4.5 The role of electronic publishing and print-on-demand

Two-thirds of the academic presses that responded to the survey said they had published at least one book(in any subject area) electronically (either online-only titles or hybrid publications). But just one-third indicated that they haddone any electronic publishing in the area of art and architectural history. Two presses reported that they had published just a singlehybrid publication (and no online-only titles) in art history, while another said it had published five hybrid publications, butno online-only titles. The press that reported the greatest amount of activity in the electronic publishing of art history-relatedtitles indicated that it had published ten hybrid works in this area, along with three online-only works.

Most of the editors surveyed said that they expected the number of books published online in the area of artand architectural history to either stay the same (6) or increase somewhat (5) over the next five years or so. Interestingly, though,there was absolutely no consensus among these editors as to whether the cost of publishing books online is less expensive, asexpensive, or more expensive than regular publishing. Two indicated that it was “substantially less expensive” than regular publishing,while four said it was “substantially more expensive.” Three other editors fell in between these extremes.

Finally, editors were split as to whether or not print-on-demand would become a viable option for printing bookswith high quality illustrations over the next five years or so. Five said yes, seven said no. In their own words, here are thereasons given by editors who indicated a negative response to this question:

• Technology and costs
• The cost of obtaining permissions to reproduce images
• Quality of reproduction; restrictions on paper quality and trim size
• Illustration quality will remain substandard in print on demand publications for longer than five years
• Quality of photographic reproduction
• The key words are "high quality"
• Cost of obtaining online permissions; difficulty of establishing uniform color quality; difficulty ofestablishing uniform “framing” of image; difficulty in “scrolling” between text and images; loss of texture, etc. inon-line reproduction; recognition that books convey knowledge, not simply information; recognition amongeducators that students learn more from reading books than from reading on-line; the book’s capacity as a material object toassume varied guises with which to challenge the imagination and intellects of readers.
• [Also,] problems in shelf-life of digitalfiles; right now, there is no way to guarantee the shelf-life of digital files. Therefore to pour financial resources andexpertise into on-line publication of art and architecture does not make sense. Further, most art and architecture booksare printed on paper chosen for its longevity and capacity to yield accurate reproduction of complex works of art. This meansthat if adequate measures were taken to archive art and architectural scholarship with its typical corpus of illustrations,there would have to be a very expensive doubling of “publication”: 1) digital 2) print.
• PLEASE NOTE I FIND IT TROUBLING THAT ADVOCATES OF ON-LINE PUBLICATION FAIL TO DISCUSS THE PROBLEM OFCONSERVATION OF DIGITAL FILES. [respondent’s emphasis]