MeanDean checks in with a thought provoking post on whether to use, on a Church web site, pictures of real people or stock photography.

It’s a sticky wicket.  Stickier than the frosting on Deans faux donuts...  We’ve traded a bit of email over the issue because I’m in the midst of putting the final touches on a website for my church, Ridge Point Community Church in Holland, MI and have worked multiple large images of “real” Ridge Pointers into the design.  No stock photos.  Lots of closeups.  I can see Dean twiching already...

But, after reading Dean’s article, I completely agree with his decision.  For his church.  Yeah, I know, you could maybe construe what I’m going to say as relativism but this is one of those times when you can’t make a unilateral design decision that applies to all churches and their web sites.  We don’t do that in the business world, but for some reason in a church context these discussions seem to head that way.

So why “real” images for Ridge Point?  It boils down to three areas; Context, Culture, and Target Audience.

Context:
Ridge Point is in West Michigan.  If you know anything about this area, you know how densely populated it is with churches.  There are street corners around here that literally have churches on 2 of them.  In Zeeland, you can walk past 6-8 churches in 20 minutes.  Ridge Point is somewhat out in the country, and even there within a 3 mile radius there are probably 8-10 churches.  While this is great from a perspective of choice, it offers up the challenge of differentiation.  How do I, as a web designer, communicate how Ridge Point is different in the context of all these other local churches?  It’s a big enough challenge on its own, much harder to do with the “genericized” imagery of stock photography where the people are Exacto-knifed out of a background, devoid of any context.  To put it bluntly, I’ve just not seen any stock photography that would adequately differentiate RP from other churches.

Culture:
Ridge Point is truly differentiated by it’s culture - it’s why the church exists to begin with.  RP was birthed out of a more traditional church, and given the task of reaching out to seekers using methods that just didn’t work as well in the parent church.  When’s the last time you heard a Doors, Beatles, or Don Henley tune on Sunday morning?  We’ve done that, along with movie clips, live dramas, live dance, mime, puppetry - all tools used to communicate the Gospel in a relevant fashion.  But rather than just me deciding what aspects of the church to promote, I put the church leadership through a branding discussion.  While foreign ground for many churches, basically I wanted to hear from the church leadership how they would want people to describe RP if given 10 minutes to peruse the web site.  What I got were things like “creative”, “fine arts focused”, “blue jeans OK”, “vibrant”, “friendly”, “inclusive”.  I’m convinced that the absolute best way to communicate these brand attributes is to use a lot of pictures from Ridge Point events showing Ridge Point people.  Really, how could we - with a straight face - attempt to communicate some of those attributes using stock photos?  The other aspect of Ridge Point’s culture is that it’s one of high involvement.  I grew up in a church where if you weren’t the Pastor, a Deacon or Elder, or in the choir you really weren’t involved much.  At Ridge Point there are 800 volunteer positions. No, you read that right - 800.  In a church that has a weekly attendance of around 1200.  I’m not sure how I would communicate this aspect of Ridge Point with stock photos.

Target Audience:
The biggie.  Ridge Point actively targets “Post-Moderns”.  If you don’t know that term, a Google search will do a better job educating you than I can - I’m still getting my arms around the concept too.  But in series of articles on the topic Christian Standard magazine which had this to say:

“Postmoderns yearn for a reality-based religion.  Postmoderns will see Jesus first in us. They will understand the �mystery of God� through my story. The Bible is a living letter, confessed by both my life and my lips. Four spiritual laws and baptismal arguments are meaningless. A rich life in God is an apologetic no postmodern can deny or denounce.”

and

“The Web is also their oyster. E-mail, chat rooms, discussion boards, and Internet-based technologies drive their outreach.” (http://www.christianstandard.com/pdfs/58.pdf)

To reach this audience, the new Ridge Point site will have commenting, group blogs, a discussion forum, and member profiles - all as a way of promoting community via the web site. 

If Postmoderns “see Jesus in us”, and the first place they look is our web site, then I gotta show “us”.  Whatever it takes.  I can’t take the chance that a stock photo will do the trick.

Due Dilligence
So we’ll do the due dilligence.  Photos will be reviewed by staff members.  We’ll get permission where it make sense.  Images of non-staff members will only be accompanied by names or other contact info in special cases,or upon request.  But - I don’t intend to be legalistic.  The point isn’t to show Ridge Point at “this” moment in time, but “a” moment in time.  In fact I’m using 4 year old pictures of kids in many places - they still tell the RP story but the passage of time helps to soften the sensitivity.  We won’t weed out pictures showing ex-members unless they ask us to or unless it just makes sense to based on the situation.

So are stock photos “evil”?  Not at all.  For many churches they make sense—not for Ridge Point.  The feedback I’ve gotten while training the Ridge Point staff, board and Elders on the new site has confirmed this - the response to the photos has been overwhelmingly positive - really the highlight of the site.