4kw Photography wrote:
Who finds customers for pictures and where?

I'm thinking mostly for photographers, but everyone has this issue, where do you get your pictures shown and or paid for?

I have a Patreon and a print shop. That's how I make my money at this. I'm a model and a self portraitist. Most of my Patreon content and the prints I sell are self portrait work. I do also include sets shot by other photographers (with their permission) and a few prints of me by photographer friends (we split the profits). I also occasionally show in local exhibitions and they sometimes have a print shop as well and I include prints in those too.

As far as shows go, just look for calls for art. There are a few groups on Facebook. As far as selling work online to customers, it's a lot of work. You have to promote. I promote my prints and sets on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, and Instagram. Just about every time I share a photo, I link my Patreon. I have it as my link on all of those social medias.

Now, the obvious difference here is that I'm a model. Fans are generally more likely to purchase from models. So if you can find models who are willing to promote and split the profits with you that can be one way to do it. That's not to say photographers can't be successful, but it can be easier if you can get the models to help with the promotions.

Exhibiting art is different (and that's one of my other jobs, I coordinate and produce several local and international exhibitions yearly). Obviously most shows want the photographer to submit as you are the copyright holder. The issue that a lot of photographers run into is that it requires some investment to have the print made and framed properly (any where from $50 or so on up depending on how large the piece is and how much you spend framing it) and you may end up not making all that much though people might see your work and come to buy prints or a larger piece later. If you want some advice on that, send me a PM and I'll give you some tips.

So that's kind of an overview on my take on it. Granted I'm not making that much ($500 or so a month right now), but it's definitely a start.

Eagle Rock Photographer wrote:
Sadly, many of the financially successful 'artists' gain fame and money by gaming the system. See, e.g., Prince, who has built an empire on, and been judged in court as, a 'serial infringer.' Or the L.A.-based 'graffiti artist' Robbie Conal who based his business on illegally postering public and private property without permission.

Perhaps, but I don't see that.

I look at every image of a person and accord it some respect - that's a person. The thing is we have a lot of people and another image, even naked, has a great deal of competition. People are swamped. Every digital image is a click away from being duplicated or transferred. There are so many images and videos. The audience only has so much time.

Barry Kidd Photography wrote:
5) Work comes slow at the start. It always does, always will and no mater how good you are you're not going change this simple fact of the buisness.

I’m pleased to be able to report that this is no longer the case.

Or at least, not in the UK.

Last summer I had lunch with a young woman who is (I think) 18 and she’s become sought after almost as soon as she started.  From what I see, she always seems to be busy and gets flown all over the world on some great assignments.  She’s also now shooting pop videos.

Not quite so young, the daughter of a good friend, took a set of photographs from (mostly) a train window on a journey across Asia.  With this work, which I believe was the first she ever had published, she won several awards and got asked to join Magnum.  Or so her dad told me.

She’s also been invited to represent GB in the World Photographic Cup.

And although I’m hesitant to name them, I know of two instances of young female fashion photographers becoming successful and well known within months of starting.

The key factor in all the above was IMHO talent.

4kw Photography wrote:
...I'm thinking mostly for photographers, but everyone has this issue, where do you get your pictures shown and or paid for?

4kw this question is and has been ubiquitous on Mayhem... And it's likely a very poor platform to query on since as others have pointed out it is primarily a hobbyist portal. 

So you want to generate a revenue stream? Is that in fact what you are asking? Barry Kidd has eloquently addressed this from purely a photographer's perspective... And I certainly commend Barry for sharing his wisdom here, I couldn't have said it better...

However for me, my kit was paid for by assisting other commercial shooters in my market... The lion's share of these gigs came from my membership in the ASMP where I was listed under Find an Assistant.  While the pay was very good the working conditions were (I'm being politically correct here) rather brutal... Pushing 200lbs of kit around on hand-trucks sometimes in 105 degree heat for 14 hours/day demanded all my strength/endurance and then some... Not only that these gigs would be 4 or 5 days in duration...  There are compelling reason's why high value commercial shooters don't hire female assistants...

Keep in mind that this worked for me in my market (Washington DC) albeit every market is different...

But wait, my highest value gigs are in my forte as a bridal makeup artist... Recompense here dwarfs any thing I've ever generated with a camera... Reason is simple... Supply/Demand... Marketing 101 stuff...

Need guidance from those who actual know how to turn a trick? ASMP

Best Advice? Go back to college as get a degree & credentials in the health/medical field... Seriously...
Photography is best for dreamers chasing rainbows... It rarely can be a sustainable career path... only wishful thinking by those who initially choose poorly and find their current work scenario seriously lacking in job satisfaction... Since the barrier to entry is so low the field is over saturated and has been for over a decade...

Nope 4kw best go back to academia and obtain a viable credential in the health sciences... where there is a real need for highly motivated and dedicated gifted talent...

I wish you well on your journey...

Thomas Van Dyke wrote:
Best Advice? Go back to college as get a degree & credentials in the health/medical field... Seriously...
Photography is best for dreamers chasing rainbows... It rarely can be a sustainable career path... only wishful thinking by those who initially choose poorly and find their current work scenario seriously lacking in job satisfaction... Since the barrier to entry is so low the field is over saturated and has been for over a decade...

Nope 4kw best go back to academia and obtain a viable credential in the health sciences... where there is a real need for highly motivated and dedicated gifted talent...

I wish you well on your journey...

This is ludicrously negative. 

I’ve been a full time profession photographer now for 36 years and I’ve had a fantastic time (although, I can assure you, I’ve never taken any of it for granted for a moment).

I recently asked two photography tutors at the London College of Communication what proportion of their students went on to get a job in the industry?  They both agreed that it was close to 90%.  Maybe not all actual professional photographers but working within the discipline somewhere.

Thomas Van Dyke wrote:
Best Advice? Go back to college as get a degree & credentials in the health/medical field... Seriously...
Photography is best for dreamers chasing rainbows... It rarely can be a sustainable career path... only wishful thinking by those who initially choose poorly and find their current work scenario seriously lacking in job satisfaction... Since the barrier to entry is so low the field is over saturated and has been for over a decade...

Nope 4kw best go back to academia and obtain a viable credential in the health sciences... where there is a real need for highly motivated and dedicated gifted talent...

I wish you well on your journey...

Derek Ridgers wrote:
This is ludicrously negative. 

I’ve been a full time profession photographer now for 36 years and I’ve had a fantastic time (although, I can assure you, I’ve never taken any of it for granted for a moment).

I recently asked two photography tutors at the London College of Communication what proportion of their students went on to get a job in the industry?  They both agreed that it was close to 90%.  Maybe not all actual professional photographers but working within the discipline somewhere.

Yes, it's a bit harsh but I would say don't quit your day job.  Not right away at any rate.  Waite until your business grows.

Mike Collins wrote:
Being a photographer is like any other creative endeavor.  The glamorous jobs are held by very few.  Your chance of being a fashion or even well known photographer are slim.  Very slim.  Your chance of being a portrait, wedding or event photographer?  Very good.  I've been everything from a commercial/advertising/product shooter, to portrait shooter (still am) to a corporate event photographer.  Yes, shooting corporate events can be very boring.  But it keeps me very busy.   Hell, I work every single day this week.   Been pretty damn busy all year.  Last year was great. 

Mike Rowe from Dirty Jobs said it best "Don't follow your passion.  Chase opportunity."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT1i26RbrhM

Sure, you may want the "cool jobs", but all you really want is to just be a photographer.  I'm a photographer.  No.  I don't shoot  famous models or designer clothes.  I do shoot for some of the largest companies in the world though.  I do,  once in awhile, meet some very famous people and musicians they hire as well.  The other 95% time, it's just shooting boring general sessions, awards, and cocktail receptions.  But I'm still a photographer.  And I am very good at what I do.  I will always have work. 

I can still shoot other things.  But at least I don't have to worry if those things don't bring me any income.  I do shoot a lot of portrait work as well.  That too brings me some nice income.  Will I ever do commercial type stuff again?  Who knows.  If I do I do.  If I don't, no big deal. 

Remember too, if you do this professionally, it's a business.  And like all businesses, it follows all the same requirements to keep a business going.  And the actual CREATION of the product or service is only a small part of the overall process.  And also only a result if you did all the fun "business stuff" before hand.  Marketing, advertising, meetings, negotiating, etc.

I find this to be a very depressing point of view. 

I have almost the opposite point of view about what I do.  But then... I never particularly wanted to be a photographer in the first place.

If I had a job that was boring 95% of the time I’d do something else.  Life is way too short.

Derek Ridgers wrote:

I find this to be a very depressing point of view. 

I have almost the opposite point of view about what I do.  But then... I never particularly wanted to be a photographer in the first place.

If I had a job that was boring 95% of the time I’d do something else.  Life is way too short.

The gig itself is boring.  Business people talking business stuff.  Or partying it up.  I still manage to try and create interesting images.  Get the "have to" stuff then try other things to bring out my creativity. It's not depressing.  Not working is a lot more depressing.

Point I'm trying to make is at least I still make great money with my cameras, lights, etc.  Trust me, I hear famous musicians who get tired of playing the same damn songs over and over again.  SO they find other outlets to keep their creativity alive.  Do what you have to do to survive then do what you want to do to keep your sanity.  I don't see how a comedian comes up with a set and then has to repeat over and over and over again, night after night.  They get paid, that's why.  At least with my work it's a different company.  Different hotel/resort.  Parties.  Sometimes concerts with very well know acts.  Yes, the general session speeches get old.  The meetings are boring.  But it pays pretty damn good.

Mike Collins wrote:
The gig itself is boring.  Business people talking business stuff.  Or partying it up.  I still manage to try and create interesting images.  Get the "have to" stuff then try other things to bring out my creativity. It's not depressing.  Not working is a lot more depressing.

Point I'm trying to make is at least I still make great money with my cameras, lights, etc.  Trust me, I hear famous musicians who get tired of playing the same damn songs over and over again.  SO they find other outlets to keep their creativity alive.  Do what you have to do to survive then do what you want to do to keep your sanity.  I don't see how a comedian comes up with a set and then has to repeat over and over and over again, night after night.  They get paid, that's why.  At least with my work it's a different company.  Different hotel/resort.  Parties.  Sometimes concerts with very well know acts.  Yes, the general session speeches get old.  The meetings are boring.  But it pays pretty damn good.

Obviously I can’t take issue with how you make your money or the level of satisfaction you get from what you do.  That would be ridiculous.

Only the defeatist element in what you originally posted and - to a degree - that shown in the Mike Rowe video.

We can’t all have riches and success, that’s true. 

And there is a lot of truth in what Mike Rowe says.

But I would argue that it’s very anti-aspirational. 

Obviously not everyone is talented at what they chose to do - 93% of the portfolios on Model Mayhem are a testament to that fact.

For most people, the journey is the fun part not the arrival.  And if you can ever find your true talent, so much the better.

Leo Burnett famously once said “When you reach for the stars, you may not quite get them, but you won't come up with a handful of mud either.”

Somehow, I don’t think he was talking about a career as a septic tank cleaner.

Mike Collins wrote:
Sure, you may want the "cool jobs", but all you really want is to just be a photographer.  I'm a photographer.  No.  I don't shoot  famous models or designer clothes.  I do shoot for some of the largest companies in the world though.  I do,  once in awhile, meet some very famous people and musicians they hire as well.  The other 95% time, it's just shooting boring general sessions, awards, and cocktail receptions.  But I'm still a photographer.  And I am very good at what I do.  I will always have work.

I shoot mostly corporate style work as well.  More specifically political photography.  I shoot a good deal for congressmen, senators and an occasional judge.  It's not exactly a path that I chose but a path that chose me.  In sort it's the route that my business took and type clients that I started building.  Referrals work that way.  People always refer you to their coliegus.  My referrals came from politicians.

Though political photography isn't what I thought I would be doing even 12 years ago it's far from boring. In fact is a great deal of fun.  Much more fun than I would have thought before I got involved with it.  I certainly can't complain but perhaps it's all way we make of it.  Hell if I know?  I wouldn't change things.

MM?  I'm just here for fun. No other reason.

goofus  wrote:
all mine end up

in boxes in my closet and then eventually the Goodwill  or dumpster upon my passing

QFT.

Mike Collins wrote:
Being a photographer is like any other creative endeavor.  The glamorous jobs are held by very few.  Your chance of being a fashion or even well known photographer are slim.  Very slim.  Your chance of being a portrait, wedding or event photographer?  Very good.  I've been everything from a commercial/advertising/product shooter, to portrait shooter (still am) to a corporate event photographer.  Yes, shooting corporate events can be very boring.  But it keeps me very busy.   Hell, I work every single day this week.   Been pretty damn busy all year.  Last year was great. 

Mike Rowe from Dirty Jobs said it best "Don't follow your passion.  Chase opportunity."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NT1i26RbrhM

Sure, you may want the "cool jobs", but all you really want is to just be a photographer.  I'm a photographer.  No.  I don't shoot  famous models or designer clothes.  I do shoot for some of the largest companies in the world though.  I do,  once in awhile, meet some very famous people and musicians they hire as well.  The other 95% time, it's just shooting boring general sessions, awards, and cocktail receptions.  But I'm still a photographer.  And I am very good at what I do.  I will always have work. 

I can still shoot other things.  But at least I don't have to worry if those things don't bring me any income.  I do shoot a lot of portrait work as well.  That too brings me some nice income.  Will I ever do commercial type stuff again?  Who knows.  If I do I do.  If I don't, no big deal. 

Remember too, if you do this professionally, it's a business.  And like all businesses, it follows all the same requirements to keep a business going.  And the actual CREATION of the product or service is only a small part of the overall process.  And also only a result if you did all the fun "business stuff" before hand.  Marketing, advertising, meetings, negotiating, etc.

That's a great explanation.  I love being a wedding photographer.  I can't explain it to most people because showing up to a stressful day and getting a great job done is a skill.  It's partial technical but mostly a social skill.   I also love being in business.   I hire people I enjoy being around and love to work with.  Yes it's the same thing week after week but I've had other jobs where I worked with people I didn't like or was physically difficult.

martin b wrote:

That's a great explanation.  I love being a wedding photographer.  I can't explain it to most people because showing up to a stressful day and getting a great job done is a skill.  It's partial technical but mostly a social skill.   I also love being in business.   I hire people I enjoy being around and love to work with.  Yes it's the same thing week after week but I've had other jobs where I worked with people I didn't like or was physically difficult.

+100  Social skills are soooo important in just about any  photography job and probably what will get you more jobs.  We were hired these past two days to provide "quick" headshots to new residents and a huge dermatology trade show.  All the big names in skin care, both commercially and medically were there.  So many of the residents (new Dr.s) thanked us for being their since they were just starting out and needed a good headshot and this was so convenient.  But they also thanked me so much for being so patient with them.  We had to do many over since they could view on the spot and didn't like something.  Mostly they're hair.  We provided a MUA. 

THAT part of my job as a corporate photographer I enjoy a lot.  It's more personal and I'm really helping someone.  Probably why I get hired a lot for that kind of work.  The other stuff can be boring and it can be interesting.  Depends on the company.  But I give my all to anyone who hires me and do the very best I can.  The client deserves the best you can give them.

Tony Lawrence wrote:
I met Grandart aka Peter LeGrand years ago.   He's a stand up guy.  Years ago being a good pro shooter meant really knowing your stuff.   Advertising in the Creative Black Book.   Meeting art directors from ad agencies.   Building a good reputation and usually working as an assistant for someone.   Today we have talents who within a year of shooting are being hired for national campaigns.   What's changed?   Today we have Instagram, Facebook and websites where people can connect to those who hire around the world.   Today a decent used DLSR can be bought for $300.00, coupled with a laptop and copy of CS and away you go.

Are there still folks who do well, sure.   However you only have to look at the decline of print to see where this is going.   Several years past a product shot was bought from a MM for $30.00.   It appeared on Time.   This an image that would go for well over a grand 20 years ago.   Today on Facebook a photographer talked about a model who wanted new shots in dresses from a friends boutique and wanted to be paid to do them.    Don't get me wrong.   There will always be those who do well and make a good living but the pool of talent has become more crowded and the paid work less available or worse paying very little.

That's true enough.

When I was a boy my big dream was to shoot for NatGeo.  You know? Shooting crystal blue glaciers in the Antarctic this week and shooting exotic animals on the Serengeti Plain a week later.  (Sigh. It never happened.)

In this digital age NatGeo has print run of only 6.1 million per month.  That's down from over 12 million in the 1980's. They also let much of their staff go.  These days they typically only pay a creative fee of $400 plus licensing fee

A few months ago I was contacted by NatGeo for the first time in my life.  I was actually quite excited to be contacted by the people at my "dream job" They wanted to license an image for the magazine plus digital rights for the PDF version.

The quote that I sent them was fair market for the size and usage and distrabution.  I didn't over price or try to stiff them.

They never contacted me back.  They never tried to negotiate.  (Which is almost unheard of. Almost every potential client will try and negotiate if a quote is outside of their budget.)  I can only assume that they just weren't interested. 

Nope.  My excitement was short lived.

Barry Kidd Photography wrote:

That's true enough.

When I was a boy my big dream was to shoot for NatGeo.  You know? Shooting crystal blue glaciers in the Antarctic this week and shooting exotic animals on the Serengeti Plain a week later.  (Sigh. It never happened.)

In this digital age NatGeo has print run of only 6.1 million per month.  That's down from over 12 million in the 1980's. They also let much of their staff go.  These days they typically only pay a creative fee of $400 plus licensing fee

A few months ago I was contacted by NatGeo for the first time in my life.  I was actually quite excited to be contacted by the people at my "dream job" They wanted to license an image for the magazine plus digital rights for the PDF version.

The quote that I sent them was fair market for the size and usage and distrabution.  I didn't over price or try to stiff them.

They never contacted me back.  They never tried to negotiate.  (Which is almost unheard of. Almost every potential client will try and negotiate if a quote is outside of their budget.)  I can only assume that they just weren't interested. 

Nope.  My excitement was short lived.

A writer who is published on Amazon wrote me about an image.   The shot was on another site and she tracked me down.
https://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/pic/25083435    It didn't have the watermark.   I gave her a what I thought was a great rate.      She declined and when I asked for what she was willing to pay never replied again.   I wasn't being greedy and I had to pay the model something.   I've had small stores offer me clothing in exchange for work.   I can't wear women's clothing.   I don't have the legs for them.   Others have said, I will be credited.   Wonderful but I can't eat credits.
Its a whole new day.   You have what are actually good shooters PAYING to be published.   

However its a sellers market for a smart model.   A model who hustles and networks can easily make a extra $500.00 to $1,500.00 on amateur sites like this.

Randall Holden Photography wrote:
I've been in the magazine/book/newspaper business since 1988, I can assure you, print is dying quickly and outside of advertising agencies, nobody's ever paid a photographer (or model) squat for doing what they do.  Even today, we can get models to spend hours posing for free just because they want to be on the cover of a magazine, and if I don't do the photos myself, we typically only pay $75 to $100 to the photographer - if we use the photos.  I've done pics for the newspapers in Baton Rouge and New Orleans, I've never been paid more than $40 for anything they've published.  I've taken stills for several movies that filmed down here in Louisiana, and that was okay money, but still, if you broke it down as an hourly wage, the kids at McDonald's would still be making more.

You do realise there is a wide world out there beyond Baton Rouge and New Orleans don’t you?  What about New York, Paris, London or Rome?  Can you similarly assure me that no one is making any money from photography there too?

What makes you assume that because you’re not making decent money from photography, then no one else is either?  I have no wish to belittle your career choices and if you earn a living at something you love, fair enough, no argument there.  But the idea that successful professional photographers are all earning a pittance these days is ludicrous.

Fotopia wrote:
I don't actually  "sell pictures", I sell professional services

This.

Derek Ridgers wrote:
You do realise there is a wide world out there beyond Baton Rouge and New Orleans don’t you?  What about New York, Paris, London or Rome?  Can you similarly assure me that no one is making any money from photography there too?

What makes you assume that because you’re not making decent money from photography, then no one else is either?  I have no wish to belittle your career choices and if you earn a living at something you love, fair enough, no argument there.  But the idea that successful professional photographers are all earning a pittance these days is ludicrous.

Read my last paragraph.  I didn't say "no one" is making any money, I simply stated it's about the same ratio as those who are making millions selling music as opposed to the masses who are equally talented but never make a dime off it playing in cover bands.  I'm not in Rome, or Milano or Paris - my day job is here in Louisiana - that option isn't open to me, and even if it were, I guarantee you there are 1,000 photographers in Rome not making a dime for every one that's actually able to pay his rent using his camera.

The term you use, "successful professional photographers" speaks volumes.  Canon and Nikon sell millions of cameras every year.  There are thousands upon thousands of profiles here on MM. There are probably a dozen photography studios in Baton Rouge alone.  How many "successful professional photographers" bought a new BMW simply off their work with a camera in the last two or three years?  Maybe 300 to 500?  Worldwide?  All I'm saying is, the odds are highly stacked against making money with this field - do it because you enjoy it and hope to recover some of your costs.  Not trying to be harsh, again, I'm a realist (no camera pun intended).  Be well.

Randall Holden Photography wrote:
Read my last paragraph.  I didn't say "no one" is making any money, I simply stated it's about the same ratio as those who are making millions selling music as opposed to the masses who are equally talented but never make a dime off it playing in cover bands.  I'm not in Rome, or Milano or Paris - my day job is here in Louisiana - that option isn't open to me, and even if it were, I guarantee you there are 1,000 photographers in Rome not making a dime for every one that's actually able to pay his rent using his camera.

The term you use, "successful professional photographers" speaks volumes.  Canon and Nikon sell millions of cameras every year.  There are thousands upon thousands of profiles here on MM. There are probably a dozen photography studios in Baton Rouge alone.  How many "successful professional photographers" bought a new BMW simply off their work with a camera in the last two or three years?  Maybe 300 to 500?  Worldwide?  All I'm saying is, the odds are highly stacked against making money with this field - do it because you enjoy it and hope to recover some of your costs.  Not trying to be harsh, again, I'm a realist (no camera pun intended).  Be well.

I honestly don’t know where you are getting your numbers from?  There are 1800 pro photographers in the UK’s AOP and the membership fees are set at a level that, I imagine, would put off anyone that was simply making squat, as you earlier put it.

Chances are, neither of us know the real numbers.

But the reason why it’s important to give an accurate picture is, if we as senior professionals are too negative about what we do and it’s potential rewards, then it will have a demotivating effect on students and any new blood coming into the industry.

I agree that one does need to be a realist but I just don’t think it’s quite as hard to make decent money from photography as you claim.