Photographer
AcmeStudios
Posts: 4528
Yes there is. You just cant shoot the same thing the same way as everyone else does.
Photographer
IEPhotos
Posts: 391
Riverside, California, US
Photographers who make a significant amount of money at their craft are not all that uncommon, but a reality check shows that for most taking pictures is not their only source of income.
Wages for photographers have declined as the skill set and equipment have become more advanced. For example, to shoot a wedding 10 years ago would have meant shooting perhaps 200 - 300 pictures total with film, the cost of developing and post production were high. Today anyone with a digital camera can shoot 1200-1500 pictures at very low cost and their post production cost are also negligable. Therefore, the skill set required to become a wedding photographer is lower (you just have to work harder) and your competition is the gwc that is pretty dammned good. When it comes to shooting models, most guys would gladly do it for free since they don't have a problem paying for a fleeting view at the local strip club.
To make money, think outside the box. If you have a good portfolio of models, why not partner with them and put on workshops, group shoots etc. This is the money making trend of the new photography class.
For those who talk about marketing and business etc as with any business, the more time you spend on administration means less time shooting, pretty soon you have to hire a photographer to handle the workload so you can do the books, then are you still a photographer or are you a business manager?
Photographer
KuttingEdge
Posts: 314
Fayetteville, North Carolina, US
Orca Bay Images wrote:
It's pretty high on the list when you've got car payments to make and rent to pay.
Last time I checked, Honda Finance doesn't take photos as payment, no matter how fulfilling the images may be. lmao, hey I can't make my car payment this month but I got photo of the week.. look how awesome this photo is... can I get a discount as I had to buy a lens for this shoot and pay the model for her to take her clothes off, cmon pulleezzee!
Photographer
Micyl Sweeney
Posts: 7442
Madison, Alabama, US
Photography is a business like any other business so one must not rely on their photographic skills only, one must know how business revolves and know how to market themselves. Marketing courses and business courses are more valuable than taking photography courses.
I have always made a great living from photography. I owned a successful photography business in Minneapolis then moved down here and opened up one here last year and have stormed the market and really busy, booked until March, and others keep asking me, wow how did you get so successful in such a short period of time when others it has taken them years to get established here, cause I know how to market and how business works and do not rely on my skills only. I do not just open a studio and put my name in the phone book and hope people will call. I am aggressive at marketing and networking. I learn what marketing techniques work and those that do not, I network with anyone and everyone and so on. My camera and port stay in the trunk of my car.
We are our own failure or success.
edit: I am so busy that I am going into it full time again in March.
Photographer
Micyl Sweeney
Posts: 7442
Madison, Alabama, US
Oak Grove Photography wrote:
Money!! What's that ?
Recently a model posted (to a group) that she wanted headshots for herself and her daughters. I replied with a very reasonable rate! Which she refused.
Come to find out she shot with another photographer (a friend of mine) FOR FREE!
Whatever.....
So.. how do you compete with those who give away their time!
Yeah.. I know... you gotta become a Known Entity with a good/popular business
expect anyone to pay you! Problem is, how do you get there!
If you ain't full-time at this business, it's gonna be tough to make "real" money at it.
Just my .00045 cents worth you don't do headshots of models, you do things where you can get paid like weddings, portraits, aerial, commercial and so on, everyone wants to be the next great fashion photographer and then they wonder why they cannot make money at this.
Photographer
LeDeux Art
Posts: 50123
San Ramon, California, US
NSE Films wrote:
People often like to paint a bleak picture of photography, often exclaiming that there's little to no money in it... "If you want a modest lifestyle, go to business school, if you want to be a photographer, be prepared to sacrafice that lifestyle", that's something I read recently.
Anyway, my point is, these bleak summaries of photography I often find misleading, at best. If you want to shoot advertising and are good at it, you can make a fortune, if you want to be an art photographer and you're good at it, you can make more than the best advertising photographer would ever dream of.
The point is, painting all of photography with this "you'll not make any money" is a rather silly and shows quite a misunderstanding and ignorance of the various sub-catagories of photography. Sure, if you want to shoot family portraits in a smallish town, you'll be lucky to make more than average income.
Discuss. your correct, sweeping generalizations overlook many things
Photographer
J C KUNSTFOTOGRAFIE
Posts: 2691
Los Angeles, California, US
Frank McAdam wrote:
The above is true, but only for a relative handful of photographers. Sure, Steven Meisel, Patrick DeMarchelier and others are multi-millionaires, but their earnings are hardly representative of the industry. The bottom line is that if you want to make a lot of money, there are much more lucrative professions to consider. The only valid reason to make photography a career choice is because one loves taking photos. Exactly! I wish I could have been Bill Gates or Warren Buffet or Donald Trump . . . unfortunately, even just the idea of writing computer code, playing the financial markets and making real estate deals bore me to tears.
Photographer
LeDeux Art
Posts: 50123
San Ramon, California, US
Micyl Sweeney wrote:
you don't do headshots of models, you do things where you can get paid like weddings, portraits, aerial, commercial and so on, everyone wants to be the next great fashion photographer and then they wonder why they cannot make money at this. we all have our goals, some our more lofty while others tend to be more simple, we also all have our boundaries as to what will be sacrificed in order to make money
Photographer
Michael Alan
Posts: 1499
Bayshore Gardens, Florida, US
Frank McAdam wrote:
The above is true, but only for a relative handful of photographers. Sure, Steven Meisel, Patrick DeMarchelier and others are multi-millionaires, but their earnings are hardly representative of the industry. The bottom line is that if you want to make a lot of money, there are much more lucrative professions to consider. The only valid reason to make photography a career choice is because one loves taking photos. Said like a pro.. I love shooting but I know that most PEOPLE looking for shots will not make you rich. My teacher at SMC (Jones) told us that doing fashion, headshots and editorial type of shooting is not where the money is at in photography.
I still agree with that statement and even more now 25 years later. Now it has become more obvious that any GWC can do head shots, fashion shots for very little money.
Of course the 2 year course was for commercial photography and we learned on medium/large format cameras. The first thing that we learn about shooting 4x5 cameras was composition and focus. It really helped me by forcing me to slowed down and frame the shot when shooting 35 or medium format.
I love playing with lights and taking pictures. I have been doing it since I was 14.
Iâm also very interested in video and IMHO the future is video, not stills. YouTube is an example of what the future is all about. IMHO, still pictures will still be around but wonât cost you a lot to have done in the coming years. If you cannot see trend now then one day you will and it might be too late.
Photographer
Michael Alan
Posts: 1499
Bayshore Gardens, Florida, US
Mark Harrington Photogr wrote:
Photographers who make a significant amount of money at their craft are not all that uncommon, but a reality check shows that for most taking pictures is not their only source of income.
Wages for photographers have declined as the skill set and equipment have become more advanced. For example, to shoot a wedding 10 years ago would have meant shooting perhaps 200 - 300 pictures total with film, the cost of developing and post production were high. Today anyone with a digital camera can shoot 1200-1500 pictures at very low cost and their post production cost are also negligable. Therefore, the skill set required to become a wedding photographer is lower (you just have to work harder) and your competition is the gwc that is pretty dammned good. When it comes to shooting models, most guys would gladly do it for free since they don't have a problem paying for a fleeting view at the local strip club.
To make money, think outside the box. If you have a good portfolio of models, why not partner with them and put on workshops, group shoots etc. This is the money making trend of the new photography class.
For those who talk about marketing and business etc as with any business, the more time you spend on administration means less time shooting, pretty soon you have to hire a photographer to handle the workload so you can do the books, then are you still a photographer or are you a business manager? 100% correct...
Photographer
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Michael Alan wrote:
Iâm also very interested in video and IMHO the future is video, not stills. YouTube is an example of what the future is all about. IMHO, still pictures will still be around but wonât cost you a lot to have done in the coming years. If you cannot see trend now then one day you will and it might be too late. They've been saying that for 30 years, and for a hundred years if you count film.
There will always be a huge market for still photography. The thing "trendy" types forget when predicting that video will take over is that video takes time to watch. I can read or skim an article and get the info I want out of it in less than a minute. I don't want to spend three to five minutes watching a video about it. If you print out every word in a TV newscast it fills less than the front page of a newspaper.
If you thought slide shows were tedious and boring, so are videos. They are real conversation stoppers and not in the good sense.
The commercial appeal of videos is limited. Most consumers give websites less than 30 seconds before deciding whether to move on to another. They are not going to look at a video in that time. The company better have top-notch attractive still photography to interest the consumer. If the photography is good, maybe the consumer will stay to look at a video about the product or service. But not a lot of three minute videos or a half hour video unless there is some vitally important information that can only be conveyed that way.
Video doesn't work for magazines or pictures hung on the wall. It can be made to work for billboards and bus-shelter posters, but even there, the best bet is a video sequence of still photographs.
If you think GWC competition is severe in photography, it is severe in video too, maybe more so. Lunkheads who can't tell a good photo from a so-so one are just as prone to not being able to tell a good video from a so-so one.
Photographer
Ken Rieves Photography
Posts: 934
Avon Lake, Ohio, US
Making a living as a photographer is tough, but being self employed is tough no matter what business you go into. That's why such a large percentage of small businesses fail.
Photographer
JR Digital
Posts: 378
Fullerton, California, US
I've got to get back to work so I didn't read many of the posts, but I make a fine living. I do something I love and get paid enough to own a house in Southern California.
Photographer
The Alternative Image
Posts: 4129
London, England, United Kingdom
I would work for halve the salery I am on now doing the day job, to do what I love
Photographer
SayCheeZ!
Posts: 20621
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
NSE Films wrote:
There's no money in photography There's lots of money to be made in photography, and there are many ways to do it!
1.) Sell a new digital camera to a photographer.
2.) Tell the photographer the camera he just bought is outdated because it's only 10 pegamixels instead of 12 like the newest version has. Now sell 'em the newer version to replace the camera that they purchased yesterday.
3.) Convince 'em that an on camera flash isn't good enough for real photography. Sell 'em a regular flash unit.
4.) Now tell 'em that his new flash isn't meant for a studio. Sell 'em a cheap Britek.
5.) Wait a day for the Britek to melt so they have to come in and buy some A.B.'s
6.) After they get a hold of the A.B.s, tell 'em that those aren't real studio flashes that pro studios use... now get 'em to shell out for a set of Hensel's, Bowens, Normans, or Elinchromes!
7.) WTF??? You forgot to sell 'em a softbox to go with it!!! Shame Shame! Better late than never.... do it now!
See!!!
There's plenty of money to be made with photography!
Photographer
StephenEastwood
Posts: 19585
Great Neck, New York, US
NSE Films wrote:
People often like to paint a bleak picture of photography, often exclaiming that there's little to no money in it... "If you want a modest lifestyle, go to business school, if you want to be a photographer, be prepared to sacrafice that lifestyle", that's something I read recently.
Anyway, my point is, these bleak summaries of photography I often find misleading, at best. If you want to shoot advertising and are good at it, you can make a fortune, if you want to be an art photographer and you're good at it, you can make more than the best advertising photographer would ever dream of.
The point is, painting all of photography with this "you'll not make any money" is a rather silly and shows quite a misunderstanding and ignorance of the various sub-catagories of photography. Sure, if you want to shoot family portraits in a smallish town, you'll be lucky to make more than average income.
Discuss. I don't know many that do not bill well over 100k a year just to stay in business, and they are barely making it, most I know are doing very, very well. Plus, my line is recession proof, I actually raised rates this year and am over booked still.
Stephen Eastwood
http://www.StephenEastwood.com
Photographer
Imagemakersphoto
Posts: 786
Saint Paul, Minnesota, US
To make money in photography you need to be serious about doing it as a business. You need to be good at marketing and the business side. You have to know your market and price your work to turn a profit.
Know your monthly and yearly expenses. What is your businesses overhead (rent, utilities, equipment, marketing, your salary, tax liability, insurance, self promo production, ..........)? How many days a month do you expect to have paying work (be realistic for the field you are in, commercial shooters often do not have paid work every day)? When you know all your overhead and how many days you will really have paid work you can figure out how much you need to charge each job just to break even.
Breaking even does not mean you are profitable, but just getting by. You need to be realistic about your skills as a photographer, business person and marketer.
Photographer
SayCheeZ!
Posts: 20621
Las Vegas, Nevada, US
Photographer
Southern Glamour
Posts: 817
Kingsland, Georgia, US
There is plenty of money in photography, I know, I put some it there!
Photographer
robert gaudette
Posts: 238
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
the influx of people becoming "photographers" due to the availability of affordable gear and no need for any past education or certification is whats bringing those remarks about most people starving while trying to fast track themselves as "photographers".
thatll even out eventually and normalize - reminds me of a few years ago when everyone was a professional poker player...
Photographer
Imagemakersphoto
Posts: 786
Saint Paul, Minnesota, US
StephenEastwood wrote:
I don't know many that do not bill well over 100k a year just to stay in business, and they are barely making it, most I know are doing very, very well. Plus, my line is recession proof, I actually raised rates this year and am over booked still.
Stephen Eastwood I agree. My rates went up at the beginning of the year. I am busier than last year. I am in commercial photography and although there have been some cut backs by some clients, most understand the need to have good advertising in hard times to keep clients and add new ones.
In my area a staff photographer in a commercial studio would expect to start at over $55,000 a year with benefits on top of that. And that is as a starting staff photographer (there is a lot of competition so you have to be good). Some start at less, but make up for it in better benefits and /or bonuses.
Photographer
Manuel Rego
Posts: 1954
Worcester, Massachusetts, US
Personally, I've all but given up trying to make anything at this. Just last week I got contacted by someone looking to hire a wedding photographer (which I do do). I got the "I'll call you back later" answer when I told them my price...
I don't normally charge this little, but it was supposed to be a small wedding with no reception.
I asked between $300-$500 (depending on exactly what they wanted).
Apparently, they were expecting me to do it for less than $100.
I'd like to blame the economy, but in reality it's cheapskate jackasses.
Photographer
Ken Rieves Photography
Posts: 934
Avon Lake, Ohio, US
Yeah, my commercial work has been pretty good the last few months. I think ad agencies are pushing the idea that in a declining economy, the only way for a business to grow (or even remain at constant level) is to gain market share. Thus more and better marketing materials.
Photographer
Robert Beynard
Posts: 640
Bayside, New York, US
Ken Rieves Photography wrote:
Yeah, my commercial work has been pretty good the last few months. I think ad agencies are pushing the idea that in a declining economy, the only way for a business to grow (or even remain at constant level) is to gain market share. Thus more and better marketing materials. Too true. The actual products have come down in price, but the photography and retouching and printing rates have all gone up.
Photographer
Visionary Studio One
Posts: 703
Grand Prairie, Texas, US
Micyl Sweeney wrote:
you don't do headshots of models, you do things where you can get paid like weddings, portraits, aerial, commercial and so on, everyone wants to be the next great fashion photographer and then they wonder why they cannot make money at this. I was charging only enough to meet expenses.. at the time when fuel was hitting $4.00/gal and would have had to rent studio space.
Moved on to other venues of photography...
|
