Making Money in Photography

[tnp651]

All commercial work these days is digital. Art directors want digital files for printed or online presentation, and they won't pay for film and processing, or for scanning. They also don't want to wait for film to be processed and scanned. On set, they want the immediate feedback of seeing the image on a monitor or the back of the camera. A photographer insisting on shooting film will be seen as odd and unprofessional.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

Photography as a vocation? I just don't see it at all. How long will it be before weddings are shot by drones using AI? When did you last walk past a photography studio on Main street? Photography has been commodified already for a couple decades. Ex: My wife is a book designer. In 1990 she regularly paid photographers $1500 for rights to a photo for a book cover. Today, she pays a massive stock photo house $25 for the same thing.

In 2007 Apple dropped the atom bomb on photography with the iPhone. The fallout is still falling.

What is left is photography as fine art. And fine art as a vocation is right up there with history and literature. A few will make it.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Yes photography as vocation is possible, though like in the past the very best work 7 days a week and spend lots of money marketing themselves, I know quite a few photographers younger than me making significant income. Cream rises to the top and yes you do have to move to where the work is.

They say all the photo labs are dead, but some of us have figured out how to stay in business, much more niche orientated these days and one has to spend a lot on marketing to stay afloat. Downsizing and concentrating on what
you are good at is the way for me. I cannot please everyone so I just look for the clients I can please and I try to do my best for them.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Comments are extremely valuable but please remember to vote.

 

[benjiboy]

I would hate to try to make my living in either medium these days when everyone with a smartphone thinks "how hard can photography be".

 

[ReginaldSMith]

..... And then they conclude, "Oh, it's not hard at all."

 

[Berkeley Mike]

The Poll closed yesterday after 10 days. I want to thank you all for your input, both in the vote and with individual comments. Both have been useful but each of the comments warrants a discussion at length. I'm sure it has all been done.

FWIW, in my Intro to Digital classes, we develop manual exposure skills, including DoF, bracketing, color balance, histograms and integrate them with Lightroom and its developing capabilities. (BTW lets stop using the word "post" or "post-processing". It is really developing).You have to remember I come from the "do it all in camera" school of photography. By about mid-semester I ask them if they would like their cell phones back or want a button to press for a special effect. They just laugh.

Now that this is done I can tell you that this poll will be a part of a discussion I will have with our Dean who, in his day, was the family photographer and darkroom resource. He thinks that the film modality is essential for training vocational photographers, and has pedagological (teaching/learning method) advantages. It is remarkable that administrators, and the average joe, only understand photography as the culture has represented it; the "magic" of the darkroom. Well, a combination of darkroom rats, photo wanna-bees, serious amateurs, posers, gods, goddesses, and pros said, 32-1, that Digital was vocational. BTW our Technical Advisory Board and faculty voted 16-2 to make film an elective an not have it in the degree.

The majority of commercial pros do not rely on "magic" or gimicky Lomography films to satisfy clients. Statistically that is a rare event. We leave that to others to play with. Work can be done there, even really cool stuff, but I wouldn't bet my house that it will lead to a livelihood. It's a one-trick pony that will fall to the wayside like smearing polaroids, oblique depth of field, reverse processing....oy-vey, just shoot me now.

Thank you, again.

 

[faberryman]

Film courses are electives for a photography degree at our local community college. Those that do elect to take B&W 101 rarely go on to take any of the other film based courses. Film courses are expensive, time consuming, and inconvenient, and students see little relevance to commercial and retail photography as it is practiced today.

 

[Bob Carnie]

We are about to introduce 5 day internships at my facility in Gum over Palladium for any student at any of the 6-10 photo schools in our area. They will be working on my personal work from beginning to end with supervision at critical stages each day. This has been brought about by the fact that the schools have all but abandoned wet rooms, and since my facility is complete wet facility we are putting the students to work so to speak, This is being rolled out this fall and
over time will see how it works with each educational institution.
I am really interested in how the dynamics of this will work, I have always been open to bringing students in on tours and two hour demos, but this decision was sparked by a student coming in for 4 days when I had the appropriate work here and it was an excellent experience for myself and the student.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Film course are electives for a photography degree at our local community college. Those that do elect to take B&W 101 rarely go on to take any of the other film based courses.

Good knowledge but no surprise. I have tried to demonstrate this through my experience but it all gets tossed into the pile of anecdotes and perceived biases. Soemhow the prevailing cultural view and anecdotal info from film folk holds sway. Hence; data.

I have pages and pages of information on film production over time, disappearing labs/technicians, market figures. I'm trying to work that into a presentation that is easy to digest.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

We are about to introduce 5 day internships at my facility in Gum over Palladium for any student at any of the 6-10 photo schools in our area. They will be working on my personal work from beginning to end with supervision at critical stages each day. This has been brought about by the fact that the schools have all but abandoned wet rooms, and since my facility is complete wet facility we are putting the students to work so to speak, This is being rolled out this fall and
over time will see how it works with each educational institution.
I am really interested in how the dynamics of this will work, I have always been open to bringing students in on tours and two hour demos, but this decision was sparked by a student coming in for 4 days when I had the appropriate work here and it was an excellent experience for myself and the student.

What absolutely everybody fails to appreciate when ever we have this discussion about vocational direction is that we all started in film. We learned to love and master it. It is not as if we want to kill the presence of Philip in a school but we have to be realistic when we are facing budgetary limits and have a specific vocational purpose. At my school I have instigated a darkroom certificate of proficiency. It contains introduction to the darkroom, intermediate darkroom, and alternative processes. But they are elective, not essential for a full-fledged degree in photography.

I wholeheartedly wish you nothing but success in this endeavor.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Thank you, I have been working with the educators of photography as much as I can, I understand the pressures of what they are up against, I wish each school had the budget, and space for what I do , but the practical side is that I think that I am only one of a few custom labs in Canada offering hand made wet prints whether in silver or pt pd. It has turned into a niche market and luckily for me I was able to bridge the gap from analogue to digital while some of my contemporaries were not able to make the switch.
My best friend came up with this concept of the students working on my personal work as working for my clients projects cannot fly and this was the big holdback for me...

What do you thing the impact of me having students working on my personal projects? negative or positive as its yet to happen and I am curious to say the least.

 

[nmp]

If you can imagine "photography" without digital tools, by all means teach them only about film.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

"What do you thing the impact of me having students working on my personal projects? negative or positive as its yet to happen and I am curious to say the least."[/QUOTE]

I am not understanding this. Would you describe it a bit more?

 

[Bob Carnie]

I feel kind of guilty that the students would be working on my personal work for these internship, PS Digital Film Stripping film together for tri colours, coating paper, exposing paper, developing paper...
I cannot let the students work on my clients work as they would rebel.

Am I being self centered by making them do this.... I am working each day and this is the only practical way I can give them my attention as well practical experience.

www.alternativephotoservices.com is my company so you can see a bit more about what I do.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

If you can imagine "photography" without digital tools, by all means teach them only about film.

Why would one do that? Film was the only game in town but now, learning SS, f, ISO is much easier than film. Can I learn how to drive on a 6-speed automatic or do I need to use a 3-speed stick? Now, if I wanted to race it would be something different but that is an advanced form of driving. I propose that once on learns to use the camera and its consequences, learning film makes more sense. It still is not vocational to any statistically significant degree.

 

[faberryman]

Why would one do that? Film was the only game in town but now, learning SS, f, ISO is much easier than film. Can I learn how to drive on a 6-speed automatic or do I need to use a 3-speed stick? Now, if I wanted to race it would be something different but that is an advanced form of driving. I propose that once on learns to use the camera and its consequences, learning film makes more sense. It still is not vocational to any statistically significant degree.

Film photography probably needs to be moved to the fine arts curriculum where questions of vocation are not primary.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Film photography probably needs to be moved to the fine arts curriculum where questions of vocation are not primary.

Good point Frank.. the pressures of students getting real jobs is mind boggling these days.

 

[nmp]

Why would one do that? Film was the only game in town but now, learning SS, f, ISO is much easier than film. Can I learn how to drive on a 6-speed automatic or do I need to use a 3-speed stick? Now, if I wanted to race it would be something different but that is an advanced form of driving. I propose that once on learns to use the camera and its consequences, learning film makes more sense. It still is not vocational to any statistically significant degree.

Not sure I understand everything you just said, but my guess is you answered your own question.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Film photography probably needs to be moved to the fine arts curriculum where questions of vocation are not primary.

I agree but in our district the funding style make s the whole department either vocational or other.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

I feel kind of guilty that the students would be working on my personal work for these internship, PS Digital Film Stripping film together for tri colours, coating paper, exposing paper, developing paper...
I cannot let the students work on my clients work as they would rebel.

Am I being self centered by making them do this.... I am working each day and this is the only practical way I can give them my attention as well practical experience.

www.alternativephotoservices.com is my company so you can see a bit more about what I do.

I see. Very cool. Sounds like a great program. with a real sense of craft. Whether it is applicable to the real world is less important than whether you can keep your numbers up to keep the administration happy. If they sign-up to do more work, that is gravy.
FWIW, I try as often as possible to use a students own work, no matter how modest, to start and further execute the process. Their buy-in values the lessons. But that is my style. Good luck.

 

[MattKing]

Just so you are aware, I didn't complete the poll because of its "one not the other" question.
IMHO a vocational program that does not either supply or require some familiarity with analogue options won't serve the students well.
While the current markets feature techniques are almost all digital, many, many potential customers will also have knowledge of the very recently "normal" film options.
Customers are never impressed when a potential service provider is totally ignorant about quite recent norms.
I would have voted for a training program that is mostly digital, with at least a contextual review of analogue options.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Understood. Thank you fro the description of your position.

 

[Cholentpot]

I'll chime in

As a relative youngster - at least on this site - who's only been shooting for income for about 6 months it's gonna be hands down digital.

However.

I spent the past 5 years eating, sleeping, dreaming, reading, watching photography. Every day multiple times reading forums, websites, videos, tutorials. I carried a heavy SLR everywhere to everything. I learned to develop my own B&W and C-41, I cobbled together a darkroom twice, I built my own scanning rig. I learned post processing analog and digital. When the bell rang to make money - which I answered very very reluctantly - I started with an entry level DSLR camera and slightly better lens. I quickly made enough to upgrade to a used older pro body and a very good lens.

Jump to now, 6 months late. I now get enough gigs to float my hobby and as of my last two shoots I've offered film as an extra and the client wanted it when they saw my results. Mind you it was for a tween and they wanted the film!

My 'useless' analog skills have taught me more than any of my peers who've never looked at film. I can shoot in any situation confidently with digital. I've learned scale focus, sunny 16, shooting from the waist, the zone system, shooting with care, having an eye for colorless, ignoring minor mistakes and issues, keeping people still and coping with misbehaving equipment. I would not be able to do what I'm doing without learning on cheap expired crappy bulk loaded film and a cranky camera twice my age. Since 2013 when I started I've shot and developed over 300 rolls of film. From unknown rolls to rare and exciting emulsions. I've tried over 10 formats and almost a dozen developers. I mixed my own up from scratch and screwed up more rolls and pants then I can count. I've failed miserably and won amazingly. I've done what millions have done before me and some things of what no-one has ever done.

This is a bottomless learning experience that I'm still wrapping my brain around. I'll never be a pro in my mind only a student along for the ride.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

As an instructor and athletic coach there is no holding back a motivated and talented subject. Students like this have courage and agility. I suggest that your friends who haven't groked film are neither. They are playing around. You aren't. THAT and subsequent success, are independent of format, emulsion or sensor.