On Being A Professional Photogapher...Tell us your story, please...

[jtk]

.

 

[jtk]

.

 

[John51]

As jtk says, it's about clients.

When I was hustling, mid 70s, it seemed to me that wedding photographers only saw the bride and groom, plus maybe immediate family, as clients. For me, everybody at the wedding was a potential client, including the kids. 'You look so sweet in that dress, ask your mother if I can take some pictures of you'.

I worked on spec. Informal/candid shots outside the church. At the evening reception I'd collect as many names and addresses as I could by doing b+w walkie snaps. 'My numbers on your receipt. Give me a call in a week or two if want to see the wedding photos I took earlier today.'

There was some legwork involved in flogging the colour prints but hey, work is work. In just about every wedding I wangled myself an invite to, more people saw the pics I took than those taken by the pro.

 

[jtk]

Smart !

 

[KenS]

Ken, great story! Question: if you wanted to be a professional today, how would you go about it? Would you free-lance? Or you think there are photo opportunities like the ones you enjoyed for a younger version of you today?

I'm not sure I would want to be a 'competent' pro now-a--days... too many 'wanna-be's' running around with the 'latest and greatest' in digital hardware.. making 'dozens' of exposures and hoping they got it close to 'right' and hoping it can also be 'fixed up' on the computer.. and probably for but a fraction of what I could afford to charge.
Approaching my 79th birthday, I think I have 'earned' the right to 'do for me' (as I have been doing.. after my post-retirement BFA at the local university at the ripe old age of 74 [ 'answering the challenge offered me by my (PhD-type) daughter]..... and posting some of the the results to the 'somewhat new' 5x4 web site in the UK. I now doing 'only for me'.. and having a 'ball' while I'm at it.

Ken


Ken

 

[KenS]

Ken, great story! Question: if you wanted to be a professional today, how would you go about it? Would you free-lance? Or you think there are photo opportunities like the ones you enjoyed for a younger version of you today?

Sorry about the delay in getting back to you

To be perfectly honest... I don't really have a 'sensible' answer.
But... to get 'started' I would probably start off with a good 'basic' education and apply to an institute of higher education (think Rochester Institute) before looking for a Fine Arts degree. I'm not sure how many (If any) Universities continue to offer courses in 'real' technical/scientific photography other than Rochester. Our 'local' Institute of higher learning had just closed all but one of their 'wet darkrooms' in favour of digital imaging.. but I had my own darkroom downstairs for 24/7 use.. while they did not have continuing 'large format' facilities for a 'dyed in the wool' large format film users such as myself.

A high percentage of my print 'out put' is NOW done using the 'archaic print processes' on a good quality 'water-colour paper using my home built UV light source ...some what 'less expensive'.per print.. but LOTS more 'time per' than silver-gelatin print (think exposure times of 20+minutes per print).
I 'work' in both 4x5 (Linhof monorail,,and B&J 8x10 'woodie) I have an RB67 ProSD but it does not see much use these days... I was 'called back' for some 'free-lance' work for the local Agriculture Canada Research Center after my 'forced' early retirement (they needed the 'space I occupied rather than my 'skills'after closing down a similar facility in Ottawa and transferred their scientific staff out west to 'here'
I think the 'acceptance of digital' imaging may have helped. I did some free-lance work for a few of those who 'knew' ... and appreciated "what I could 'DO' with my 'skill and abilities'.. but in he end...they believed Q& D 'digital' was a lot 'cheaper'.. (but nowhere near as 'good' as I had proved I could produce over the years).

Ken
PS. I've been post a number of my post employment images to the somewhat 'new' 5x4.co.uk website ...in B/W as KenS.in Portals,
you MUST to sign in with e-mail and a password just to visit and 'peek (think 'security')

Ken

 

[jtk]

I'm not sure I would want to be a 'competent' pro now-a--days... too many 'wanna-be's' running around with the 'latest and greatest' in digital hardware.. making 'dozens' of exposures and hoping they got it close to 'right' and hoping it can also be 'fixed up' on the computer.. and probably for but a fraction of what I could afford to charge.
Approaching my 79th birthday, I think I have 'earned' the right to 'do for me' (as I have been doing.. after my post-retirement BFA at the local university at the ripe old age of 74 [ 'answering the challenge offered me by my (PhD-type) daughter]..... and posting some of the the results to the 'somewhat new' 5x4 web site in the UK. I now doing 'only for me'.. and having a 'ball' while I'm at it.

Ken


Ken

My "favorite" photographer was Richard Avedon.

I doubt he lost any business to people who used digital equipment. There's no reason to compare his work to the work of photographers who do their work digitally.

Avedon's approach to his work earned him that long career. He manifested particular kind of personal vision...and he was hired for that vision. It didn't spring from his choice of camera (his earliest published work included 16mm spy camera). He used equipment that served his purposes and the purposes of his clients.

Bitterness about the commercial and artistic success of digital photographers is even more sad than bitterness about advancing age.

 

[KenS]

My "favorite" photographer was Richard Avedon.

I doubt he lost any business to people who used digital equipment. There's no reason to compare his work to the work of photographers who do their work digitally.

While I am not 'against' those who rely on digital... If I were a LOT younger.. and lacking the acquired
'proven' skills I have acquired over the 60-odd years of working under the dark-cloth and the 'learning of the 'How best' to get the final image onto 'paper', I might be tempted .I rarely ever use commercial B&W paper these days... I have taken more of a 'liking' to the Archaic print processes for personal work where I scan my LF negatives to modify the contrast range and density to meet the needs of the home mixed emulsion.

Yes.... it IS a LOT slower but somehow much more 'satisfying' to do that which 'tickles' your fancy

I found out that the head of the photography section of the FIne Art department was 'somewhat' less than 'happy' with my working outside the current 'norms' when they were 'pushing digital' hard copy
output at around $10 per square foot.... outside my financial means.

Ken

Post scriptum (as they used to say)Don't forget to take a peek at the images i have posted at that LF website ... consider 'joining an sharing YOUR works

Ken (a.k.a.) "Grumpy"

 

[jimgalli]

I posted in this thread in 2006. Still keeping the world safe, and Still making a paycheck and will retire early next year. After that it's all "hobby".

 

[Darryl Roberts]

I don't care being a professional, I care about clients.

 

[jtk]

I earn a paycheck as a photometric tech. I guess that counts. All this LF stuff is relax mode for me though.

Let's say you've got a missile that you want to have land at spot X and it's traveling about 960 ft. per second. You'd really like to know how fast it was really going, what the angle was in flight and what if any difference the angle of the unit was compared to the angle of flight and spin rate if there is one. You'd also like to know within a thousandth of a second when it hit the ground. I can build you a camera array that will get you all that info.

I picked up my Nikon FG about 1985 or so because I wanted to make some pretty pictures of my Postwar Lionel train layout. I didn't have a clue. So I had to buy some books and learn how to use my Nikon. That led of course to better lenses and better Nikon's. (Not that much better, an FE was all I ever needed). Soon I got more interested in the cameras than the trains and yet another expensive bad habit was born.

By the time I came to work out here on the test range in 1994 I was doing 4X5 work. I came out here as an electrician but got to be very good friends with the guy in the photo shop who was also into 4X5. To make a very long story short, when they offered him a very nice early retirement package we conspired to move me into this photometric job from the electrical work. I spent a year getting up to speed on the high speed movie cameras but most of the building blocks I needed were already in place. Of all the old timers that retired, the photometric job was the most seamless transition they experienced out here.

So while I make my pay as a pro photog the LF stuff that I chatter about here at the forum is still just hobby. I plan to keep it that way. I try to make the hobby pay it's way by horsetrading on Ebay and that frees me up to just give the pretty pictures away.

Jim Galli mentioned his 2006 post, so (respecting his work of course) I looked it up. Great observations!

I'll just mention that I've known many commercial photographers and never met one who stepped far very away from 'hobby" (or "art") origins.

The only bitter photographers that I've met were people who were bad businessmen . Professional photography, just as with other jobs and romances, is probably an important step along the way for those of us who are/have been successful. Avedon's uninterrupted life work aside.

 

[jtk]

Jim Galli mentioned his 2006 post, so (respecting his work of course) I looked it up. Great observations!

I'll just mention that I've known many commercial photographers and never met one who stepped far very away from 'hobby" (or "art") origins.

The only bitter photographers that I've met were people who were bad businessmen . Professional photography, just as with other jobs and romances, is probably an important step along the way for those of us who are/have been successful. Avedon's uninterrupted life work aside.

The "bad businessmen" I mentioned are the ones who experienced significant "slow pay" ... which was their own fault due to poor client selections. For example, they chose to work with architects....a profession that's notorious for slow pay.

 

[removed account4]

The "bad businessmen" I mentioned are the ones who experienced significant "slow pay" ... which was their own fault due to poor client selections. For example, they chose to work with architects....a profession that's notorious for slow pay.

You forgot.... Working foe anyone named a “consultant “. Notorious for saying ‘ you won’t get paid until we get paid’ but tend to put off paying their sub contractors for as lonp as possible using their fees as their personal bank account... and competing against people with someone on the inside who tells them the “ low bid” so they can bid lower....
BTDT

 

[jtk]

You forgot.... Working foe anyone named a “consultant “. Notorious for saying ‘ you won’t get paid until we get paid’ but tend to put off paying their sub contractors for as lonp as possible using their fees as their personal bank account... and competing against people with someone on the inside who tells them the “ low bid” so they can bid lower....
BTDT

Never ran into that, tho I sometimes worked intentionally for free to mutually build portfolio. And we all should realize that "consultant" usually means "unable".

 

[removed account4]

Never ran into that, tho I sometimes worked intentionally for free to mutually build portfolio. And we all should realize that "consultant" usually means "unable".

I don’t work for free.

Consultant in the historic preservation industry means they get a 1099-misc, it has nothing to do with being incapable. It is too bad once again you are using language that insults people who you don't know jack about.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Quitting is a decision...decisions like that are similar to what's necessary to develop new business in any enterprise. I switched from photo to self-employed recruiting (head-hunting) ...which calls for energies/skills comparable to free-lance photo. I'm seriously thinking about that brew-pub opportunity I described above...

Forgive me if I've missed this, but how are these two disparate ventures comparable..? From a practical real-world perspective.

I absolutely love having my time be my own, but it's f***ing exhausting seeking/soliciting/planning/worrying about finding the next client. It's just not fun and I don't disparage anyone who makes a calculation to seek security -- especially if they have others to worry about. I don't plan to engage further on this point, but it's unseemly and arrogant to sneer at those who do and you'd come across a whole lot better if you felt likewise.

Let's not forget photographers a whole lot more profound, talented and successful than we toiled their years away in job-type jobs -- Fred Herzog, Vivian Meier and many many others. Even working pros who've made a name for themselves in documentary or fine art pay the bills with classes, commercial work and hustling and jiving on social media.

 

[Pieter12]

I am not, nor ever have been a working professional photographer. But I have hired hundreds of them. Most of the ad agencies I worked for took as long as possible to pay their bills, 90 to 180 days not being uncommon. The last agency I worked for was an exception, paying in 10-15 days. It was not unheard-of for agencies or clients to fold and leave suppliers hanging out to dry.

Many photographesr (or their reps) would request an advance payment to cover expenses knowing how long it could take to collect the balance. Also, there was a lot of "flavor of the month" in the business, hiring the current hot photographer or style and there was always a crowd of young photographers willing to work cheap to get their foot in the door if one was willing to take the chance. On the other hand, many art directors preferred to work with a small group of established photographers that they knew could deliver consistently and would not (because of the amount of business they were getting) shy away from doing an occasional free or expenses-only reshoot or some pro-bono work.

 

[jtk]

Perhaps I should explain that I made a point of working for advertising agencies and design studios that had good reputations among other photographers and graphic designers (I knew a few from the start because they were graphic design clients). I worked mostly with ADs who had come from Art Center School in Los Angeles...the fact that I knew the importance of Art Center School bought me credibility.

I did occasionally take risks with agencies and designers that were "just starting out" or who had moved from a good agency to a startup and I suffered from more than 60 days exactly once...from an agency that asked me to take that risk because they were in financial difficulty...and I took the risk because I liked the AD and knew him from his previous agency.

That conscious strategy worked well for me. Very few agencies took more than 45 days tho one took 90.

I was merely an average studio photographer...600 square feet, mostly 4X5, multiple Norman strobes and almost no B&W. My billings were average among my peers and that bought me a house in San Francisco.

It's true that some great photographers wanted payment up front because of scale of project...I never did that, but would have if I'd needed cash in front for a large setup of some sort. My work never involved an agent so I didn't have that expense. In retrospect, if I'd used an agent I might have billed a lot more, but that would have involved additional complexity. I sometimes needed food and other stylists, but they did their own separate billing.

I did show a good and evolving portfolio and almost never bothered with an appointment.

 

[jtk]

Forgive me if I've missed this, but how are these two disparate ventures comparable..? From a practical real-world perspective.

I absolutely love having my time be my own, but it's f***ing exhausting seeking/soliciting/planning/worrying about finding the next client. It's just not fun and I don't disparage anyone who makes a calculation to seek security -- especially if they have others to worry about. I don't plan to engage further on this point, but it's unseemly and arrogant to sneer at those who do and you'd come across a whole lot better if you felt likewise.

Let's not forget photographers a whole lot more profound, talented and successful than we toiled their years away in job-type jobs -- Fred Herzog, Vivian Meier and many many others. Even working pros who've made a name for themselves in documentary or fine art pay the bills with classes, commercial work and hustling and jiving on social media.

Colin, the OT involved professional photography...photography for money. Not Meier.

fwiw, since you asked: recruiting (head hunting), the way some of us did it (some still do), meant picking up the phone, calling targeted companies (e.g. Charles Schwab, John Hancock), finding and reaching decision-makers who had authority to pay (i.e. big cheeses). If they hired my candidates they always paid because they had that authority. Internet research was central, but decisions were verbal and emails were confirmations. I never dealt with Vice Presidents or Senior Vice Presidents because those were mostly ceremonial titles, given instead of bonus etc. The "Executive Assistant" of the President or CEO could always be reached and would point me to the real decisionmakers, who often lacked titles (some trade secrets, gratis). Recruiting was BIG FUN and it paid very well.

I'm sorry to read that some people are proud of failing to pay quickly, even justifying slow pay.

 

[jtk]

I don’t work for free.

Consultant in the historic preservation industry means they get a 1099-misc, it has nothing to do with being incapable. It is too bad once again you are using language that insults people who you don't know jack about.

Sorry to step on your toes. In my headhunter world (now former) we all recognized that "consultant" in resume or interview was kiss of death. And of course we advised potential candidates to specify projects and markets instead...both recruiters and our clients recognized blowing of smoke. Pm me if you're open to discussion.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

After College I spent a fairly short time (2 years or so until the 2008 crash) working as a photo assistant in MPLS and NYC. I worked for studios that did a lot of pretty boring but solid work for Target, Room and Board, Sea Doo, and then some local brands too. A lot of the work we were doing was for 'circular', you know the little ads in the Sunday paper. Even if it was just a new box of cookies it needed to be photographed and structured into Target's file system.

It's about 13 years later now, and I get ads from Squarespace in my inbox about their photo services. They have a little AI powered robot that will do 3 images per product, plus a pretty basic but clean background. Looks slick enough. (https://www.squareshot.co/)

For this service they charge...wait for it...about $45 bucks per image! You can actually 'subscribe' I guess to get those costs even lower.

I've heard the technology is a little iffy right now and definitely requires techs on site to oversee it. But imagine where it'll be in 5, 10 years. This used to be a whole industry in a given town that supported stylists, assistants, catering, maybe a producer for larger gigs, and of course photographers. I can't imagine why a shop like Target wouldn't either A. add this functionality to their existing studio, or B. Contract with a very large centralized operation that can do 100% of their product photography for significantly less than the handful of MPLS studios that used to rely on it.

There are sub-genre's of pro photography that are going to be somewhat immune to technological changes that completely eradicate their business. Weddings are more competitive but there are people who make a good living doing them if their market can support the work. Idk what is happening with editorial but stories continue to need telling, and video remains 'it's own thing' until we have Harry Potter style newspapers (which is incredibly annoying in practice...raise your hand if you love autoplaying video content!). I have no idea what is going to happen to ad work. I'm sure there will always be very high end stuff that operates somewhat similar to the 'old model'. But what about the next layer down? It's not work I would want to pursue...

I personally find stories about the few incredible success stories to be a little less interesting than the work-a-day industry as a whole. Great artists are going to continue to exist and make money to be sure. That's about as helpful to your average shutterbug teen as telling them they they too, can be Brad Pitt. In my experience the talent is there or it's not.

Luckily for me photography is no longer about commerce as much as it's about lifestyle, art making, and documentary/story telling. Certain people just love making photographs, and they don't seem to aspire to ad-making. This is a good thing, and I enjoy supporting this community.

 

[jtk]

After College I spent a fairly short time (2 years or so until the 2008 crash) working as a photo assistant in MPLS and NYC. I worked for studios that did a lot of pretty boring but solid work for Target, Room and Board, Sea Doo, and then some local brands too. A lot of the work we were doing was for 'circular', you know the little ads in the Sunday paper. Even if it was just a new box of cookies it needed to be photographed and structured into Target's file system.

It's about 13 years later now, and I get ads from Squarespace in my inbox about their photo services. They have a little AI powered robot that will do 3 images per product, plus a pretty basic but clean background. Looks slick enough. (https://www.squareshot.co/)

For this service they charge...wait for it...about $45 bucks per image! You can actually 'subscribe' I guess to get those costs even lower.

I've heard the technology is a little iffy right now and definitely requires techs on site to oversee it. But imagine where it'll be in 5, 10 years. This used to be a whole industry in a given town that supported stylists, assistants, catering, maybe a producer for larger gigs, and of course photographers. I can't imagine why a shop like Target wouldn't either A. add this functionality to their existing studio, or B. Contract with a very large centralized operation that can do 100% of their product photography for significantly less than the handful of MPLS studios that used to rely on it.

There are sub-genre's of pro photography that are going to be somewhat immune to technological changes that completely eradicate their business. Weddings are more competitive but there are people who make a good living doing them if their market can support the work. Idk what is happening with editorial but stories continue to need telling, and video remains 'it's own thing' until we have Harry Potter style newspapers (which is incredibly annoying in practice...raise your hand if you love autoplaying video content!). I have no idea what is going to happen to ad work. I'm sure there will always be very high end stuff that operates somewhat similar to the 'old model'. But what about the next layer down? It's not work I would want to pursue...

I personally find stories about the few incredible success stories to be a little less interesting than the work-a-day industry as a whole. Great artists are going to continue to exist and make money to be sure. That's about as helpful to your average shutterbug teen as telling them they they too, can be Brad Pitt. In my experience the talent is there or it's not.

Luckily for me photography is no longer about commerce as much as it's about lifestyle, art making, and documentary/story telling. Certain people just love making photographs, and they don't seem to aspire to ad-making. This is a good thing, and I enjoy supporting this community.

Northeast...that was an interesting post..thanks...

I enjoy a lot of your posts because you have a clear point of view.

Our ideas of what "photography" and "art" mean differ quite a lot, which figures: we are, of course, different people.

For me, "commerce" isn't / wasn't an obstacle. Its always been easy to pay bills with photography because my most financially significant clients actually shared what you call "art making" and "lifestyle"... extreme examples were a unit of US Army Corps of Engineers and a company that manufactured huge agricultural machines. And of course, ADs (art directors) of important advertising agencies such as Young and Rubicam resonated with me. I enjoyed and learned from working with even the most obnoxious of them.

When technical needs developed (such as for large Ciba transparencies and exhibit systems or for massive commercial slide shows, they were not fascinating or enjoyable in themselves. That distinguishes some Photrio participants from others, perhaps such as yourself.

But there's another, more profound distinction: Some of us, me for example, see no important distinction between "photography" and, for example, athletic or literary or other "artistic" pursuits.

One of my favorite commercial friends was Galen Rowell, a rock climbing super-athlete who was initially best known for a kind of image relying on Kodachrome and, unknown to most of his clients, multiple exposures with a Honeywell Repronar....an entirely visual, seat-of-pants, essentially non-technical process. And he was a writer who was known by most people only because he was published.

I personally doubled the business of two then-famous professional photo labs and the professional client side of one famous San Francisco "camera store". I enjoyed developing the concepts that led to those successes. I have literally never pursued business from "hobbiests" because I've always related best to people who saw image-making as more than a pastime, just as some athletes and some writers and some Photrio participants have always done in their lives.

For me the most important influences have been my mother, who taught me how to develop and print nearly 70 years ago, and a number of Minor White students...and of course girlfriends, who appreciated what I did and always had compelling lives of their own.

 

[removed account4]

Sorry to step on your toes. In my headhunter world (now former) we all recognized that "consultant" in resume or interview was kiss of death. And of course we advised potential candidates to specify projects and markets instead...both recruiters and our clients recognized blowing of smoke. Pm me if you're open to discussion.

steel toe shoes
what I have realized is the kiss of death in some professions ( "consultant". > high powered executive search )
is not the kiss of death in other professions ( "consultant" >> sub contractors for section 106/EIS statement reviews/planning + historic preservation )
me? my CV doesn't say consultant. resume and project list, portfolio are fine tuned for every job I go for. people I worked for back in the day were the ones that started the profession, they knew everyone on a first name basis, I don't remember what their resumes said.

 

[KenS]

Ken, great story! Question: if you wanted to be a professional today, how would you go about it? Would you free-lance? Or you think there are photo opportunities like the ones you enjoyed for a younger version of you today?

OOPS... Sorry about the delay in 'replying'.. However a LOT depends on your 'major' area of interest.. that being said 'Free-lance' can become a muddy water 'trap' if you are not 'free' to go and 'do' at the drop of a hat (Think
'Who gets to own the 'image copyrights' after you have 'done all the work?)

In my case I had all those years 'practical' experience with ALL formats.. and a portfolio to show 'what I could do'
with each format. Biological and Medical photographers do have an 'Association' for pros who seek and have proven or feel he need to acquire the highest of quality (as opposed to 'Wanna Be's) but getting hired also requires a good portfolio to 'show' that you are competent with all formats..using colour and B&W films (as well as digital recording (which seems to have taken over a large portion of imaging.
Do you 'know' any current "Biomedical/Biological photographers? try communicating with them at the local University (or Hospital) and perhaps 'have chat' showing your interest of perhaps 'working in that field.. We do have a "Professional Organisation" now called BioCom.org who provide a LOT of continuing Educational programmes for current members as a means of 'keeping up' with the How-to's and Why's with 'workshops' and 'meetings' and a 'publication' for 'keeping up with the how-to's and why's (annual fees are currently $75.00
and it is $$ well worth spending (or should I say 'investing????) I had to let my membership laps after I was 'downsized' from Agriculture Canada's nearby Research Centre.. but I"m just about ready to 're-join' in the new year for US $75 .00

I believe there is now a means of 'chatting' via computers (but it has been a while since I 'used it that way. I tend to chat with my sister in the UK via my iPhone with the "messenger" App It 'might be 'easier to provide 'better' information and answers by 'that' means than my "hunting and pecking" on my macBook Air
MY iPhone number is 403-394 6456 (and its "free")

I have to admit I do not know 'everything I aught/need to know but I believe I am still 'learning'
I have been posting my post-retirement 'creative endeavours' on the 5x4.co.uk website (you HAVE to 'sign in with your 'real name', e-mail address and a password just to peruse my post-retirement creative endeavours in a number of the 'sections' as KenS
enjoy (pretty please?)

Ken

 

[jtk]

"if I wanted to be a professional today" I believe I'd need first to think "why?" I don't love photography over client relationships and I think most clients already do most of what they need to do with cell phones. My "clients" mostly need to think (or re-think( WHY they need photographs, and how they want to display whatever they believe photographs to be.

My photographs are, today, almost entirely graphic-artistic explorations. If I had more space and related resources I'd undoubtedly make photo-silkscreens.