How to make some money out of photography?

colinh

colinh

Well-known
Local time
2:57 AM
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
504
It seems that some people here who are not full time professionals have managed to sell some of their photos. So, serious(*) question here:

Is there any chance of me selling any of my images (from my various RFF galleries) and if so, how should I go about it?

I don't want to touch any of these "give all your rights away for 99 cents" sites, which were mentioned in another thread.

colin


(*) I just read an article yesterday (in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung) about how the Japanese don't make jokes about people in positions of authority. In fact, they barely tell jokes at all. And if they do they say "What I'm now going to say is a joke." Afterwards they say the joke is now finished. It finished off with the following anecdote:

The Japanese PM, Yoshihiro Mori, was being coached in English for the upcoming G-8 2000 summit. He was taught the phrase "How are you?" and to reply "Me too". Later, as he greets Clinton he says "Who are you?" Clinton laughs and replies "Hillary's husband". Upon which Mori, well trained, says "Me too".
 
Last edited:
Weddings?

I'm trying to sell some stuff on a stock website, istockphoto. I've four pictures up for a month and made $2.36. It is going to be a while before a pay for my equipement.

It will be interesting to hear how it differs from Europe to the US to make some cash on the side.

I've made more money betting on golf that with photography, and I'm a crappy golfer.
 
I wouldn't be any good at weddings. And pros have to have something to do. No, I just meant the photos I take anyway.

colin
 
Having a website is a good way to put yourself "out there" so people can see your stuff and maybe buy some of your photograhpy.
I get a few requests through mine a year, not a lot I know, but they are sales.
Good Luck!
Brian
 
Last edited:
Oh Colin.... I am from Munich too and I can tell you, that it is a really hard job, to sell any photos here. I think and my experiences are that you need a huge pile of luck, a plenty of personal contacts in the scene and a well-meaning and warm-hearted gallerist.
I am strolling through the city of Munich as you do, triing to get some very good and unique shots which are worth to be showed to some audience. But I have never sold any of them.
But good luck and keep shootig.
George
 
Matthew Allen said:
Here's an interesting and rather depressing article that deals with the state of professional photography today in the context of the 'war' on copyright:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/29/photojournalism_and_copyright/

...Though it appears that you (Colin) have already recognised the evils of penny stock photography.;)

Matthew
Click to expand...

I am aware of all that....but was hoping to block it out. I guess not today.

/T
 
Has anyone been contacted by Schmap (through Flickr)?

They asked if they could use a photograph of mine (a crappy one, well more crappy than usual) and promised to - wait for this - give me full credit for the picture. No cash of course, and this was from a commercial venture, ie, people making money.

Apparently lots of flickr people have been signing up happily, thrilled that their images are now being used by a company. Even microstock photography is under threat.

I refused to let my image be included btw.
 
Have you tried stock?

Have you tried stock?

colinh said:
I don't want to touch any of these "give all your rights away for 99 cents" sites, which were mentioned in another thread.

colin
Click to expand...

Well, Colin, it sounds as though you want to do what you want to do and get paid for it. You can . . . almost. It's called stock. I use three different agencies and they are all very different. I use one of those that you refer to above, only they pay $0.30 per image! Sometimes, rarely, $20 per image.

The other two agencies demand more money for their photographers, but the volume is much less. I have been running a "competition" among them to see which one will make more money for me.

Surprise! The cheap site makes more money! I hate to say this, but the general trend is downward. More access to more people, more competition, more downward pricing pressures, the difficulties of protecting copyrights in the digital age — all conspire to drive down all prices.

Right now, I can make between $150 and $500/month with stock. This is with many thousands of images uploaded, a lot of hard work and a lot of rejections by agencies who only accept what they want to. This helps to suppliment my retirement (or pay for my hobby) but I expect each year to be worse than the one before.

So far, MOMA has not discovered me or offerend me a one-man show.

I am still waiting. :)
 
istockphoto drove me nuts with 'artifacting' and copyright issues, usually small signs or 'art work' in the picture. The problem is that they never really say what is exactly wrong.

I think I have it down more on what they want. I'd have to say that they don't seem to like scanned film. I think it has to do with the fact that for stock they want clean, simple pictures that pop, not black and white scans. That's just me though.

The pic that has been downloaded the most is the least favorite that I posted. Posted almost as an after thought. To me as a total novice, it seems like the picture has to have a good amount of negative space in it so there is room for copy and such.

There was a series on Luminious Landscape about going pro or making money.

To me it seems that to make money as a photogrpaher, you need to spend a lot of time selling and networking. I sell for living, I just want to go out and shoot, and if someone will pay me for it, so much the better.
 
I didn't mean I'd like to take up photography as a profession, or that I want to do contracts. And I'm not even interested in stock since the meagre returns Mr Bike Tourist mentions don't warrant the hard work he referred to.

I do this for fun, and because of some artistic desire to create. Every now and then I paint and had some paintings in a show. There were several inquiries as to price, but I wasn't interested in selling - at least not at the prices people might have contemplated since these were precisely not just "oh, let's paint another picture then" paintings.

With photography things are slightly different, as one can make multiple prints from the negative (bet you didn't know that :) ).
Like some of the guys in the Leica SLR mailing lists (ie. Doug Herr, David Young) I might consider selling prints. Not that anyone has asked yet, mind you :) :)

Maybe I should make some nice big baryt prints and stroll around some galleries?

colin
 
Well - from an art side - some people argue against it for various reasons - but I always print in editions for signed matted prints. I keep a database of everyone who owns an editioned print, and thus far, have not been tempted to re-release an edition (having not yet sold any out - numbered editions total of 200).

So taht helps the "you can make as many as you want" factor.

Having large hand crafted prints on archival materials, well matted is nice too.

I'm always suprised how little many photographers charge for something as time consuming as this.

I need to shop for a new gallery too. But my first step I'll be adding personal portfolios to my pro site, and allowing people to request prints from there. We'll see if that boosts the bottom line any.
 
News agencies are always asking for pictures from the public. The shots they use are not paid for and not even credited, but people seem happy to send them in anyway. Sometimes it's a picture from a phone, sometimes it's a nice landscape used on the local weather, but there's no money in it.

Stock agencies have been mentioned, Amateur Photographer recently said you can expect about £1 per image per year. That's after all the time you spend on the images and whether you can get past their QC dept.

I think the only way to make money (and I haven't even considered attempting this) is to go down the "fine art" route, where well-heeled buyers will pay reasonably large amounts for a "fine art" photograph. But first you have to convince them that it is, indeed, "fine art", which goes back to selling skills etc. and not so much photographic ability.

Then I think of all the money people have paid for Tracey Emins work. The term "emperors new clothes" comes to mind...
 
anselwannab said:
istockphoto drove me nuts with 'artifacting' and copyright issues, usually small signs or 'art work' in the picture. The problem is that they never really say what is exactly wrong.

I think I have it down more on what they want. I'd have to say that they don't seem to like scanned film. I think it has to do with the fact that for stock they want clean, simple pictures that pop, not black and white scans. That's just me though.

The pic that has been downloaded the most is the least favorite that I posted. Posted almost as an after thought. To me as a total novice, it seems like the picture has to have a good amount of negative space in it so there is room for copy and such.

There was a series on Luminious Landscape about going pro or making money.

To me it seems that to make money as a photogrpaher, you need to spend a lot of time selling and networking. I sell for living, I just want to go out and shoot, and if someone will pay me for it, so much the better.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean :)

I finally got through their "screening/review" process and in a sense, that helped me to raise the bar of quality of my pictures according to *their* standard, but that doesn't mean that I agree with that standard.

Furthermore, there's no way that my other pictures that has more artistic value (said others who has seen it, not myself) can pass the test.

BTW, Dick (Bike Tourist), you're my inspiration in stock-photography ;)
 
I've had a few enquiries in the last year asking if I can sell prints of certain pictures but I never knew how much to sell them for. How much is the going rate for prints?
 
That's fine for you?

That's fine for you?

mpt600 said:
'I think the only way to make money (and I haven't even considered attempting this) is to go down the "fine art" route, where well-heeled buyers will pay reasonably large amounts for a "fine art" photograph. But first you have to convince them that it is, indeed, "fine art", which goes back to selling skills etc. and not so much photographic ability.'

Show as much as you can, it's pain but you have to have track record: one that says which galleries you've been shown in, which shows you've placed in, who owns your work in their collections. At some point you have to go national with this. As a painter I easily conquered my local market, won a number of shows and had no problem getting galleries to handle my work. But there was a ceiling to this.

It costs money show nationally, framing and crating artwork, attempt to insure it, and you have take the risk of winning and participating in traveling shows. This can cost money, and lots of it, and it's very good if you travel and glad hand gallery owners. Mick Jagger says, 'No artist was discovered in his garret', and that's very true. If you can't promote yourself you need a promoter who believes he can make money for himself from your work.

Selling photographs is like selling prints, but the venue is much smaller than other 'fine art' and the collector market much smaller too.

It doesn't hurt to take part in workshops led by folks who already have a name; that way you can begin to network. However, this costs money too. I'm pretty much classically trained in photography, and went to art school for it. Believe me it helps and many of the issues that may be keeping your dreams down may be very obvious to someone who has really studied. Being self taught is okay, but that comes with risks. I'm a self taught guitar player and I've played professionally as well, but I'm stuck with bad habits and attitudes that prevent me from going forward because of my pride of being self taught.

In the end talent means perservering over failure, but you have to really want what you want to do. This often means 'paying to work'.

The first step to earning a little money is to show and compete in the market.
Get involved in some workshops, and invest in training yourself.

This forum is a great support group, but personality, attitude, myopic artistic sensibilty, lack of formal training or experience and not knowing the difference of hobbyist vs. professional will not substitute for real one on one professional criticism and support.

Grandma Moses very likely didn't know what she was doing, and I agree that there are folk/anti art photographers (lomography) but there ain't no de-fence for ignor-ence in my book. A little education won't stifle your 'inate and pure talent or vision'.

If you are good at photography, and know why, you will sell if you compete.
Click to expand...
 
dingadingdang said:
I've had a few enquiries in the last year asking if I can sell prints of certain pictures but I never knew how much to sell them for. How much is the going rate for prints?
Click to expand...

How famous are you? How much money did the people asking have? :)



mpt600 said:
Then I think of all the money people have paid for Tracey Emins work. The term "emperors new clothes" comes to mind...
Click to expand...

I've been an expat since 1991. In the last 16 years I have hardly watched any British TV or read any British newspapers. I used to read The Times, which my mother got (when I visited) but since it seems to have turned into The Sun, with longer words, she cancelled it. I used to watch The Nine O'Clock News. Horizon used to be good. Oh well.

So, I had to google 'Tracey Emins'. If you hadn't mentioned the name, I would have remained blissfully unaware... Thank you so much :bang:

colin
 
I think in order to make $$ from photography - for most people it is to take photographs for someone at their request for a specific event.

Other than that, the street shots we take will have little demand in the market.
 
Last edited:
Ok, serious question, but I can't resist:
How to make some money?
Out of photography (so, at least you will save some money).

Said that, you can enter what us Spaniards call BBC (bodas, bautizos, comuniones) that is weddings and other social events. To do that, you should know enough people and having a street seller talent. Then you can make official events not for the press (that usually have their own photog) but for organizers (e.g. meetings, fairs and the like). A good physical portfolio is great value here.

A guy made a pretty good deal shooting a ruined building and selling the pictures (along with newer ones) to the restoring enterprise when the building was rebuilded. Try to think about temporary employers that don't have in-staff photog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom