Photography as a career??

[patmahe]

I'm thinking of changing careers as I haven't been happy in what I do for a long time(IT). I did an aptitude test and amongst the careers it said I was suited to was photography.

I'm assuming there are a number of professional photographers on here and I'm just looking for a bit of an insight into the job,

-the highs and lows
-pay
-type of work(studio, nature, sports etc..)
-hours
-satisfaction
-motivation
-regularity of work
-cost of setup and training
-etc

Would be particularly interested to here from any motoring photographers.

All advice welcome and appreciated.

[Scho]

chicks dig it!

[patmahe]

Scho said:

chicks dig it!

Converted

[Piglet]

My OH is a motorsport photographer (amongst other things), it is virtually impossible to make a living in motorsport photography. Most teams don't want to pay vast amounts of money - or even any money at all to 'togs. Jo Public can take pretty good pics with today's digi cameras and Jo is normally happy to give their work away to teams/drivers/websites/mags etc as they think it will give them a staircase to being a Pro, without realising that there really is very little Pro work anymore partially because of the freebies.

Expect to fund your own travel and accomodation at race circuits and to then spend three days taking pics for very little return (that's without touching the accreditation issue!).

I can't comment about other aspects of photography but I'm sure others can.

Edited by Piglet on Tuesday 13th November 15:00

[jagdpanther]

You can earn a good packet with wedding photography, but there is so much competition at the moment, that you really do have to produce something above and beyond what most people are offering!

Personally, I would love to be a professional photographer, but I wont concentrate on making a living from it and treat it more like a much loved hobby with financial potential!

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

In common with lots of careers that appear superficially attractive (TV presenting, film directing, F1 driver, etc.) it takes a lot of work and talent to get to the top. Those of us that are content to be outside the Premiership can make a reasonable living, but it's not easy.

I don't want to appear negative, but I'm keen to dispell the idea that it's an easy career to get into. For example, the current 'Learn Direct' TV ad, where a guy does a correspondence course and next week is photographing models in a studio - this does not happen.

However, if you are talented and determined you can make it, but I suspect an aptitude test isn't the best way to decide that.

[Bacardi]

patmahe said:

I did an aptitude test and amongst the careers it said I was suited to was photography.

Depends on what type of photograph you end up/want to do but here's a general vague ramble...

patmahe said:

-the highs and lows

Highs- Travel to exotic locations and photograph naked women with expensive cars... and get paid for it... if you're lucky...
Lows- Standing around some cold dismal factory while all your gear gets covered in grease and dirt. Dealing with awkward clients. Making ugly members of the public look attractive, equipment failures just at the wrong time.... etc etc.

patmahe said:

-pay

Very variable from peanuts to loads.

Local news paper, I don't know but would guess junior at 12k a year to 25-30k for senior (most probably do portraits and weddings on the side).
Wedding and portraits -as low as 25 to maybe average of 200 for a portrait sitting and 1000-1500 for an average wedding. Good wedding snappers can charge 3k + for a wedding.
Average commercial suburban studio rate is about 500-800 a day + or - 200. London higher.
Editorial car snappers 350 a day.
Top car and advertising snappers may get 3-5k+ a day + usage

patmahe said:

-type of work(studio, nature, sports etc..)

Depends what you want to do. Nature and sports are more specialised, studio work can be more variable (unless you just do jewellery or food, or whatever speciality), so you may need to buy more gear. Your rates need to reflect this (otherwise you will go bust).

Are you cut out for nature and wildlife, sitting in a cold hide for hours or days on end for a picture you may still not get? Obviously you don't need the overhead of a studio to do sport or nature.

Other types of photography can include Press inc. sport, news, war, pap, editorial etc. Advertising, Industrial, fashion, beauty, cars, architecture, food, still life, music theatre and film, medical, police forensic and of course weddings and portraits. Some people (very few as the market is saturated), make a living from just doing Library shots but you have to put a lot of high quality shots in with no guarantee of sales.

patmahe said:

-hours

Assuming you're talking about working for yourself, Very irregular from doing nothing for days to working 24 hours a day. (looks like Speedy, like me, is having quiet day today )

patmahe said:

-satisfaction

Can be very satisfying when you nail a good shot/s/solve problems. Be aware though, you are being paid to take a picture for someone else's benefit... not yours! And it has to done reliably, to brief, on time and in budget if you want repeat business.

patmahe said:

-motivation

It helps to have some (although I wore mine out years ago).

patmahe said:

-regularity of work

Depends on the work. Weddings can be every weekend. Other commercial work can be regularly irregular... if you know what I mean. Annual reports, updating brochures might happen with regular clients every year (usually all at the same time). If you can get into editorial, you can have regular monthly work.

patmahe said:

-cost of setup and training

Again, depends on what you do. Something like sport could be two bodies and 4-5 lenses and flash guns + hire expensive lens when needed (15-25k), to studio with different formats, types of cameras, lighting and grip etc. (30-70k+ depending on your tastes). + computer hardware and storage.

As for training, well, like everything in life, there's no substitute for experience. Doing courses will not make you a brilliant photographer but it may help to develop your natural talent. A lot (not all), photographers in advertising have usually served time as an assistant (on terrible pay), and learnt a lot that way to start with. Also useful to have knowledge about associated industries like reprographics to help you overcome problems when they arise (and they will). The technical aspects of photography, exposure, lenses, focus etc. should be second nature. It's solving the problems, working with people, coming up with something better than the competition, staying fresh, which is the challenging part of being a photographer.

patmahe said:

-etc

You can make a living at it and it beats working but... it may take a pleasant hobby away from you. It won't happen overnight, it takes time to gain experience. If you want to work for yourself, make sure you have the right aptitude to do the book keeping and VAT etc.

HTH, your milage may vary, E&OA
Good luck .

[agent006]

patmahe said:

I did an aptitude test and amongst the careers it said I was suited to was photography.

What's your current portfolio like?