Author Topic: Is there a sense in sending pictures anymore? (Read 13577 times)

niserin · « **on:** August 31, 2009, 07:13 »

Hi,
I am generally an optimist but what have noticed is that the industry called microstock is on the edge of some big change or even collapse. Much as the agencies themselves might survive, the photographers will get burned in the search engines among millions of other pictures and it will become non-profitable business for an individual.
I have already seen that the vast majority of my sales are pictures 2 or 3 years old which established good positions in the search engines. And here I come to the point - Is there a sense in sending new pictures to agencies like Fotolia, Dreamstime (except Shutterstock because it's a different model) ?
I hear voices - take better, more commercial pictures. Actually I do send prime quality, commercial pictures which I believe would do very very good 2 years ago, but now they end up unnoticed.
What are your views ?

Michal

sharpshot · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2009, 07:33 »

I haven't noticed much change since I started 3 years ago. Some of my new uploads don't sell but others do well. My biggest selling photo was uploaded in the last year and sells well on several sites. 2009 has been a great year so far. I don't see many problems with the microstock industry, perhaps there are more contributors struggling but there are also lots doing well and keeping quiet about it.

michealo · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2009, 08:11 »

Quote from: niserin on August 31, 2009, 07:13

Hi,
I am generally an optimist but what have noticed is that the industry called microstock is on the edge of some big change or even collapse. Much as the agencies themselves might survive, the photographers will get burned in the search engines among millions of other pictures and it will become non-profitable business for an individual.
I have already seen that the vast majority of my sales are pictures 2 or 3 years old which established good positions in the search engines. And here I come to the point - Is there a sense in sending new pictures to agencies like Fotolia, Dreamstime (except Shutterstock because it's a different model) ?
I hear voices - take better, more commercial pictures. Actually I do send prime quality, commercial pictures which I believe would do very very good 2 years ago, but now they end up unnoticed.
What are your views ?

Michal

It's definitely time to give up

Clivia · « **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2009, 13:06 »

Yes, microstock has had it. Everybody stop uploading at once. (except me

)

disorderly · « **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2009, 13:34 »

Quote from: Clivia on August 31, 2009, 13:06

Yes, microstock has had it. Everybody stop uploading at once. (except me )

I'm certainly going to give up, just as soon as the rest of you do.

lisafx · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2009, 15:57 »

I notice that newer series that would have caught fire a couple of years ago take much longer to build up sales now. Market saturation is real. What's the solution? Either give up or keep plugging away.

I have a daughter a year away from going to college. I have little choice but to keep plugging way

stockastic · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2009, 16:56 »

Unfortunately you will get a range of answers to that question, ranging from optimism to extreme pessimism.

Part of the problem is that the microstocks have continued to modify their search functions, weighting photos on a number of scales - we never know exactly how, but these scales might include past popularity, portfolio size, past contributor success, and possibly other, secret factors. For example, who's to say they don't simply ask their reviewers to tag each accepted image with a subjective rating of how saleable they think it is? We can never find out, and it can all change at any time.

Most merchants will try to steer you to whatever have been their best sellers in the past - they think that's their best chance of making a sale. And of course that tends to lead around in a a circle, making it harder for new products to crack the market, and steadily increasing the emphasis on the proven sellers. I have to believe some of that is going on in microstock.

The more images the microstocks acquire, the more "proven sellers" they have to push, and the less motivation they have to take a chance on putting new images at the front of the search results.

cardmaverick · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2009, 17:30 »

LOL.

Market saturation is real, but so is social change! What good are 8 million images from a few years ago when clearly life/technology/popular trends/EVERYTHING IN LIFE has changed? Seriously? Changing LIFE is why Getty Images will only represent an image for "x" number of years. They only renew the contract if the image is selling well, last time I bothered poking around Getty thats what I found....

Were already beginning to see microstock agencies toss out old photos.

Right now is probably prime time to get in early on undeveloped image markets within microstock. Only the brave who have some guts to invest will get in early enough to really dominate and profit from it.

One last note - try searching with just 3 keywords only at shutterstock. You'll go from 8 million images to less than a few thousand, sometimes less than a few hundred. Think about that.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #8 on:** September 01, 2009, 22:12 »

Quote from: disorderly on August 31, 2009, 13:34

Quote from: Clivia on August 31, 2009, 13:06
Yes, microstock has had it. Everybody stop uploading at once. (except me )

I'm certainly going to give up, just as soon as the rest of you do.

I'm with you, and bring back the Moth/Yeti

I think the growth isn't as fast as it used to be, because the market needs have been filled. Simple enough, you can only have a limited number of any business in a market which will succeed, and once the growth period has ended there will be consolidation and weeding out. The new agencies coming into the arena in the last two years, are too late. The well established agencies will now be battling for market share and their own existence.

The only area where an agency may get into the microstock business is either a niche market or innovation, by offering something new and different that the big six don't offer. Good luck. The big six are more like the big four, maybe the big three and possibly, there are only two!

Depending on the level and number of photos someone has online, with the limitations, changes in acceptance and some other blocks to uploading higher volumes.

Nothing unusual or strange, the market is stabilizing and leveling off, after the rapid growth period. Don't expect things to keep booming like they did in the past.

Randy McKown · « **Reply #9 on:** September 02, 2009, 23:36 »

The trick is don't limit your photography career to microstock only. I look at it as supplemental income to my studio as a whole. In all honesty, you will never make the money from microstock that a traditional photographer makes. It doesn't matter who you know, how many photos you have online or how hard you jump up n down getting everybodys attention. There's just no way. You can say you make a full time income from it but that depends on what you are comparing that income to. Do you think $50K a year is a full time income or maybe $100K? It might be to some but a portrait photographer would be literally freaking out if their sales were that low.
I think a lot of microstockers have become drawn into the industry to hard and to fast to actually learn about the photography industry as a whole. I've wondered how many microstockers actually know how much a photographer really makes. Yuri Arcurs gets a lot of press as being the highest paid microstock photographer in the world. That's all good n groovy but go talk to a couple of the popular senior or wedding photographers in your town and tell them how much he makes and that he's become a somewhat international celebrity for it ... they will be rolling on the floor laughing and wondering who this guy is. They probably cleared that much in the last 45-60 days. **dont get your panties in a bunch and go off topic. I'm not slamming on Yuri. I'm just pointing out to those who honestly want to succeed in this business that the highest recorded income is actually extremely low and you should in no way look at that as a career goal ... aim higher ... much higher**
Microstock has it's place but even if you become one of the microstock elite you are still only making what a professional photographer would call a failing income. If you are not already a career photographer my advice is you learn what you can about photography from your involvement in microstock. Use every penny you make to invest into your photography future and then grow into other fields where you will make the real money as a photographer. Then when you are sitting around the studio between clients or on day were you get rained out .. shoot some microstock instead of farting around on the computer. That's what I try to do .. actually I spend more time farting around on the computer.

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #10 on:** September 03, 2009, 01:38 »

I would be surprised if there would be anyone in all of Germany who makes as much as a wedding photographer as Yuri.
Anyway I agree, it is much harder to get good selling photos. My quality definately improved and I am convinced that the files I sent in this year are by far not taking off so well as they would 3 years ago.

Randy McKown · « **Reply #11 on:** September 03, 2009, 03:21 »

What's the price range for full day weddings in Germany? Here it's $4000-$10,000 for professional work and the amateurs normally do it for $2000-$3000 .. I personally hate weddings and stick with high school seniors .. which actually a high school senior can bring in $1000-$4000 in sales and requires 1/10 the work so actually they produce a higher return than weddings.
And we are very competitive on our pricing .. there are others charging way more than us. Some photographers won't bother talking to somebody who is not willing to drop a $15,000 minimum for a 8 hr wedding. I also know one of my competitors is charging high school seniors $1000 for a 1 hr session that includes 24 wallets and 2 8x10's ..... microstock can never compete with those figures.

It all comes down to knowing how to seek out and target the proper client .. the ones with money !!!!

Freezingpictures · « **Reply #12 on:** September 03, 2009, 04:02 »

It is in average probably similar as in the U.S. Edit: After thinking about it no, average should be lower for professionals and amateurs. If you are a top photographer you probably charge starting 2000-3000 Euros/wedding. If you are the top of the top you probably start at 4000 Euros ($ 6000).

But even if you have an average price of 10000 per wedding or let it be 15000 and you are doing a wedding every weekend of the year you are not even close to what Yuri makes. Anyway, yes for me it is more profitable to do weddings. I almost make the same amount in weddings since advertising started in July-August as I make with a microstock portfolio build up over almost 4 years.

Oh btw I actually know no one who is making 15000/wedding in Germany and I know quite a few wedding photographers.

gostwyck · « **Reply #13 on:** September 03, 2009, 05:49 »

Quote from: xposurepro on September 03, 2009, 03:21

What's the price range for full day weddings in Germany? Here it's $4000-$10,000 for professional work and the amateurs normally do it for $2000-$3000 .. I personally hate weddings and stick with high school seniors .. which actually a high school senior can bring in $1000-$4000 in sales and requires 1/10 the work so actually they produce a higher return than weddings.
And we are very competitive on our pricing .. there are others charging way more than us. Some photographers won't bother talking to somebody who is not willing to drop a $15,000 minimum for a 8 hr wedding. I also know one of my competitors is charging high school seniors $1000 for a 1 hr session that includes 24 wallets and 2 8x10's ..... microstock can never compete with those figures.

It all comes down to knowing how to seek out and target the proper client .. the ones with money !!!!

Well I just did a quick search for wedding photographers in the your area (Kansas) and the maximum package price quoted was $2500 (I'm sure they'll be extras on top of that but not a lot). Of course there's millions to choose from too so you can probably pay as little as your buget demands.

Here in the UK prices for virtually everything are significantly higher than in the US (due to higher taxes, rents, costs of doing business) and the average price paid for weddings is about $2800 __ that price includes VAT at 17% btw. By the time you've deducted overheads you've got to be a top-notch photographer to make a good living from weddings in the UK and you'll be working on most of your weekends too.

Traditionally being a professional photographer in the UK has always been very poorly paid for all but the very best __ you only have to look at the beat-up old vehicles most of them drive. I think the advent of digital has actually improved things somewhat as it has reduced cost, saved time and generally increased productivity.

Lots of people desire or try to earn their living through photography and therefore severe competition and market forces ensure that the vast majority will just earn enough to keep them doing it __ and that's pretty much the same all over the world.

There's an old adage that it is easy to become a professional photographer __ the hard bit is staying as one.

Perry · « **Reply #14 on:** September 03, 2009, 06:02 »

Quote from: gostwyck on September 03, 2009, 05:49

I think the advent of digital has actually improved things somewhat as it has reduced cost, saved time and generally increased productivity.

I think you are wrong about this one. With digital the photographer need to do much of the things that previously were done by others like color correction and retouching. And still do it cheaper...

What you are correct about is that generally being a (small town) photographer means you don't earn very much. The top notch shooters are only the cream of the crop, they do earn serious money, 95% don't.

I'm a full time professional shooter and I have to drive an old beat-up vehicle...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #15 on:** September 03, 2009, 06:26 »

Quote from: xposurepro on September 02, 2009, 23:36

That's all good n groovy but go talk to a couple of the popular senior or wedding photographers in your town and tell them how much he makes and that he's become a somewhat international celebrity for it ... they will be rolling on the floor laughing and wondering who this guy is. They probably cleared that much in the last 45-60 days. **dont get your panties in a bunch and go off topic. I'm not slamming on Yuri. I'm just pointing out to those who honestly want to succeed in this business that the highest recorded income is actually extremely low and you should in no way look at that as a career goal ... aim higher ... much higher**

I've never heard of portrait or wedding photographers making so much they would roll around on the floor laughing at $1 million in gross sales. Sure, there is the occasional, ridiculously successful photographer, just like in micro, but most of them are not nearly making as much as you seem to be inferring.

Here's an old thing from 2004, but I can't imagine it's much different now:
"Median annual earnings of salaried photographers were $26,080 in May 2004. The middle 50 percent earned between $18,380 and $37,370. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $15,000, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $54,180. Median annual earnings in the industries employing the largest numbers of salaried photographers were $32,800 for newspapers and periodicals and $23,100 for other professional, scientific, and technical services."
http://www.collegegrad.com/careers/proft30.shtml#ear

Of course, the same holds true for stock. Very hard to make the money, and very few do it.

Eyedesign · « **Reply #16 on:** September 03, 2009, 10:47 »

That sounds about right Sean. I've been in the Portrait business for the last 15 years and most photographers make between $20,000 - $30,000 per year. School photographers if you can get 10 - 20 schools can pull in about $60,000. You would be hard press to get more than $2,500 for most weddings. To many people with cameras willing to shoot cheaper.

asiaphoto · « **Reply #17 on:** September 03, 2009, 11:39 »

My take is this - photography as a profession is a glamorous job (to the non-professionals who don't rely it for a living)

Just like singers and actors (also glamorous jobs), there are too much supply and not enough demand.

Most singers end up performing for small pubs and bars. Only the top 1% record albums, perform in big concerts, make world tours and get fat endorsement deals. The rest struggle to stay in their dream job.

likewise, it's hard for a photographer to earn more than your average banker, accountant or lawyer. the top 1% earns millions and do dream shoots. the rest struggles.

lisafx · « **Reply #18 on:** September 03, 2009, 18:03 »

Quote from: xposurepro on September 02, 2009, 23:36

Do you think $50K a year is a full time income or maybe $100K? It might be to some but a portrait photographer would be literally freaking out if their sales were that low.
I think a lot of microstockers have become drawn into the industry to hard and to fast to actually learn about the photography industry as a whole. I've wondered how many microstockers actually know how much a photographer really makes.

Actually, when I incorporated I had to research how much a typical pro photographer makes. Don't know where you are getting your figures, but the stats I found after researching multiple sources were all pretty consistent with the below chart:

Here's the link for anyone who wants to read the details:
http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layouthtmls/swzl_compresult_national_CM02000016.html

Randy McKown · « **Reply #19 on:** September 03, 2009, 21:15 »

The problem with the research that has been mentioned is that it covers "salaried photographers" These statistics are totally irrelevant because they are looking at wages of franchise studio employees and not those who operate a studio as a professional portrait photographer. These stats are looking at people hired to work at places like .. Wal-Mart Portrait Studios, Lifetouch, Olan Mills, Portrait Innovations .. and the list goes on. These places flat out hire photographers with "no experience required" plastered right on the application form and then pay them minimum wage or close to that. They are "Mall" Studios not professional studios ... completely different sector of the industry and yes those "salaried photographers" make .. well nothing really .. they just have a normal job.

I can't go into the entire business structure of running a studio without writing an entire book. You only need to look at a few aspects though to get the idea of a potential income. Look at Senior Rep programs. For those that do not know what that is, it's where you recruit high school seniors to represent you in their school (word-of mouth referral program). A successful rep program should result in $200,000-400,000 in referrals over the senior season, which varies by region but normally peeks over a 3-5 month period. If you live out in the middle of nowhere of course you wont make this income but that is your own fault for selecting a business location based on the convenience of where you already live and not on a proper business strategy. You can't base the industry average on somebody you know who gave it a shot without having any business knowledge whatsoever. But back to my point ... this one marketing campaign for your studio generates a $300,000 average in sales ... big difference from a salaried photographers yearly income. This is also only one strategy and does not reflect income made from other targeted clientele like families, weddings, etc. Nor does it reflect the profits from other marketing strategies within each group.

With proper marketing and business strategy a studio income will continue to grow year after year. The highest earning photographer I personally know lives about 2 hours from me (thank god). He has been established for about 30 years now. He specializes in seniors but also does families children and weddings. Average studio with about 3,000 sq ft in a 2 story building in an older downtown area. Pretty standard nothing you would call a glamorous rockstar studio. He lives in a town with a population of 25,000 and an average household income of $40,000 a year. He doesn't have a website .. never has. His prices are not actually that high but he targets clients in volume who purchase larger packages and not the minimum package requirements. He is not famous. Nobody interviews him. He's just an established average photographer. I haven't talked to him for a couple years but last I knew his studio income was around 3 million a year ... after taxes.

I think most microstockers would be amazed at how many thousands upon thousands of studio photographers have 7 figure incomes and do not look at it as anything more than day to day business. It's not uncommon. It's simply overlooked because of the vast majority of MWAC photographers.

HermanM · « **Reply #20 on:** September 03, 2009, 21:37 »

I see microstock income as a long term investment. From my experience (personal) after more than a year and a half of not uploading my income has become stable (very stable, indeed). It is not fantastic, but surprisingly it is quite nice for not doing anything at all in a long time. With that in mind I'm goint to restart working with a goal set a year from now, or more. I'll keep in mind that there will be good days and bad days, sometimes my income will not match my uploads.

And I will keep working my RM images and my assignments as usual, since those are my real earners.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #21 on:** September 03, 2009, 21:42 »

Quote from: xposurepro on September 03, 2009, 21:15

A successful rep program should result in $200,000-400,000 in referrals over the senior season, which varies by region but normally peeks over a 3-5 month period.

Oh come on. Some one shooting high school seniors isn't going to make half a million in 4 months. I think you're imagining things. Regardless of the location.

lisafx · « **Reply #22 on:** September 03, 2009, 21:59 »

Sorry, but nobody on salary at Wal Mart or Olan Mills is making 50k a year taking photos. That does not account for the majority of those stats.

You are determined that we believe you are making a couple of million a year taking senior portraits. In Kansas. Okay fine, if you say so.

Congratulations, but once this gets out Kansas will be inundated with photographers from New York and LA looking to break into the lucrative midwestern senior portrait market.

Randy McKown · « **Reply #23 on:** September 03, 2009, 22:18 »

Quote from: sjlocke on September 03, 2009, 21:42

Quote from: xposurepro on September 03, 2009, 21:15
A successful rep program should result in $200,000-400,000 in referrals over the senior season, which varies by region but normally peeks over a 3-5 month period.

Oh come on. Some one shooting high school seniors isn't going to make half a million in 4 months. I think you're imagining things. Regardless of the location.

Yes that income is not only possible it's quite common. Ok let me put it this way .. it's common in the US. I don't feel that I can speak for other countries because I have not ran a studio outside of the US. However, if you are in the US and serious about a career in photography you should start digging deeper.

Actually Lisa, there isn't much time for microstock in the studio. It does justify a profit though and that is why we include it. However, it's priority is placed last and done just to keep busy or a way of taking a break and doing something different. I also use it as part of my apprenticeship program. You can train an apprentice in photography and allow them to earn money .. since an apprentice works for free. and no I do not take any money from that or include their images in my port .. I simply guide them.

lephotography · « **Reply #24 on:** September 04, 2009, 01:44 »

Why is it no one understands how much money a successful studio can make? I am surprised. Does anyone not own a studio with a store front on here? If you talk to a owner of a studio that is busy, they tell you that their studio brings in way more than $50-60 Thousand a year. If you only brought in that, how do you pay your overhead and rent? If they do tell you that, they are doing something wrong or are new to the business and just starting out. It does take time to build your studio up though.

Those totals you are finding on the internet are not correct and is not for a successful studio. Have you went to any professional portrait photography conferences? You will find alot of photographers that are successful and really busy and rake in a six to seven figure salary, depending on the line of work and the demand for the work. Yes even in Kansas City. There is alot of business out there for a photographer to gain if they market the correct way.
It is all up to you and where do you want to be? It takes alot of hard work and determination. But if you are good at what you do ~ you could do the same as them. Marketing is the key.

Eyedesign · « **Reply #25 on:** September 04, 2009, 02:00 »

Quote from: lephotography on September 04, 2009, 01:44

Why is it no one understands how much money a successful studio can make? I am surprised. Does anyone not own a studio with a store front on here? If you talk to a owner of a studio that is busy, they tell you that their studio brings in way more than $50-60 Thousand a year. If you only brought in that, how do you pay your overhead and rent? If they do tell you that, they are doing something wrong or are new to the business and just starting out. It does take time to build your studio up though.

Those totals you are finding on the internet are not correct and is not for a successful studio. Have you went to any professional portrait photography conferences? You will find alot of photographers that are successful and really busy and rake in a six to seven figure salary, depending on the line of work and the demand for the work. Yes even in Kansas City. There is alot of business out there for a photographer to gain if they market the correct way.
It is all up to you and where do you want to be? It takes alot of hard work and determination. But if you are good at what you do ~ you could do the same as them. Marketing is the key.

lephotography you wouldn't happen to be married to Randy?

Randy McKown · « **Reply #26 on:** September 04, 2009, 02:20 »

of course she is .. I told her people didn't believe me when I made a comment about how much portrait photographers make and that they thought pro photographers only made 50K a year .. she said NO WAY and had to jump on here to see for herself

cardmaverick · « **Reply #27 on:** September 04, 2009, 02:22 »

I don't doubt you could open a very successful portrait studio. My bigger question is whats the net income. People love throwing out gross numbers while implying it's all profit. One thing I hate about assignment work is that it only pays once. I like having more investment grade material working for me. I think a studio style approach to stock is the best one really - you get the benefits of studio efficiency, yet the potential of a world wide market and material that pays out for several years.

Income levels aside, given the way things are headed economically in this country, I don't think any of these studios will see increased sales. If anything a sharp fall off is gonna happen, and probably going to become worse as we enter deeper into depression. Portraits are a luxury, and luxuries go out the window when things get hard. Ads on the other hand will persist - decline they could, but they won't just dry up totally and you have the advantage of selling online to other buyers in other nations with more sound economies and financial situations. It's totally unrealistic for a US portrait photographer to sell his work to a customer in Asia.

gaja · « **Reply #28 on:** September 04, 2009, 03:31 »

The tax records are public in Norway, so I did som investigating:
-The most popular portrait photographer in my little town makes close to $100 000 in net income. He owns his studio, so there is no rent.
-Morten Krogvold (who is kind of a star, doing tv shows and lectures) makes about $250 000 (net)

For comparison, a teacher's salary is between 50 and 80K (before expenses and tax), depending on level of education.

Randy McKown · « **Reply #29 on:** September 04, 2009, 04:08 »

I was talking about net incomes .. aside from government taxes of course. Naturally studio owners can create large overheads but that is due to poor business management and not necessary expenses. Because you are dealing with such a large amount of products and options, compared to options in microstock, there is no magic number to base your markups on. However, each markup should fall somewhere in a 400%-2000% profit .. 400% on less popular items and going up from there. There are some exceptions. For example a standard studio markup on smaller prints like a 4x6 will be 8000%-17,000% .. These prints are so incredibly cheap to process you can place these extremely high markups on them and the general public will think nothing of it. The 2000% cap can also be raised in situations such as .. you want to lower your work volume in order to increase profits. So where a studio is charging an average price for an 8x10 with a 1800% markup they will increase it to normally somewhere around 3500% .. and all other sizes accordingly. This will weed out their low-end clients and make more time for the high-end clients which increase income .. or lessen the workload completely while maintaining the same income.

On the subject of the effects of the economy on portrait business, I can tell you it doesn't go down. The reason is this .. in america senior portraits are not a luxury they are a need. Senior photography in our society has become firmly rooted in tradition. I have never once in my life heard a potential client say they "want" to get senior pictures taken. They use the word "need" every single time. Not only do they refer to it as a need .. it's a HOLY CRAP I NEED TO GET THESE DONE NOW !!!!! Which is awesome for us photographers. In some cultures when a child comes of age they go through a rites of passage .. they get ritualistic tattoos .. whatever. In modern america when a child comes of age .. they get senior pictures. That's no joke. Just like every graduate needs that cap n gown .. they need those pictures.
Yesterday, a seniors mom was telling me how she was glad her husband was going back to work because he had been laid off for 6 months. She mentioned how nice it would be to get all their bills caught up because they got so far behind. Then she went on to schedule a 2nd session because she said we did such an awesome job and they were having such a fun day (I think it's important to say she hadn't seen any pictures at this point .. you got to sell the experience) .. I think it also had to do with the fact that her daughter was friends with one of our senior reps .. we make those seniors special by giving them multiple sessions .. this mom is feeling the need to give her daughter what her friends have so that she is equal to them and the lack of money will not stop her from spending it. Human nature .. you gotta love it.

gostwyck · « **Reply #30 on:** September 04, 2009, 04:45 »

Quote from: xposurepro on September 03, 2009, 21:15

With proper marketing and business strategy a studio income will continue to grow year after year. The highest earning photographer I personally know lives about 2 hours from me (thank god). He has been established for about 30 years now. He specializes in seniors but also does families children and weddings. Average studio with about 3,000 sq ft in a 2 story building in an older downtown area. Pretty standard nothing you would call a glamorous rockstar studio. He lives in a town with a population of 25,000 and an average household income of $40,000 a year. He doesn't have a website .. never has. His prices are not actually that high but he targets clients in volume who purchase larger packages and not the minimum package requirements. He is not famous. Nobody interviews him. He's just an established average photographer. I haven't talked to him for a couple years but last I knew his studio income was around 3 million a year ... after taxes.

$3M a year __ after taxes? As tax is usually the last thing deducted, after overheads, etc, you seem to be suggesting that that is pure profit.

Even if that was only gross income it would require the studio to generate about $10,000 PER HOUR, six days a week over 50 weeks of the year. If it were not gross income then the hourly earnings would need to be substantially higher. You have to be kidding.

When you take into account that these 'high school seniors' are presumably a seasonal event, peaking over a few weeks of the year, then it seems even more extraordinary. These kids have to go to school don't they? It's not as if they are lined up on a conveyor belt outside the studio being fed through the machine at the rate of 4 per hour and each paying $2500+ for the privilege of doing so. That's the sort of robot-like efficiency you would need to generate the revenue you speak of.

Randy McKown · « **Reply #31 on:** September 04, 2009, 05:53 »

It only takes 400 seniors per year with an average sale of $2500 to equal a $1 million gross

Seniors are also not necessarily seasonal .. they come in all year long. The so called senior season is the 3-5 month peak where you have seniors running all over the city trying to get them done.

There's nothing in the rule book that says a senior cant throw down $2000 or $3000 or $5000 on senior pictures.

The biggest mistake is to think of possibilities as seeming extraordinary. Would you think it was unthinkable to have a senior who was driving an $80K Cadillac Escalade .. then hear them complaining to their mother how hard it was to drive .. then overhear her ask her mom if she though her dad was going to get her that cute little yellow corvette convertible they saw last week .. and then the mom say "yeah he's going to take you to look at it this weekend." ... that was a conversation that took place only a month ago on one of our senior sessions.

Never assume people can't throw down some cash. All you will do is limit your potential and end up targeting people who cant afford it because you assumed they couldn't in the first place.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #32 on:** September 04, 2009, 07:24 »

Quote from: gostwyck on September 04, 2009, 04:45

$3M a year __ after taxes? As tax is usually the last thing deducted, after overheads, etc, you seem to be suggesting that that is pure profit.

This just gets better and better. No wonder everyone is heading to photography school now!

massman · « **Reply #33 on:** September 04, 2009, 07:38 »

Quote from: sjlocke on September 04, 2009, 07:24

Quote from: gostwyck on September 04, 2009, 04:45
$3M a year __ after taxes? As tax is usually the last thing deducted, after overheads, etc, you seem to be suggesting that that is pure profit.

This just gets better and better. No wonder everyone is heading to photography school now!

Forget photography school, I'm heading out to Kansas ... now, I just have find the yellow brick road.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #34 on:** September 04, 2009, 08:16 »

I'm sure an Olan Mills photographer could make $50,000 per year. They would just need to work 100 hours per week.

http://www.careerbuilder.com/Jobs/Olan-Mills/Studio-Photographer/J8H1Z475BYC2HHTHPP3

lisafx · « **Reply #35 on:** September 04, 2009, 09:37 »

Maybe the recession here in Florida is worse than elsewhere in the country, but the studio pros that I am acquainted with are not netting anywhere near 7 figures a year. Low six figures at best. And they tell me they are being affected by the economy and having to add lower priced packages and explore new avenues of marketing.

Of course maybe they are all lying, but if so it is a darned convincing show.

OTOH, Xposurepro, I applaud both your work ethic and your optimism. Just not sure why it is so important to convince all of us, though? Most of us on this board are mainly stock photographers anyway.

Speaking for myself, there is no amount of money you could offer me to deal with the tedium of running a studio and catering to the whims of portrait and wedding clients. (been there, tried that) Shudder!

HughStoneIan · « **Reply #36 on:** September 04, 2009, 09:52 »

Quote from: lisafx on September 04, 2009, 09:37

Maybe the recession here in Florida is worse than elsewhere in the country, but the studio pros that I am acquainted with are not netting anywhere near 7 figures a year. Low six figures at best. And they tell me they are being affected by the economy and having to add lower priced packages and explore new avenues of marketing.

Of course maybe they are all lying, but if so it is a darned convincing show.

OTOH, Xposurepro, I applaud both your work ethic and your optimism. Just not sure why it is so important to convince all of us, though? Most of us on this board are mainly stock photographers anyway.

Speaking for myself, there is no amount of money you could offer me to deal with the tedium of running a studio and catering to the whims of portrait and wedding clients. (been there, tried that) Shudder!

Yes! Bridezillas and mothers of Bridezillas make life truly miserable.

cardmaverick · « **Reply #37 on:** September 04, 2009, 10:03 »

LOL, "Bridezilla". It's the reason I DON'T do weddings.

Honestly, even assignment commercial work for television - which I've done (I was a cinematographer for a series of Court TV commercials years back) - isn't always fun. I had a never ending train of people trying to dictate the look, feel, angles, etc... I can understand the appeal financially of doing portraiture or weddings, but I also have meet many burnouts, lots, who used to do that type of work. Some really love it, and never get tired. Great for them! Stock work is ever changing for me, feels more "free".

As for stock photographer earnings, they can certainly compete or be higher. It all boils down to the photographer.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #38 on:** September 04, 2009, 10:12 »

Bridezillas are exactly what keep me away from doing weddings. I would need to qualify heavily. If I even got a hint the couple was high maintenance I'd recommend they work with someone who's a better fit for them.

I can see it now. Barking orders, belittling comments, and then complaining about the results and refusing to pay. No thanks.

lephotography · « **Reply #39 on:** September 04, 2009, 22:36 »

I dont know, we have done weddings and have had great experiences doing them. No one barking orders and no one refusing to pay (as they normally have already paid before the ceremony had started) It is stressful but with 2 photographers, we don't have any problems really.
I think it is all about what you have patience for and what fits what you want to do. Goes the same for the pay. You will get paid what you demand. We this year raised our prices on our packages again this summer. It is amazing how much people will pay. There is never going to be a decline in photography as long as people get married and graduate. These are too important for people to let pass up to keep photo memories and they want them professional and not snapshots.. so they will pay the price. Your website makes a great bit of difference. It is amazing what marketing techniques work.
Marketing is a big difference in success. It makes the difference in a low generating income studio to a very sucessful studio unless you have been in the same place for 20-30 years and established a name before websites were so important. Word of mouth also is a great advertisement.. maybe one of the best next to "the website". You are just fooling yourself if you say "studio's cant make that much money". You are wrong. There is potential for any great photographer with the know how.

By the way.. I read someone said kids have to go to school. Well, they come at all times and skip school to get their pictures taken.. and the parent sometimes takes off work as well so they can come too because they want to watch. It is more than just getting your pictures taken.. it is a life time experience. Over 20 years ago.. my parents paid ALOT of money to get mine done and I remember everything about it. It was an important thing to me. To a senior and their parent.. it is an exciting experience. I always talk alot to the moms and dads and they just talk about they cant believe they are a senior and time has went so fast.. they talk about when their child was small and reminisce about them. The parents always tell us how much fun they had too. They sometimes bring their entire family. The other day, this senior had brought 2 friends, a cousin, her mom and then afterwards I was told that the friends were going to be calling to make appointments with us and so was another family member. They not only will spend ALOT of money because they had a great time and the pics were good.. they are out telling everyone about us and how much fun it was. Creating a good experience means generating a higher income.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Is there a sense in sending pictures anymore? (Read 13577 times)

michealo

lisafx

RacePhoto

lisafx

lisafx

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors