Anybody Making Any $$Money By Way Of Their FILM Photography?
-
A
- Thread starter DF
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Negative Supply-PRO RISER MK3 Like-New Condition $700
- Started by JuanG
-
For Sale Nikkor SW 150mm f/8 including Sinar Lens Board $2300
- Started by JuanG
-
For Sale FS: Versar Portrait & View 5x7 8.75" f/6 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Hermagis No. 7 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Nicola Perscheid Objektiv 42cm f/4.5 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
Forum statistics
IMO, the money for analog is still out there, however like any budding business l, you have to find which opportunities are within your 'range', who/which companies AND art directors crave analog photographers and their product for their clients.
Straight shooting and detailed film results, especially when a particular film, developer, printing paper, such as Tri-X, in D-76 1:1, on a classic silver FB paper or, Ektachrome on Ilford Cibachrome, or, Tmax 100 in Rodinal, have the advantage of being actual what they are, vs. a computer create/tweaked digital camera image.
There are always going to be art directors and clients that prefer film over digital and they are your potential targets/clients, you just have to ferret them out and make you and your work known to them.
By the way, it use to be that a models card/book needs a headshot, ¾ length and a full length body shot, often a swimsuit.
The sets, existing or built to purpose, are easy set ups and analog photographers, who introduce themselves to model Talent Agencies should have a good sampling of their work, even if it's only for their own book, that should evolve as their photography skills become more experienced.
Learning the current market should be a priority.
Last edited:
As a side note, when I worked as an advertising art director, I had to deny a job to a well-known photographer because he would only shoot film and both the client and agency insisted on digital.
That is beyond awesome. "Mad photographer at work."
Besides being awesome on its own merit, it also makes me think of the Kate Bush video for "Cloudbusting."
I believe. The last time I worked with a professional photographer was 1996, and he was the only one of the many I interviewed who would shoot the wedding on film. It's been a digital world for professional image making for decades. The prints are stunning and even he was wondering if htey would have been the same shot with digital camera. Although I beg to differ, he thought they would have been just as good.
Andrew O'Neill
Moderator
Great video! Thanks!
It happens, thanks for your experience.
When a photographer approaches you, what is it you want to see in their work?
I talked to a professional wedding photographer friend a few months back. Sparked by the fact that I was carrying my film camera, he told how for one wedding he had engaged an older, semi-retired PJ as helper, a guy who shot only film (on a Leica, as it happens). He was really impressed by the guy's output, especially that almost every frame was a saleable picture.
it may be that the semi-retired PJ has a lot of visual talent and could perform exceptionally well with any type of camera equipment, including digital. Don’t you think, or is there some Leica/film magic?
The interest for me was that my technologically modern friend was impressed that the guy got those results without auto-explosure, autofocus, fill-in flash etc.
I offered a film developing service for a year, and while I made some money with that, it wasn't much compared to the time you put into it, especially when you're working with a Paterson tank and flatbed scanner.
Had a couple of friends who were successful wedding photographers that used both film (medium format Hasselblad) and digital.
Any creative pursuit is going to have the majority of practitioners not breaking even or barely scraping by, and a few standouts who make millions. Just the way it goes.
Had a couple of friends who were successful wedding photographers that used both film (medium format Hasselblad) and digital.
Any creative pursuit is going to have the majority of practitioners not breaking even or barely scraping by, and a few standouts who make millions. Just the way it goes.
I have been professionally printing since the fall of 76, I still am doing this and selling my own work and that of others. Its the only thing I can do well , without photography I am
only qualified to Umpire or drive a Zamboni which are great jobs.
This job require being persistent , hard working and a love of photography but I have raised my family and support staff with this profession and now at 71 years of age , training young women
to take on roles that I think they can excel at and continue to help my wife and I continue with the business. This is a great profession and worthy of taking on. I have always strived for excellence each day
and with that have not made as much income as other lab / gallery owners but I feel really good about what we do.
only qualified to Umpire or drive a Zamboni which are great jobs.
This job require being persistent , hard working and a love of photography but I have raised my family and support staff with this profession and now at 71 years of age , training young women
to take on roles that I think they can excel at and continue to help my wife and I continue with the business. This is a great profession and worthy of taking on. I have always strived for excellence each day
and with that have not made as much income as other lab / gallery owners but I feel really good about what we do.
Usually, I would look for what I wanted in the assignment I was working on. I know, a lot of commercial photographers complain that art directors and art buyers want to see the photo already in the photographer's portfolio and not trust that the photographer can do the job, but our jobs are on the line every time we hire a photographer. There's a lot of money involved, deadlines to meet, and of course clients (and their associated staff, sometimes their family) to please. In general, I would not consider a celebrity portrait photographer for a table-top food shot, etc. Generalists have to be really good to be considered, it doesn't really help. I would prefer to see a portfolio that is focused on my clients' needs. A good eye and technical proficiency is expected. For people/portrait work, I usually wanted to see a connection, a feeling for the subject. But something that is often overlooked is the photographer's judgement. A poorly edited portfolio, with even one mediocre shot would make me doubt the photographer knows good from so-so. I could generally spot "spec" work from real assignment work, it was OK but seeing actual assigned work (tear sheets are OK) told me that he photographer could work under actual conditions with the agency and clients present, with stylists and models and props, etc. I always enjoyed seeing personal work, but that was icing on the cake.
If I were to recommend anything to a photographer who wanted to approach an ad agency, it would be to have someone review their portfolio beforehand. Sometimes that extra set of eyes, that other opinion might make a difference. And this is not the Cheesecake Factory menu--keep it to the minimum that is necessary to show proficiency, maybe 20-25 pieces. Don't show everything you've ever done. You can have an extra portfolio handy if the agency wants to see more. Of course, when I was looking at portfolios, the work was all large-format (8x10 or even 11x14) transparencies no matter what the original was, mounted to be the same size and laminated. Usually in a custom-made case, some quite elaborate and expensive. Now I expect everything is digital on a large tablet or laptop.
On the topic of more than one book or portfolio, I've known more than one photographer to be hired because they carried their "Professional" folio to an interview and their "Creative" book as well.
One was a photographer that worked in the same studio I was in, where the owner confided that while the man's portfolio was a perfect example of a good industrial professionals work.
While that was enough to put him into the small group of professionals the owner was considering, what put him over the top, on the spot, was the owner saw he carried a second folio, which was his "Personal" Arts, Landscapes and Abstracts, etc.
On his polite inquire of "Whatcha got there?" the photographer handed over the photographs within and was hired inside five minutes, after the owner saw his work.
Keeping professional and "Creative" works ready to go, can be the difference in connecting with someone in a superior position, in unexpected ways.
One was a photographer that worked in the same studio I was in, where the owner confided that while the man's portfolio was a perfect example of a good industrial professionals work.
While that was enough to put him into the small group of professionals the owner was considering, what put him over the top, on the spot, was the owner saw he carried a second folio, which was his "Personal" Arts, Landscapes and Abstracts, etc.
On his polite inquire of "Whatcha got there?" the photographer handed over the photographs within and was hired inside five minutes, after the owner saw his work.
Keeping professional and "Creative" works ready to go, can be the difference in connecting with someone in a superior position, in unexpected ways.
I think that the Photo Journalist was used to working under pressure and knew how to make every exposure count, in any given situation and lighting conditions.
Film or digital, Leica or Zorki, it's the eye & brain behind the viewfinder that is important.
The first time I seriously started looking at bracketing was many years ago, when I read an article about a photojournalist and his Pulitzer Prize winning photography in southern Africa and in detail, the taking of a bracket of shots of a rebel prisoner being guarded in a jungle or wooded setting, by a South American guard.
His use of bracketed photographs struck me as intelligent and well designed to give the story the clarity and gravitas of the war and that moment in time, in that place and circumstance.
Later on, when I was exposed to commercial model, product and architectural photography, the do or die necessity of ensuring you've got the "money" shot became crystal clear to me.
Shooting action events, performances, dancers, small bands, runners, etc was a one shot deal, 99% of the time but when i can bracket, I do, simply because I came to get the picture, whatever it is, and to do less makes no sense at all!
Very cool, Andrew!
I sell a few platinum and/or carbon prints a year and give a film-based carbon workshop once a year or so (just got back from one). Keeps me in film and other photo necessities and keeps me moving and learning. My key to 'success' was to have day jobs that worked well with, and reinforced, my photography...as well as providing a decent retirement outcome. The first permanent day job was 6 months on, six months off (12 years), and my last one (22 years) was halftime, 10 months a year (and came with a darkroom and health benefits). Hitting 70 this year, so it is all bonus time from here...
I have done less than a handful of commercial jobs. On one job, I was to make 4x10 color transparencies of the view of Humboldt Bay from a balcony of the County Courthouse -- a cafe inside had no windows and prints were to be made by some billboard company in San Fran to create fake windows (almost 4'x10' if I remember correctly). I showed up and found the plans were changed. Instead I was taken thru the attached county jail and onto its roof. Then up a 20' ladder to a higher roof, and then up another 20' ladder to the top of the elevator shaft. This is with my 45 lb pack of 8x10 stuff, and the Ries tripod/head. So there I was, six stories up (the tallest building in the city) on a small flat space messing with my 8x10. I don't particulally like city heights. Got the images, but the cafe owner never carried thru with the project.
Image: two of the four 4x10 transparencies
Attachments
Last edited:
Ironically, that could be done today with a drone and stitching. No backache, no heights to deal with...
No LF film either, which is the point seeing who is and can make film money or highyay toll fares from analog photography.
One of my first jobs assisting a budding architecture photographer was an old church in Salisbury, N C..
The church elders were very happy with the construction and installation of several very tall columns (Ionic, IIRC), and they wanted real, Professionally composed photographs of both front exterior and interior installations.
The external shots were not difficult and the lighting was natural light only.
The interior however was a different story. Armed with quartz lights that needed placement, the photographer doing this job, pointed at me and without a moment's hesitation, told me to climb this ancient forty foot ladder, already pre-/positioned, fully extended, with what looked to be a three foot bow-in curve at the center ladder, where both limbs we're at maximum extension, to make the hight.
He wanted some of the smaller, corded lights to be placed, just behind the capitals and illuminate not only that feature but the surrounding details.
Now, I liked this guy, we'd worked together several times and naturally saw what needed to be done, trouble shooting automatically and getting the details right, down to giving a final carpet sweeping so the grain of the threads were all raised or laid out properly, but, not once did he ask me about climbing up a very high, rickety ladder to place hot lights, under his guidance, before that moment.
I just looked at him and told him "NO", which actually surprised him.
I went on to tell him that there was no way I was going to climb that old ladder, totting a heavy extension cord and lights, reach out enough to place them far enough behind the columns, to light the scene, adjustments and all and clime down and up for the other side of the Altar area, repeatedly repositioning the ladder of death and then taking them down, by hand, rather than giving the power cords a sound tank!
I explained he should have asked before hand if I had an issue with climbing old or new ladders to that high, without any insurance, or workers comp., and to do it himself, because he was a damn fool if he thought I would do it myself!
After all, he HAD Insurance and a good paying client to deliver the shots to and a budding reputation to protect and nourish.
If he felt I was not the assistant for him, because of my very sensible declining of the high work, well, that was fine for me, the job did not pay that well to risk a broken back, etc.
He did not like it much, but he had no choice, the job was to be done that day, so up the ladder he went and went again.
Before going up the first time, he was not a happy client of mine, but by the time he finished the shots, he had a complete understanding what it was he had asked me to do, so we continued working together for several additional shoots, though he found someone else,eventually, who he decided to work with on a regular basis.
The shoots we did were fun, but even with insurance, I still wouldn't have climbed that ladder, life is too short as it is, unless you're seeing it go past from your invalid's bed.
I did some shoots with other architectural photographers, but I made darn sure they knew my position about working high, before we worked a job.
Last edited:
For me, apart from the hobby, photography is only a big money pit. With equipment like Leica and Hasselblad, it's impossible to fill this pit, even if you win the lottery all the time.
The only way to make money with photography would be to be very lucky to find this type of equipment at garage sales where the sellers don't know what they are selling, and resell it at a good price.
The same thing is also valid with music and everything else... unless your name is famous!
The only way to make money with photography would be to be very lucky to find this type of equipment at garage sales where the sellers don't know what they are selling, and resell it at a good price.
The same thing is also valid with music and everything else... unless your name is famous!
As I mentioned before, photography has always been a hobby and I’ve made no real attempts at monetizing it. It did, about 30 years ago, almost become a full time teacher of film photography when the photography teacher at the high school where I taught retired and I was offered the job. I suppose that would have qualified as making $$money by way of film photography but I declined the position. The reason was that I was interested in starting computer programming classes at the school and was given full reign to do so. That worked out really well for me and the the photography class was absorbed into the art depeartment where they hired a new teacher who is/was really great.
The issue of monetizing one’s hobby is an interesting subject on its own and maybe could be thread of its own. A hobby is “an activity that someone engages in, purely for the pleasure of doing it. It is usually done during their leisure time. While it can be something that produces monetary income, this is not the primary purpose for engaging in it….Hobbies are not passive activities as they take a degree of involvement by those engaging in them.” (I am quoting myself from my own web site that looks at Hobbies, Interests, and Passions.)
The questions I’d pose are does monetizing a hobby detract from the enjoyment one gets from it and does the work done or produced change to make it more salable? Over the years I’ve had people “should” on me, telling me that I should be making money with one of my varied skill sets instead of just doing them for fun and, in many cases, giving away my time or the products. It’s not like I didn’t already had a career path (OK, several of them) that kept a roof over my head and food on the table.
The issue of monetizing one’s hobby is an interesting subject on its own and maybe could be thread of its own. A hobby is “an activity that someone engages in, purely for the pleasure of doing it. It is usually done during their leisure time. While it can be something that produces monetary income, this is not the primary purpose for engaging in it….Hobbies are not passive activities as they take a degree of involvement by those engaging in them.” (I am quoting myself from my own web site that looks at Hobbies, Interests, and Passions.)
The questions I’d pose are does monetizing a hobby detract from the enjoyment one gets from it and does the work done or produced change to make it more salable? Over the years I’ve had people “should” on me, telling me that I should be making money with one of my varied skill sets instead of just doing them for fun and, in many cases, giving away my time or the products. It’s not like I didn’t already had a career path (OK, several of them) that kept a roof over my head and food on the table.
Professional kit is not necessary element in making some monies with your camera, you can start with many types of kit. but if you are specialized in your topics, you will quickly find out any limitations about how far that equipment can take you.
Very often, work can be done with a kit lens filters, support and a flash, so don't think you can not get started today with what you have on hand.
It's just a simple matter of discovering those jobs that will allow you the use of what you have to hand.
IMO
Very often, work can be done with a kit lens filters, support and a flash, so don't think you can not get started today with what you have on hand.
It's just a simple matter of discovering those jobs that will allow you the use of what you have to hand.
IMO
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |