# If I have *THESE* morals, how can I make money out of photography?



## photoguydudeperson (Jan 21, 2016)

I occasionally feel like going out and taking pictures of different things, from buildings to people to nature, to... Anything. I recently noticed that my pictures became so good that I'm actually impressed by them because I see similarly good pictures when I go to professional sites, so I thought that maybe I could commercialize on  that.

Here's the problem however, I'll make a list for simplicity:


I only take pictures when I feel like it and the kind of pictures that I feel like.
I do not want my pictures to be used or edited by anyone without my explicit permission, and unless I like the idea - I won't give the permission.
I want to always, under any circumstances, retain my authorship and association with the picture.
That said, it could only be a side-project from which I somehow manage to make some extra money. I'm short on money now, so that would be great actually, even if it's $50-100 a month. Hell, even if it's $10 or $20 a month, to be honest.

Now, is it possible to make any kind of money with these morals? They are non-negotiable, but I'm also not trying to be a photographer as a career, I have different goals in life, even if I really enjoy snapping pictures and somehow became good at it.

Please tell me if it's not possible as well, instead of just ignoring the thread. Thank you.


----------



## Taveuni (Jan 21, 2016)

They're not really morals are they?
More like requisites I'd say and if you're any good you might make some pocket money. Go for it


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Jan 21, 2016)

Taveuni said:


> They're not really morals are they?
> More like requisites I'd say and if you're any good you might make some pocket money. Go for it


Yea, maybe I used the wrong word, and I didn't want to sound like a total ahole.

Go for what? That's exactly my question here.


----------



## Taveuni (Jan 21, 2016)

Go for broke and try to make some money. I wasn't exactly going off on a tangent.
People do pay for photos.
Proof will be in the pudding.


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Jan 21, 2016)

Taveuni said:


> Go for broke and try to make some money. I wasn't exactly going off on a tangent.
> People do pay for photos.
> Proof will be in the pudding.


To be honest, I still don't know what you're trying to say.


----------



## Tim Tucker (Jan 21, 2016)

Well, let's assume you're selling for commercial use first. If this is the case then you also have to assume that the person buying your image may actually be a professional designer, or will employ a professional designer, who will probably be much better than you with editing programs. They will probably have a far better knowledge of how to present your image so it sells (they won't be trying to make it worse). Have you ever proofed your images for CMYK printing, colour-blindness, have you considered they might be used with text or a side bar?

If you're selling puppy shots for calendars then it's best not to behave like a prima-donna artist. 

If you're selling fine prints then do it yourself, it's almost always better to sell locally.

But before you spend any money please get the opinion of others on your work, after all; it's them who will be buying not you. A photographers opinion on his own work can often be biased.


----------



## waday (Jan 21, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> I only take pictures when I feel like it and the kind of pictures that I feel like.
> I do not want my pictures to be used or edited by anyone without my explicit permission, and unless I like the idea - I won't give the permission.
> I want to always, under any circumstances, retain my authorship and association with the picture.


It sounds like you want to do photography as a hobby (meaning no money, just personal happiness). I'm not saying that you can't make some sort of money doing this, but I think your list should be flexible while still being non-negotiable.

Just like Tim suggested, maybe you should consider selling locally (e.g., at local arts and crafts shows), especially if your goal is to just make $10-20 a month.

That said, your list... I'm going to rephrase these using a desk job as an example:

I only do the work that I want to do and that I feel like doing. Sometimes I don't come in, sometimes I skip meetings. I only talk to the clients I feel like. I only answer the phone when I feel like it.
My reports are perfectly written, and I never have any errors, even grammatical. Everything I say is absolute truth, and anyone that disagrees with me is wrong. I won't let anyone speak over me or correct me when I'm wrong. If they do, I'll sue them. Also, they can't use my reports or emails, despite being paid to do this, unless I specifically indicate they can use them.
All written emails and reports are mine, not my company's or clients'. If I tell them to stop reading an email or report, they have to immediately delete it. They also have to say my name out loud for all to hear prior to reading anything I've written. It's also a requirement that my headshot be posted on every page so that people know I wrote it.
It sounds pretty darn silly from this perspective.

Like Tim said, sometimes an image has to be altered slightly to be used realistically. That doesn't mean that you have to release your rights or authorship of the image. That doesn't mean that others can use it without your permission. They're your photos, and you determine how they want to be used. However, if someone says that it should be cropped or something should be changed for printing or other uses, are you going to take their recommendations into consideration or are you going to tell them off?

Why not post a few of your best photos for opinions from the peanut gallery on the best path forward?


----------



## tirediron (Jan 21, 2016)

Pretty much what Tim said.  If you're selling commercially, then it's not uncommon for the contract to call for the delivery of high-res .tif files which will be edited by the client's graphic-design team for their purpose(s).  Further, if you're selling commercially, you shoot what you're told, when you're told, or you don't get paid, and your name turns to mud in the industry in a heartbeat, so we can assume commercial is out.  Retail?  Well...  you can set your own hours, and have the clients come to you, if you choose, however, you need a fair amount of gear, not to mention insurance, licenses, and so forth.  I'm guessing that's not in the cards any time soon.  So... we're left with "fine art", or "shoot what you want, when you want", and process & print how you want and price it as you like.  The problem here is that there aren't more than a few thousand people per square mile trying to do the same thing, and none of them are making money.  Just because you see images on a "professional" website does NOT mean that the person is selling any, in fact, statistics indicate that it's very unlikely.

All of that said, if you want to try to make a few bucks, give it a whirl.  If you make $50/months three months in a row, you should consider yourself a success and me amazed (and that's NOT a comment on your work or skil as I've seen neither).


----------



## spiralout462 (Jan 21, 2016)

Make some prints.  Mat and frame them yourself and price them for what the market will bear.  Good luck!


----------



## Designer (Jan 21, 2016)

I can't do anything about your #1, but for #s 2 & 3, get your photographs copyrighted.  Then look up an attorney who specializes in copyright infringement.  Keep his contact information handy.


----------



## SCraig (Jan 21, 2016)

Probably not, for a couple of reasons.

First you are trying to enter a market that is already horrendously bloated.  For every so-called photography "Job" (and I include the hobbiest trying to make a few bucks on the side) there are probably a couple of hundred people trying to grab it.  Hang around here for a while, there will be a new post every day by someone trying to do much the same thing.

Better yet, hang around Nashville and look at all the starving musicians.  Or hang around Hollywood or New York and look at all the starving actors.  Every one of them with the idea that they are great and can make it to the big time if someone will just give them a chance.  If I've heard one mediocre guitar player who thought they were great I've heard a thousand.  The bottom line being it's not your impression of your abilities that matters, it's the impression of the guy paying for your services.

Second, you're going to have to lose that "My Way Or The Highway" attitude.  You're not the first nor will you be the last to try to start out with it.  It's not a bad attitude if all you want to do is create photographs for your use, but I can guarantee that if you want to make any money you're going to have to lose it.  When people are purchasing something they don't care about your "Artistic Values", they care about what THEY want and if you want to please clients your desires don't matter in the slightest.

And third, if you want exposure to clients you are going to have to use the internet, and if you put anything on the internet it can, and most likely will, be taken, used, edited, and otherwise violated regardless of what you allow or disallow.  Nobody cares about your "Rules" and if they want to use it and it's available they will do so.  There is nothing you can do to stop it other than not posting your photographs on the internet.

Good luck.  Hope it works out for you.  You may be the greatest photographer ever known but if not you've chosen a hobby with diminishing returns if you want to make money from it.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 21, 2016)

Designer said:


> I can't do anything about your #1, but for #s 2 & 3, get *register* your photograph's copyrighted.  Then look up an attorney who specializes in copyright infringement.  Keep his contact information handy.


 FTFY - copyright is automatic at creation.


----------



## KmH (Jan 21, 2016)

We don't know where the OP is because there is no location information in his profile.
So we can't assess market potential and legal considerations.

In the USA copyright is automatic once a photograph is recorded on a tangible medium - like a memory card.
Enforcement of your copyright is greatly aided by registering your copyrights with the US Copyright office.
Help! I’ve Been Infringed! | Photo Attorney
Registering Your Copyrights Using the eCO System | NatureScapes.Net – The Resource for Nature Photographers

A famous saying - "It takes money to make money".


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 21, 2016)

I see no issues in your desire to shoot what you want, when you want, and how you want.

Heck, that's what I do.  And I manage to sell a bit here and there.  It won't pay the rent, put food on the table, or make the car payments, but it does allow me a few extra bucks hither and yon to apply towards my GAS.

If asked, I will flat-out refuse commission work.  Period.


----------



## JoeW (Jan 21, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> I occasionally feel like going out and taking pictures of different things, from buildings to people to nature, to... Anything. I recently noticed that my pictures became so good that I'm actually impressed by them because I see similarly good pictures when I go to professional sites, so I thought that maybe I could commercialize on  that.
> 
> Here's the problem however, I'll make a list for simplicity:
> 
> ...



1.  They're not really morals but demands or desires.

2.  A paraphrase of your post is:  "I want to shoot only when I feel like it, only of what I feel like shooting, I want to sell my work but retain full control."  You can give that a try.  But I want you to imagine the following scenario:  you have paying gig that requires a model.  You contact an agency, they send you a model's contact info and she says:  "I will only pose when I feel like it, you have to show me the picture and if I don't like it you have to delete it, if I don't like the concept or work than I'll walk out, you have to get my permission before editing or selling or displaying any of the photos of me.  Oh, and you're going to pay me too."  You'd laugh.

You are totally free to shoot only when you want to and only of things you want to shoot.  But that's unprofessional.  Read Stephen Pressfield's great book (it's short) called "The War of Art" and it will explain very clearly that a professional is someone who shows up every day, not when it's convenient, not when they feel like it, not when they're in the  mood.  Professionals don't let their feelings, their moods, their health, or any of that other crap get in the way of their work and their productivity. So there are some hobbyists (i.e.: not professional) you make some money.  But most do not--it's a hobby where more money goes out (on equipment or models or travel expenses) than comes in (on sales).

3.  In this day and age, with so many scanners around, so many people with photo editing software, your ability to prevent someone from editing your photos or altering them or displaying them is near impossible.  I'm not arguing you shouldn't attempt to control that, I'm only arguing that professionals who lose money when someone pirates their photos take people to court, and they still can't stop it.  If you're really uncomfortable with someone doing something with your photos without your say so, if that ties your stomach up in knots then....don't sell or release or display your work.  I'm not being sarcastic--there are plenty of hobbyists who operate this way.  Plenty of models who enjoy posing but don't want their work to be public.

If your desires are really huge issues for you, if they're deal-breakers...then don't sell your photos and don't attempt to go in to business as a photographer.  If, OTOH, you can accept the reality that if a client pays you to shoot something, they're going to demand some creative control and timing in the issue and they'll do the editing, that when you sell a photo the buyer tends to view this as they "OWN" that photo (regardless of what the law says)


----------



## Dave442 (Jan 21, 2016)

I would have some business cards made up and put your morals on the back, can be sort of like your company vision. 

As far as not wanting anyone to change the photo, that is more along the lines of what a fine art photographer does. They make a final piece of art and thats it, but if there is no demand then people are not even going to pay for the paper its printed on.


----------



## table1349 (Jan 21, 2016)

Business 101:

You work to please the customer. = Possibly a successful business.

You work to please yourself. = What are you going do for you next job? (Which translates to, _"Do you want fries with that?"_)


----------



## snowbear (Jan 21, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> I recently noticed that my pictures became so good that I'm actually impressed by them


It doesn't matter if _you_ are impressed by them; are people who don't know you impressed by them?


----------



## dennybeall (Jan 21, 2016)

A person can do photography as an art or photography as a service or even as a hobby. IMHO the attitude that comes over in your post would fit in well with art or hobby but not photography for others on assignment.


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 5, 2016)

Tim Tucker said:


> Well, let's assume you're selling for commercial use first. If this is the case then you also have to assume that the person buying your image may actually be a professional designer, or will employ a professional designer, who will probably be much better than you with editing programs. They will probably have a far better knowledge of how to present your image so it sells (they won't be trying to make it worse). Have you ever proofed your images for CMYK printing, colour-blindness, have you considered they might be used with text or a side bar?
> 
> If you're selling puppy shots for calendars then it's best not to behave like a prima-donna artist.
> 
> ...



Puppies? *shudders* I don't think any of my pictures would be fit for calendars nor would I want them to be there, now that I think of it. I hate calendars.

Anyway, I don't dsee myself as prima-donna artist. I simply do not consider this as something I do for a living as I already mentioned, I consider it as "maybe I can make something on the side, it would be nice and help me out even if it's a little." And I have standards and values that I will not undermine for money.

As for others' opinions, depending upon who you ask, they generally like some of my pictures. Probably 60-80% of what I show, and 10-20% "really like."



waday said:


> It sounds like you want to do photography as a hobby (meaning no money, just personal happiness). I'm not saying that you can't make some sort of money doing this, but I think your list should be flexible while still being non-negotiable.
> 
> Just like Tim suggested, maybe you should consider selling locally (e.g., at local arts and crafts shows), especially if your goal is to just make $10-20 a month.
> 
> ...



Yes, exactly!  It's a hobby that if I can use to make even a few bucks, I'd be happier with. I'm not a flexible guy when it comes to my values and standards however, and especially since this is a hobby, well, the chances of me flexing around are even lower.

As for local selling, the kind of people around my village are old ladies who are not least bit interested in anything non-practical.

Your rephrased list made me chuckle, but it's irrelevant seeing as I'm not applying for a job, I'm trying to capitalize on my hobby if possible, and I'm absolutely fine with it if it's impossible. Also, I never said that I'm really good, so I'm not sure where you're getting #2 from.

As for altering images slightly - as long as it has my approval - I'm fine with it. But most alterations are annoyingly disgusting that I see nowadays, or overly-commercialized (spammy, if we use web jargon). Some are absolutely beautiful though... That said, of course I will consider their recommendations, if I like them - feel free to edit. If I don't - absolutely not, even if they pay me $1000 for it.

I don't like posting my pictures on third-party sites, so I'll have to decline. I do show them to individuals I know if they are interested though, so don't misunderstand that.



tirediron said:


> Pretty much what Tim said.  If you're selling commercially, then it's not uncommon for the contract to call for the delivery of high-res .tif files which will be edited by the client's graphic-design team for their purpose(s).  Further, if you're selling commercially, you shoot what you're told, when you're told, or you don't get paid, and your name turns to mud in the industry in a heartbeat, so we can assume commercial is out.  Retail?  Well...  you can set your own hours, and have the clients come to you, if you choose, however, you need a fair amount of gear, not to mention insurance, licenses, and so forth.  I'm guessing that's not in the cards any time soon.  So... we're left with "fine art", or "shoot what you want, when you want", and process & print how you want and price it as you like.  The problem here is that there aren't more than a few thousand people per square mile trying to do the same thing, and none of them are making money.  Just because you see images on a "professional" website does NOT mean that the person is selling any, in fact, statistics indicate that it's very unlikely.
> 
> All of that said, if you want to try to make a few bucks, give it a whirl.  If you make $50/months three months in a row, you should consider yourself a success and me amazed (and that's NOT a comment on your work or skil as I've seen neither).



$50 a month would be nice, so I would consider that a success as well. 



spiralout462 said:


> Make some prints.  Mat and frame them yourself and price them for what the market will bear.  Good luck!



I'll google around, as I don't know much about what you just said, not even if I can afford it in the first place.



Designer said:


> I can't do anything about your #1, but for #s 2 & 3, get your photographs copyrighted.  Then look up an attorney who specializes in copyright infringement.  Keep his contact information handy.



That sounds like an ahole move and trying to fix something after you knowingly broke it instead of preventing it in the first place.



SCraig said:


> Probably not, for a couple of reasons.
> 
> First you are trying to enter a market that is already horrendously bloated.  For every so-called photography "Job" (and I include the hobbiest trying to make a few bucks on the side) there are probably a couple of hundred people trying to grab it.  Hang around here for a while, there will be a new post every day by someone trying to do much the same thing.
> 
> ...



Well, for starters I don't think I'm one of the best or whatnot, never said that. Second, not losing my attitude. It's my personality and it's not changing. I'm not looking to make this my job, and I'm fine if it won't make me a cent. It would simply be a nice bonus. Honestly - I don't care the slightest to please anyone. That's the problem here, which is why - again - I'm fine with not making anything out of it.

Yes, I am aware of that, which is why I haven't created a gallery site yet. I considered that, but that's one of the things that's keeping me back from it.



tirediron said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > I can't do anything about your #1, but for #s 2 & 3, get *register* your photograph's copyrighted.  Then look up an attorney who specializes in copyright infringement.  Keep his contact information handy.
> ...



You can actually specify the type of copyright you want to use. I.e. whether or not others are allowed to edit, copy them, make money out of them, etc.. Or at least that's how it works with software, writing material, etc..



JoeW said:


> 1.  They're not really morals but demands or desires.
> 
> 2.  A paraphrase of your post is:  "I want to shoot only when I feel like it, only of what I feel like shooting, I want to sell my work but retain full control."  You can give that a try.  But I want you to imagine the following scenario:  you have paying gig that requires a model.  You contact an agency, they send you a model's contact info and she says:  "I will only pose when I feel like it, you have to show me the picture and if I don't like it you have to delete it, if I don't like the concept or work than I'll walk out, you have to get my permission before editing or selling or displaying any of the photos of me.  Oh, and you're going to pay me too."  You'd laugh.
> 
> ...



They're not morals, demands or desires, they're standards. I use the wrong wording.

If we're talking models, I'm not interested in shooting anyone who's posing. Nor am I trying to work for someone, I would only be interested in making a little bit of money on the side if possible - if not, I'm fine with it, it's just a hobby anyway.

That said, I'm definitely not trying to be professional. What you said holds true to those who want to shoot for magazines and such though, they need to make defined, uncreative, boring shots that show a specific (usually fake) side of something. I usually hate photos like that, to be honest. I have ever since I was a kid actually, and I had no interest in photography for until my 20s.

Yes, now that I've read your (and a couple other) posts here, I realized that I would only be comfortable doing something in a closed market. A group of people or something like that. I'm not sure about the details, but it wouldn't be openly public. That would mitigate the problem, but I'm not sure if it's at all possible, even.

Oh I accept the reality, I'm just not trying to make it my job, I'm not interested in professionalism, and I refuse to play by any but my own rules. That said - and what you and others wrote - I should probably stop wondering if I can make a few (literally?) bucks a month. I'll still reply to the rest of the thread though.



gryphonslair99 said:


> Business 101:
> 
> You work to please the customer. = Possibly a successful business.
> 
> You work to please yourself. = What are you going do for you next job? (Which translates to, _"Do you want fries with that?"_)



I never in my life worked to please the customer. I never will either. It's harder to do things for me, but I manage without having to be disgusted with myself for that kinda crap.



snowbear said:


> photoguydudeperson said:
> 
> 
> > I recently noticed that my pictures became so good that I'm actually impressed by them
> ...


Yes. Not all of them, obviously.


dennybeall said:


> A person can do photography as an art or photography as a service or even as a hobby. IMHO the attitude that comes over in your post would fit in well with art or hobby but not photography for others on assignment.


Yes, exactly. That's what I said - it's just a hobby for me.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Feb 5, 2016)

It seems like for this to be an option for extra income it would involve clients or customers. If you have no interest in that I don't see photography being a good choice for part time income. Even if it's a sideline it still involves shooting for clients and contracts and billing, etc. etc. - the business and professional aspects of photography.

If you want to shoot when and what you choose that seems like a possibility as fine art photography. But - I don't think that would be regular part time income; it could possibly develop in time after a reputation was established, or maybe if the photographer lived in a scenic area with potential tourist trade and/or local art galleries and shops - but I don't think that a lot necessarily sells.

As far as copyright you wouldn't specify a type; as already said, if you take the picture you automatically own the copyright. However, it's not registered til you get on the US Copyright Office website and register it (which could help pursue copyright violations if necessary). A website that offers different 'types' is referring to licensing and/or usage. There are sites referred to as 'photo rights grab sites' because they encourage people to put their photos on the site and allow the site or company usage of the photos. Usually there's a relatively small one time payment to the photographer who may have agreed to Terms & Conditions that allow the company to reuse and sublicense photos from now on without further payment.

Maybe photography would be best staying a hobby for now. And if you don't think your photos are all that good, then, well... I'm not sure why this would be a good sideline because it seems like it might take more practice and skills to get to a competitive level with other working photographers in your area - then maybe a hobby could develop into part time income.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 5, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> ...You can actually specify the type of copyright you want to use. I.e. whether or not others are allowed to edit, copy them, make money out of them, etc.. Or at least that's how it works with software, writing material, etc...


 No...........  copyright is copyright.  What you can do is specify different terms of usage, commonly known as a "EULA" in software parlance (End User *License* Agreement).


----------



## table1349 (Feb 5, 2016)




----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 5, 2016)

In 1999 there was a movie entitled  'Mystery Men' about a bunch of guys with various super-talents. 
One of the 'Mystery Men' was Invisible Boy.
Obviously being invisible was his talent; the only hitch was that he could only be invisible when no one was looking.

And the OP sort of reminds me of Invisible Boy.
He's a great ethical, self-taught, photographer but no one gets to see his pictures because he won't post them on third party sites.
So his photos are great but no one can see them.

He could upload low res pictures here - as many of us do.
He could have his own web site - as does every prominent photographer in the Western world - and most of the East.
But he's just shy and worried about his work being stolen.

I hear the typical ring of BS.


----------



## Braineack (Feb 5, 2016)

so basically you want to take photos for a hobby and maybe sell a random picture.

good luck?


----------



## table1349 (Feb 5, 2016)

Perhaps it is just a case of..........


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 5, 2016)

vintagesnaps said:


> It seems like for this to be an option for extra income it would involve clients or customers. If you have no interest in that I don't see photography being a good choice for part time income. Even if it's a sideline it still involves shooting for clients and contracts and billing, etc. etc. - the business and professional aspects of photography.
> 
> If you want to shoot when and what you choose that seems like a possibility as fine art photography. But - I don't think that would be regular part time income; it could possibly develop in time after a reputation was established, or maybe if the photographer lived in a scenic area with potential tourist trade and/or local art galleries and shops - but I don't think that a lot necessarily sells.
> 
> ...



Having said that, I will just keep it as a hobby and won't worry about the possibility of making anything on the side from it, since that seems somewhat impossible with my standards/values/morals. Well, except for fine art photography. Could you refer me to some place to look at great examples of that? I mean, I can google (already did), but people hanging around here are probably going to refer me to something a lot better than I can look up, and even then I might not know that it's actually good.



tirediron said:


> photoguydudeperson said:
> 
> 
> > ...You can actually specify the type of copyright you want to use. I.e. whether or not others are allowed to edit, copy them, make money out of them, etc.. Or at least that's how it works with software, writing material, etc...
> ...



Oh yes. I misuse that often and keep hoping I'll remember the next time I'll use it. Fortunately, that comes up in a conversation rather rarely.



The_Traveler said:


> In 1999 there was a movie entitled  'Mystery Men' about a bunch of guys with various super-talents.
> One of the 'Mystery Men' was Invisible Boy.
> Obviously being invisible was his talent; the only hitch was that he could only be invisible when no one was looking.
> 
> ...



Hmm. What do you think is my motivation for BSing people here that my photos are good? Not trying to imply or say anything, don't misinterpret. I'm just genuinely curious what your head cooked up.



Braineack said:


> so basically you want to take photos for a hobby and maybe sell a random picture.
> 
> good luck?



Thanks.



gryphonslair99 said:


> Perhaps it is just a case of..........



You seem to dislike me due to my morals, beliefs, values, standards. You can stop passively preaching that now.


----------



## table1349 (Feb 5, 2016)

A l'contraire....I love watching the clueless as they death spiral into world of reality.


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 6, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> A l'contraire....I love watching the clueless as they death spiral into world of reality.


Not knowing something doesn't mean that you're not in tune with reality unless you make assumptions while so.


----------



## SCraig (Feb 6, 2016)

Here's some reality:  There are literally millions of people taking photographs these days.  Everything from rusty doorknobs to weddings, many of them with nothing more than a cell phone.  There are thousands of them who claim to be "Professionals" and see their so-called "Work" as the best there has ever been.  People go to their web sites, see their "Work" and say to themselves, "Well my photographs are better than that so I must be even better than they are!"

It doesn't work that way.  Photographic standards have dropped so low that people are getting rave comments for photographs that 20 or 30 years ago wouldn't have been used to line the bottom of a bird cage.  The vast majority of them are trash.  The vast majority of the people calling themselves "Professionals" barely know which end of a camera to look through, some have never used any mode on their camera other than full automatic, many have no concept of exposure or composition, most have never studied their craft or bothered learning very much about what they are doing.  They point, they shoot, they claim it's a great photograph because that's what their friends and families keep telling them.  The world has become so saturated with really poor photographs that anything marginally decent is being called "Great".  If you are using these as a comparison for your photographs you may be using a very poor ruler to measure with.

Maybe you are great, I don't know and I won't pass judgement sight unseen.  All I can tell you is that those of us who have been around here for a while have seen the same comments more times than we can count.  We have also seen more people than we can count get completely disillusioned when they realize that they aren't as great as they thought.  There are some fabulous photographers on this site so use them as an opportunity.  Post some of your photographs for comment and listen to what they say.  You don't have to agree with every comment, but keep in mind that in most cases they are coming from people with a great deal of experience.


----------



## Tim Tucker (Feb 6, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> Puppies? *shudders* I don't think any of my pictures would be fit for calendars nor would I want them to be there, now that I think of it. I hate calendars.
> 
> Anyway, I don't dsee myself as prima-donna artist. I simply do not consider this as something I do for a living as I already mentioned, I consider it as "maybe I can make something on the side, it would be nice and help me out even if it's a little." And I have standards and values that I will not undermine for money.
> 
> As for others' opinions, depending upon who you ask, they generally like some of my pictures. Probably 60-80% of what I show, and 10-20% "really like."



LOL, you're not a true artist until you've experienced the pain of selling your own soul...

Back to reality. Do some market research instead of dreaming that your 'art' shots hold any real value. Why do paintings shoot up in price when the artist dies? Brand and exclusivity, qualities that digital photographs do not have. Digital photographs are transient and short lived, they're easy and plentiful. Don't go naming a few examples of prints that have sold until you've stood in front of the actual print.
Everyone's a photographer these days, and they can all take better photographs than anybody else with little or no training. You could take stunning landscapes on winter mornings and 'Bob' with his super camera and super lens will still think he can take a better one on a dull day and digitally destroy enhance it. And even though the result shows no understanding of colour he still thinks it's better than your's. So nobody will really take you seriously until you post some of your work and stop trying to convince us that you're a serious photographic artist with values, because they only exist in peoples imagination.

I'm assuming that you have no formal art education or training as if you had you'd already know the answers to many of the questions you ask. With no formal training you'll have no real understanding of art or design and selling to or through a customer who invariably will. So I'd be grateful for their advice, don't be like 'Bob'.

Don't *shudder* at puppy shots or calendars, if you knew your market you'd know that puppies, kittens, and babies always sell. If you wanted to make a few pennies that's the easiest way to do it. I've done 'puppy' calendars for family and could easily sell some of them, but I'd struggle to sell prints of what I consider to be my best work.


----------



## table1349 (Feb 6, 2016)

Tim Tucker said:


> photoguydudeperson said:
> 
> 
> > Puppies? *shudders* I don't think any of my pictures would be fit for calendars nor would I want them to be there, now that I think of it. I hate calendars.
> ...


*Could you repeat that. * You were talking to the side with my missing ear and I didn't quite hear you. 
_Dang women, they are expensive on a body's soul when ya fall for one._


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 6, 2016)

SCraig said:


> Here's some reality:  There are literally millions of people taking photographs these days.  Everything from rusty doorknobs to weddings, many of them with nothing more than a cell phone.  There are thousands of them who claim to be "Professionals" and see their so-called "Work" as the best there has ever been.  People go to their web sites, see their "Work" and say to themselves, "Well my photographs are better than that so I must be even better than they are!"
> 
> It doesn't work that way.  Photographic standards have dropped so low that people are getting rave comments for photographs that 20 or 30 years ago wouldn't have been used to line the bottom of a bird cage.  The vast majority of them are trash.  The vast majority of the people calling themselves "Professionals" barely know which end of a camera to look through, some have never used any mode on their camera other than full automatic, many have no concept of exposure or composition, most have never studied their craft or bothered learning very much about what they are doing.  They point, they shoot, they claim it's a great photograph because that's what their friends and families keep telling them.  The world has become so saturated with really poor photographs that anything marginally decent is being called "Great".  If you are using these as a comparison for your photographs you may be using a very poor ruler to measure with.
> 
> Maybe you are great, I don't know and I won't pass judgement sight unseen.  All I can tell you is that those of us who have been around here for a while have seen the same comments more times than we can count.  We have also seen more people than we can count get completely disillusioned when they realize that they aren't as great as they thought.  There are some fabulous photographers on this site so use them as an opportunity.  Post some of your photographs for comment and listen to what they say.  You don't have to agree with every comment, but keep in mind that in most cases they are coming from people with a great deal of experience.



Actually I agree completely.



Tim Tucker said:


> LOL, you're not a true artist until you've experienced the pain of selling your own soul...
> 
> Back to reality. Do some market research instead of dreaming that your 'art' shots hold any real value. Why do paintings shoot up in price when the artist dies? Brand and exclusivity, qualities that digital photographs do not have. Digital photographs are transient and short lived, they're easy and plentiful. Don't go naming a few examples of prints that have sold until you've stood in front of the actual print.
> Everyone's a photographer these days, and they can all take better photographs than anybody else with little or no training. You could take stunning landscapes on winter mornings and 'Bob' with his super camera and super lens will still think he can take a better one on a dull day and digitally destroy enhance it. And even though the result shows no understanding of colour he still thinks it's better than your's. So nobody will really take you seriously until you post some of your work and stop trying to convince us that you're a serious photographic artist with values, because they only exist in peoples imagination.
> ...



Hmm. I think the opposite: you are not a true artist if you sell out.

I never dreamt that my shots have value. Realistically, I'm sure some of them do, what value - I don't know.

And no, I'm not interested in market research. This isn't and won't be my job, and money will never be why I take a single picture.

I'm not convincing anybody of anything. I asked a question and provided information that people who want to help me should take them into consideration. Whether you believe me or not is irrelevant, I'm not here to convince anybody of anything, I'm here to get advice based on the information provided.

Wrong about education. I stopped typing my next sentence and instead type this: You have a different understanding and I won't waste my time writing down a mix of facts and my own opinion. It's objectively pointless in this case. Unless I'd be focusing on selling, which - if you read my posts - I'm not.

I do know that. You should know though, if you've read my posts, that I don't care what sells, I care what I like.


----------



## Tim Tucker (Feb 6, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> Hmm. I think the opposite: you are not a true artist if you sell out.
> 
> I never dreamt that my shots have value. Realistically, I'm sure some of them do, what value - I don't know.
> 
> ...



Actually you've told us nothing except you own opinion of yourself. Even in the post above you stop short of divulging any information but instead suggest something without actually saying anything.

Your initial post was directly about selling some prints, which you're now not interested in, or do I mis-understand what you just posted?

Rubbish like, "_you are not a true artist if you sell out_," is pure idealistic talk used by some to define themselves as the true artist by dismissing others. Let your art talk and leave the bull***t to walk.

Post an image.


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 6, 2016)

Tim Tucker said:


> photoguydudeperson said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm. I think the opposite: you are not a true artist if you sell out.
> ...


No, I mentioned opinions of others earlier. And once again - that's irrelevant. I specifically told you that it is, and even if you were to read my first post - you would know that it is.

If you want someone to convince you of something or to prove someone wrong, look for another thread. I don't know about you, but I haven't been 4 years old for a long time.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 6, 2016)

photoguydudeperson said:


> If you want someone to convince you of something or to prove someone wrong, look for another thread. I don't know about you, but I haven't been 4 years old for a long time.



You're deflecting, the first sign of someone with something to prove who can't.


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 6, 2016)

The_Traveler said:


> photoguydudeperson said:
> 
> 
> > If you want someone to convince you of something or to prove someone wrong, look for another thread. I don't know about you, but I haven't been 4 years old for a long time.
> ...


Alternative would be to comply, which is more of a sign of trying to prove something.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 6, 2016)

You've proved enough to me.


----------



## table1349 (Feb 6, 2016)

Just curious, for the old timers, does this not sound quite similar to 
Josh100Lubu from a couple years ago?


----------



## photoguydudeperson (Feb 6, 2016)

The_Traveler said:


> You've proved enough to me.


If that makes you feel better about yourself.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 6, 2016)

Everybody pick up a camera and go outside, mmmkay?


----------

