# How can i make money from photography ?



## xxx5105 (Aug 4, 2012)

How can i make money from photography ?


----------



## gsgary (Aug 4, 2012)

sell your camera ?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 4, 2012)

Uh...sell photographs and photographic services?


----------



## sm4him (Aug 4, 2012)

5. Get a really long zoom and take pictures of people in compromising situations, then bribe them.
4. Get a really long zoom, move to Hollywood and take pictures of celebrities in compromising situations to sell to the rags.
3. Search Ebay and Craigslist for under-priced photo equipment, buy it, then sell it for a profit.
2. Set up a FB page, slap up some bad-to-mediocre portraits that might, or might not, and proclaim your "Fauxtographer" status--if you post it, they will come.
1. Get a camera, read the manual, read books on photography, practice, practice, practice, post photos for critique and practice some more until your photos are something people would actually WANT to spend money on.

I know, that last one is really ridiculous, but I was feeling silly.


----------



## Sarmad (Aug 4, 2012)

Well, be extra-ordinary and may be you can win some regional awards


----------



## o hey tyler (Aug 4, 2012)

1. Buy a DSLR. It doesn't even have to be a good one. Any entry level rig with a kit lens will do. 

2. Ignore any type of reading material which may tell you how to operate your camera or learn exposure. 

3. Start an etsy immediately after importing your memory card full of photos and sell every one of the imported images as prints. 8x10s for 15.00. 

4. ????

5. PROFIT!!!


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

You can't.  Making money from photography is an old wives tale.


----------



## xxx5105 (Aug 4, 2012)

And now, seriously what is the ways to make money,
Should I photograph weddings at night and photograph on day as a hobbie?,
there something else but this., because there so many weddings photographer....


----------



## Robin Usagani (Aug 4, 2012)

You either float or drown or sink to the bottom of the ocean as a part timer and become a bottom feeder


----------



## Robin Usagani (Aug 4, 2012)

xxx5105 said:


> And now, seriously what is the ways to make money,
> Should I photograph weddings at night and photograph on day as a hobbie?,
> there something else but this., because there so many weddings photographer....


Do it as a hobby first.  When you take fantastic photos, people will come.  Then start thinking about the business end.


----------



## sm4him (Aug 4, 2012)

Oh, seriously?
Okay, seriously, what kind of question is that? The ways to make money in photography are myriad--wedding, senior portraits, newborn & baby portraits, landscape, real estate, product, fashion, boudoir, etc, yadda yadda, ad infinitum.

The question, seriously, should not be how can you make $$ from photography. 
The question should be--are you even ready to make money from photography? And seriously, if you don't even have a CLUE what sort of photography you might want to do, I'd be highly dubious about your photography SKILLS.

Learn to DO photography, *then* tackle the "how to make money" question.


----------



## usayit (Aug 4, 2012)

There are many who make money from doing things that involve creating photos of something...

Journalists... document news and events for media
Wedding photographers... document a wedding for individuals
Studio photographers.. produce family portraits
etc...

BUT

Pure artistic photography is pretty rare.... starving artists are common.   Those that do are very lucky.


The difference between those groups....  one provides a service the other is pure retail.  You want to make money with photography, build a business around a service.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

.



























There is no photography.


----------



## KmH (Aug 4, 2012)

gsgary said:


> sell your camera ?


Dude! :thumbup:  I came this close .. to spewing coffee all over my computer display.

For the OP.
By asking such a naive appearing question, you indicate you're likely not a self-starter. It takes drive, motivation, and business/marketing/salesmanship/photography skills to be successfully self-employed, or to be the selected applicant for one of the very, very few staff photographer jobs that still exist.

Put another way - you need to have a plan. 


> If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.


----------



## Trever1t (Aug 4, 2012)

gsgary said:


> sell yout camera ?


  AHhhhhh hahahaha Ha! Come on, that was freaking funny!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Aug 4, 2012)

Work in a camera store selling cameras to other amateurs that ask the same question...over and over and over.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 4, 2012)

I have an on-topic question. What's the best advertising/marketing strategies you is have found to work?

In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?

I keep thinking that it's because most are stay at home mom types with a HUGE circle of friends, but I could be wrong.


----------



## Seefutlung (Aug 4, 2012)

Trever1t said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > sell yout camera ?
> ...


Actually, rather poignant ... but not just sell your camera, but rather sell all your cameras, sell a ton of cameras to jokers like us who hope to make a killing with our photography. Open up an internet store and sell, sell, sell ... odds are totally in your favor that you'll make much more money than the average "professional" photog who's buying your camera.

Gary


----------



## Robin Usagani (Aug 4, 2012)

SEO




rexbobcat said:


> I have an on-topic question. What's the best advertising/marketing strategies you is have found to work?
> 
> In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?
> 
> I keep thinking that it's because most are stay at home mom types with a HUGE circle of friends, but I could be wrong.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 4, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I have an on-topic question. What's the best advertising/marketing strategies you is have found to work?
> 
> *In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?*
> 
> I keep thinking that it's because most are stay at home mom types with a HUGE circle of friends, but I could be wrong.



Common interest with most of their clients... Babies, Toddlers and Kids! And clients that wouldn't know a well exposed, well composed photo if it bit them on the A$$!

It is the old linear progression thing ( like multi level marketing)  Fauxtog has 10 friends with babies! (10)!  Each one of those have 10 friends with babies! (100)! Each one of those have 10 friends with babies! (1000)! On and on to infinity and Ad Nauseum!

Success = Get married.. have a baby.... shoot the baby, have your wife show darling shots to 10 friends, etc..... or teach your wife how to use AUTO.... instant success!


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

xxx5105 said:


> And now, seriously what is the ways to make money,
> Should I photograph weddings at night and photograph on day as a hobbie?,
> there something else but this., because there so many weddings photographer....



Gary Fong just published the book you NEED. Seriously. It's all about how to get to the fame and fortune that he has gotten to in photography. 
Amazon.com: So You Want To Be A Rockstar Photographer: Exploding The Myth And Real World Guidance (Volume 1) (9780985917807): Gary Fong, Andy Wolfendon, Ranilo Cabo: Books


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I have an on-topic question. What's the best advertising/marketing strategies you is have found to work?
> 
> In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who _*appear*_ to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?
> 
> I keep thinking that it's because most are stay at home mom types with a HUGE circle of friends, but I could be wrong.


You answered your own question in itself and didn't even know it. Appearances are incredibly deceiving. 
In many instances your thinking about the mom thing is dead on. 
Then there are those who really do APPEAR to be successful. However not one of them has done the math and they have no clue that they are losing money hand over fist. They're usually around about 2 to 3 years if they are persistent and Poof! No money to buy new equipment because, low and behold! They were losing a sh!t ton of money!


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> xxx5105 said:
> 
> 
> > And now, seriously what is the ways to make money,
> ...



So you are saying WRITE BOOKS or TEACH CLASSES to make money in Photography, RIGHT?  lol! (or invent a so-so light modifier and market the hell out of it?)


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

That works fantastically! The wanna be rockstar photographers will invest their last dime in gimmicks that will make them the end all to beat all in the photography world. Just look at Gary! He and his wife are retired and raising their babies in a life of relative ease and luxury.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> You answered your own question in itself and didn't even know it. Appearances are incredibly deceiving.
> In many instances your thinking about the mom thing is dead on.
> Then there are those who really do APPEAR to be successful. However not one of them has done the math and they have no clue that they are losing money hand over fist. They're usually around about 2 to 3 years if they are persistent and Poof! No money to buy new equipment because, low and behold! They were losing a sh!t ton of money!



You see so much of this.  

The guy earlier who said he did a wedding for $250... That person pretty much got paid $5 an hour, and since minimum wage is well above that, this person lost money.

I have seen countless people who sell framed prints for like 10% above their materials costs... That doesn't even cover the gas they used to bring them to the fair that they sold them at, let alone that booth they rented.

I don't begrudge anyone the excitement of knowing that someone is hanging their art in a home, and I won't bother decrying people "devaluing the industry", but it's just downright bad economics to burn your money like that.  You may as well frame a $50 bill and sell it for $40.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

manaheim said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You forgot to mention the cost of his equipment to shoot that wedding  and the cost of his computer and software to process it and the cost of  his time editing, the cost in gas to get there and back, the time it took to get there and back... 
I don't know about you, but even when I had very basic equipment it cost me more in cold hard dollars to leave my front door. 
Now he made about -$100 per hour. That's assuming he's NOT insured and doesn't have any business overhead...


----------



## nmoody (Aug 4, 2012)

gsgary said:


> sell yout camera ?



AHAHHAHA oh its so true it hurts!

Yeah and like others have said, the easiest more consistent way to make money seems to be in teaching. This could be by book or class (online/offline). It takes a lot of time and resources to become successful where you take/sell pictures for a living and very few actually make it.


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2012)

xxx5105 said:


> And now, seriously what is the ways to make money,
> Should I photograph weddings at night and photograph on day as a hobbie?,
> there something else but this., because there so many weddings photographer....



Relax, xxx, you're IN!  I can tell you have what it takes to make gobs of money with very little effort, so go for it!  All those other wedding photographers are amatures, their stuff stinks, and people who hire them are nuts.  You, on the other hand, are a far superior photographer, so you can easily charge twice the going rate.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Aug 4, 2012)

People will always make money in photography, it really all depends on how little or how much they are willing to lose just trying.  Most look at the sale of a $10 print and say I made $10, what they don't factor in is the costs involved in getting to that point.  If they start $1000 in the hole, they still see the $10 as profit.  

This is their perception of profit.


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?
> 
> I keep thinking that it's because most are stay at home mom types with a HUGE circle of friends, but I could be wrong.



Could be, but I blame the general populace for not knowing the difference between good art and bad.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Aug 4, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I have an on-topic question. What's the best advertising/marketing strategies you is have found to work?
> 
> In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?
> 
> I keep thinking that it's because most are stay at home mom types with a HUGE circle of friends, but I could be wrong.



SEO.

90+% of your potential clients are looking for their photographer via the internet. If you're not maximizing your SEO, you're letting other people take your clients.

If you're not filling in every single header tag, alt tag, caption, keyword and page title, along with a recent sitemap...you're not leveraging Google well enough.

There are a lot of hosting services who take care of a lot of SEO for you, like Smugmug (great and inexpensive), Zenfolio (not as great and about the same price) and Photoshelter (REALLY great, but much pricier).

Granted a lot of these effing idiot fauxtographers don't have the first clue about SEO, but they are very aggressive in leveraging their Facebook page and personal contacts to build referral business. Remember that 99% of the (really stupid) general public can't tell the slightest difference between a completely mediocre picture and a great one. If it's in focus, has a shallow DoF and really awful vignette, most people will think it's great.

Decide who your target market is, and if it's the Walmart crowd....well then God help you.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Aug 4, 2012)

Designer said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?
> ...



HA! Joke's on you. There's no such thing as bad art. Or good art. Art, by definition, is completely subjective.

What you could have said is that I blame the general populace for not understanding any of the foundational elements of photography (exposure, comp, blahblahblah)

But then again, these are the same people who go on TV Judge shows, get arrested for stupid chit and live their entire lives paycheck to paycheck complaining that they never got a fair shot.

Nah, I'm not cynical or jaded at all.......


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

Art isn't really all that subjective.  Personal tastes vary, of course, but effective execution doesn't vary by taste.


----------



## KmH (Aug 4, 2012)

manaheim said:


> You may as well frame a $50 bill and sell it for $40.


 QFT.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

Designer said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > In my city there are a lot of fauxtographers who appear to be fairly successful, and I can't understand, for the life of me, why?
> ...



Who cares? The guy with the horrific olympic athlete photos is now getting a show at Powerhouse Arena. And those were phenomenally bad... Bad Olympic Portraits Rewarded with an Exhibition in NYC


----------



## Designer (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> Who cares?



I care.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

Hey, I find the olympic photos to be rather offensive to the athletes, but his bad art just got him a showing with a rather prestigious firm. 
Obviously the world doesn't care and _that's_ the point. If people are going to throw money at bad art someone had better be smart enough to step up and fill that void. Capitalism at it's finest. 
Fong made his millions off of selling a piece of tupperware to all of the schlubs (me included) who thought it was brilliant.   It's cheap, cheezy and hilarious. I have one and I actually use it on occasion. I am happy with the $50 or whatever I threw to a piece of tupperware.
Powerhouse is happy showing the Klamar Olympic photos because thousands will flock to see the extent of bad. Powerhouse will make $$$ off of bad art. Brilliance? Yep.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> Hey, I find the olympic photos to be rather offensive to the athletes, but his bad art just got him a showing with a rather prestigious firm.
> Obviously the world doesn't care and that's the point. If people are going to throw money at bad art someone had better be smart enough to step up and fill that void. Capitalism at it's finest.
> Fong made his millions off of selling a piece of tupperware to all of the schlubs (me included) who thought it was brilliant.   It's cheap, cheezy and hilarious. I have one and I actually use it on occasion. I am happy with the $50 or whatever I threw to a piece of tupperware.
> Powerhouse is happy showing the Klamar Olympic photos because thousands will flock to see the extent of bad. Powerhouse will make $$$ off of bad art. Brilliance? Yep.



Sad... But very true.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

Am I the only one that wants to check out all of Manaheim's posts just to see the cute bunny?


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Am I the only one that wants to check out all of Manaheim's posts just to see the cute bunny?


Thats one benefit of his posts...


----------



## sm4him (Aug 4, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Am I the only one that wants to check out all of Manaheim's posts just to see the cute bunny?



The bunny's cute, but in my head, manaheim looks, and sounds, exactly like Capt. Kirk. 

(for those that have only ever seen the bunny avatar, it used to be Kirk)


----------



## amolitor (Aug 4, 2012)

The reason "fauxtographers" are successful, when they are, is that they're running a successful business. The photography part is almost irrelevant, learn a handful of rote shots and just do them over and over.

Clients don't WANT your d**med art, they want the rote images, and anyone can stamp those out. After you've learned to knock those out (light here, light here, power levels here, shutter speed that, aperture this, POP POP POP POP, done) it's just running a business, which is a real thing and takes some skill and talent.

This even covers very high end fashion guys making bank. They might have invented their rote images, as minor variations on someone else's rote images, but by golly they're stamping 'em out by rote now, you can bet on that.


----------



## KmH (Aug 4, 2012)

There is little that is new in the world of photographs.


----------



## LizardKing (Aug 4, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > I have an on-topic question. What's the best advertising/marketing strategies you is have found to work?
> ...



Now, wait a minute. My brother's about to have a baby during the following couple of weeks. So maybe I can avoid getting married and having a baby, and just go take pics of his baby and ask his girlfriend to advertise for me hahaha...


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 4, 2012)

amolitor said:
			
		

> The reason "fauxtographers" are successful, when they are, is that they're running a successful business. The photography part is almost irrelevant, learn a handful of rote shots and just do them over and over.
> 
> Clients don't WANT your d**med art, they want the rote images, and anyone can stamp those out. After you've learned to knock those out (light here, light here, power levels here, shutter speed that, aperture this, POP POP POP POP, done) it's just running a business, which is a real thing and takes some skill and talent.
> 
> This even covers very high end fashion guys making bank. They might have invented their rote images, as minor variations on someone else's rote images, but by golly they're stamping 'em out by rote now, you can bet on that.



I understand that the business of photography is about 80% of the battle, but I just have a hard time understanding how they got successful. I mean, when I see some Facebook photog who can't even type with capital letters it just confuses me as to why customers are attracted to them. 

I've always been taught that professionalism and knowledge beyond what the average Joe has are two things that are really beneficial, but it all seems optional when it comes to success in photography.

It just seems counter-active to the thinking of the average Capitalist American when they pay someone $100 to take picture that they could've taken themselves.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's all about VALUE. Some clients value CHEAP above all else. They feel they NEED a photographer, but don't want to pay... $100 is their budget. You aren't going to get them to spend $250 for a session only and more on the prints and products with you or me if their budget is $100 for everything and the kitchen sink. Someone has to fill that end of the market. 

I have a white box computer. I value the abilities of my computer, but I am not about to pay for a Mac. It's not in my budget. It's a designer name to me and I can get a computer to do what I need it to do fast as hell by building it myself for about 1/2 the cost. I am not Mac's customer. Does that mean I shouldn't have a computer that is fast and handles photoshop like a dream? 

I LOVE designer labels, however I am NOT going to spend a couple grand on each kid for school clothes every year so that they can have the newest Hollister clothing. I will go to Plato's closet and buy them Hollister at a MUCH cheaper price. I am not Hollister's client. Hollister isn't going out of business yet and they aren't conning me into spending big bucks for a ripped pair of jeans either. BUT they ARE getting someone else to pay it-thankfully.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I must be missing something. Someone needs to define "fauxtographer" for me, because I see that word used a lot around here, but I am unclear as to its exact meaning.  _*Faux*_ (/&#712;fo&#650;/) is a French word for "false". Wouldn't that be someone that ISN'T taking pictures? Or is it just used for the photographers that do not  live up to the standards of the Pros here? does it matter what medium they use for their advertising if it works for them? How does ones marketing medium directly affect the quality of their product? If I were trying to make money with my camera, i would use any and all marketing resources available to me. And even if they ARE using craigslist or facebook or ebay or whatever, if they are "successful" in what they are doing, how is that false?  Or am i taking the "fauxtographer" stamp too literally? I'm sorry, I just see that word used fairly often and I had to ask. :mrgreen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 4, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Success = Get married.. have a baby.... shoot the baby



I know I'm coming late to this seminar but I just want to clear something up.

Someone in my town just got married then shot his wife and everyone is really angry at him.
Wouldn't they be even more angry if he shot his baby?
I may be new to the photo business but I don't think that's a good business move.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> I know I'm coming late to this seminar but I just want to clear something up.
> 
> Someone in my town just got married then shot his wife and everyone is really angry at him.
> Wouldn't they be even more angry if he shot his baby?
> I may be new to the photo business but I don't think that's a good business move.



Did his wife survive the shooting?


----------



## usayit (Aug 4, 2012)

I did forget to mention one thing that I discovered when I was unemployed a while back....

You know those in-store and in-mall studios.... and those school photographers that take portraits of students?   Most of them are covered under a single umbrella corporation called LifeTouch Inc.   They are always more than happy to hire people to man the cameras.  But don't expect to learn or hone in photographic skills... they have everything template-ed like fast food restaurants.  Also don't expect to earn too much money.

But hey... its technically photography earning money .. . right?


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

usayit said:
			
		

> I did forget to mention one thing that I discovered when I was unemployed a while back....
> 
> You know those in-store and in-mall studios.... and those school photographers that take portraits of students?   Most of them are covered under a single umbrella corporation called LifeTouch Inc.   They are always more than happy to hire people to man the cameras.  But don't expect to learn or hone in photographic skills... they have everything template-ed like fast food restaurants.  Also don't expect to earn too much money.
> 
> But hey... its technically photography earning money .. . right?



Sure, why not. Its filling a niche like everyone else. Someone has to take pictures for the people that cant afford $5000 for a wedding. If your not willing to do it at what they can afford,  they why care if someone else does?  And why look down on them for doing it? They could just as easily be hard working people trying to make ends meet, even if they dont live up to some peoples "pro" standards.


----------



## usayit (Aug 4, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> And why look down on them for doing it?



What makes you think I was putting it down?

I actually went for the life touch job with "Flash!" studios.  Fortunately found another position that was along the lines of my original profession in software.  They are set up to take anyone with zero skills in photography and make them produce results consistent with the products advertised .. nothing less nothing more.  Not really a "photography" job but its still a job behind the camera.  A few kids were also working there.... all seemed hard workers.. and the few seemed genuinely good with children.

As far as I know, none of the brands under lifeTouch provide wedding services.. only family, children portraits kinda stuff.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 4, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, that's what everyone is angry about.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

usayit said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > And why look down on them for doing it?
> ...



I apologize, 
I just assumed it was part of the whole "lets put down less expensive photographers" thing that seems to go around here from time to time.  
My wife actually worked for the wal-mart portrait studio for a while. she was also learning from a wedding and portrait photographer that was a family friend. 
Your right, it isn't really much for learning the camera end, but she learned how to deal with people, how to pose in the studio, and how to sell. 
It may not be much, but its better than a sharp stick in the eye. between that and the second shooting, it helped her be prepared to do weddings on her own.


----------



## usayit (Aug 4, 2012)

no problem....

I already gave my response but forgot the whole LifeTouch thing ..


Yes... it would have been a step up from what I was doing before... shuffling cars around at a car dealership.   Learning how to deal with customers is a very important art to learn for a business involved in a service which is most of photography business.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 4, 2012)

i search thru craigslist on occasion for second shooter positions and there are always ads in there for the lifetouch style studios. they always say no exp. nessicary. as said youlle learn to deal with customers and push products more then photography.

i'd consider the Fauxtographer term to be those that are operating on facebook and craigslist and generally charging like $40 bucks or something so cheap you know there not really making money, they generally won't be paying taxes, wont be insured and are just like throwing there name on the side of the car and calling themselves a business without doing it the legal way. im sure some peoples opinions will differ on that though.



as for me. that framing $50 and sellig it for $40 seems like the best deal. I know I will have people lined up for miles to buy my product so i'll be rich as heck. I can't wait to start.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> i search thru craigslist on occasion for second shooter positions and there are always ads in there for the lifetouch style studios. they always say no exp. nessicary. as said youlle learn to deal with customers and push products more then photography.
> 
> i'd consider the Fauxtographer term to be those that are operating on facebook and craigslist and generally charging like $40 bucks or something so cheap you know there not really making money, they generally won't be paying taxes, wont be insured and are just like throwing there name on the side of the car and calling themselves a business without doing it the legal way. im sure some peoples opinions will differ on that though.
> 
> ...



It is amazing that people don't keep their taxes straight.. it was easy to register a fictitious name, set up the tax ID, and get set up to pay quarterly...all online. very simple. Insurance is a little trickier, but not terribly expensive and doesn't take long to get set up either, depending on how much gear you have to insure. I think the government should do a sting where they set up a "gig" with all the craigslist professionals, then see if they have their tax ID. get them for tax evasion. 
might put a dent in the illegal masses.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 4, 2012)

I thought about that earlier about the whole sting, but then it comes down to we don't have enough people to do the jobs they have as it is to go after these guys. maybe they realise that half of them are charging so little there likely loosing money hand over fist lol.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 4, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Am I the only one that wants to check out all of Manaheim's posts just to see the cute bunny?



Husky  and   Bunny.....

is that Hunny Bunnies come from?? Shame on you!!


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 4, 2012)

LizardKing said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > rexbobcat said:
> ...



That might work!! Just make sure you offer a CD with 6000 images for a $70.00 2 hour session.. you will have it made!


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 4, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> LizardKing said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...




heck man 70 bucks for two hours id be making 35 bucks an hour . be raking in the cash man. raking it in.


Last company I worked for had about 50 people in the office and In the 10 years I was there I believe there was around 17 babies born. That place was a baby factorty.


----------



## Steve5D (Aug 4, 2012)

I actually started making money when I _stopped _trying to make money...


----------



## IByte (Aug 4, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:
			
		

> Work in a camera store selling cameras to other amateurs that ask the same question...over and over and over.



Best buy has those.


----------



## LizardKing (Aug 4, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > LizardKing said:
> ...



That sounds pretty good haha... Think I better start saving for some lights :thumbup:


----------



## Aloicious (Aug 4, 2012)

gsgary said:


> sell your camera ?



better yet, sell coffee makers under the guise of selling your camera:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/buy-sell/291403-nikon-d700-accessories.html

$2800 for a $30 coffee maker is a nice profit margin


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> Thats one benefit of his posts...



Every home should have at least one!


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

sm4him said:
			
		

> The bunny's cute, but in my head, manaheim looks, and sounds, exactly like Capt. Kirk.
> 
> (for those that have only ever seen the bunny avatar, it used to be Kirk)



Shhhh!  You're dispelling the power of the bunny!  The idea is to fool people into thinking I'm NOT an egotistical bastard.  

Granted, I sort of wreck that every time I open my virtual mouth.


----------



## IByte (Aug 4, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> So you are saying WRITE BOOKS or TEACH CLASSES to make money in Photography, RIGHT?  lol! (or invent a so-so light modifier and market the hell out of it?)



Look at the ScamWow lol!


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

Speaking of egos... This whole "fauxtographer" thing is kind of obnoxious.  It smacks of putting others down to make yourself feel better.  

What's more is doing it in a really trite manner.

Honestly the second I see anyone use the term I pretty much tag them as massively insecure and kinda childish.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

manaheim said:


> Speaking of egos... This whole "fauxtographer" thing is kind of obnoxious.  It smacks of putting others down to make yourself feel better.
> 
> What's more is doing it in a really trite manner.
> 
> Honestly the second I see anyone use the term I pretty much tag them as massively insecure and kinda childish.


Have you ever perused YouAreNotAPhotographer.com? The title fits.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> Have you ever perused YouAreNotAPhotographer.com? The title fits.



I understand where it comes from, believe me.  I'm not suggesting the world isn't full of people taking bad pictures and charging for it... I'm really just reacting to the massive influx of hate mongering on TPF as of late.

And I wasn't targeting you, btw... If you used the term then my broad-brush characterization had some collateral damage.  Sorry.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

manaheim said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of late? I thought it was a full time thing here? There is no tolerance for less than perfect here.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> Of late? I thought it was a full time thing here? There is no tolerance for less than perfect here.



It seems to spike now and again... You get a few prolific super-negative posters and it goes crazy. Partly because morons like me get into it with them.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

manaheim said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's good to have these debates every so often. Keeps everyone on their toes.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> It's good to have these debates every so often. Keeps everyone on their toes.



You are such a positive force.  Nice to have you here.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

Hugs for everyone!!!!!!!!


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

BUMP for HUGS!   :hugs:


----------



## sm4him (Aug 4, 2012)

I must say, few threads have ever been any more deserving a total derailment. 

Oh, and thanks for the hug, manaheim, you big bunny (but you're not fooling me, Kirk...  )


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

sm4him said:
			
		

> I must say, few threads have ever been any more deserving a total derailment.
> 
> Oh, and thanks for the hug, manaheim, you big bunny (but you're not fooling me, Kirk...  )



Lol


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 4, 2012)

To hell with the hugs. I'm passing the wine bottle around.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 4, 2012)

sm4him said:


> I must say, few threads have ever been any more deserving a total derailment.
> 
> Oh, and thanks for the hug, manaheim, you big bunny (but you're not fooling me, Kirk...  )



derailed hard too didn't it?


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 4, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> Speaking of egos... This whole "fauxtographer" thing is kind of obnoxious.  It smacks of putting others down to make yourself feel better.
> 
> What's more is doing it in a really trite manner.
> 
> Honestly the second I see anyone use the term I pretty much tag them as massively insecure and kinda childish.



What term should we use?

I thought fauxtographers was just a shorthanded way of negatively regarding someone's business tactics/attitude/work.

It's so much easier than being politically correct all the time, which is just as obnoxious


----------



## manaheim (Aug 4, 2012)

I dunno why we even talk about that category of people anymore... It's just such a tired topic. Might just be me.  I've been here a long time.


----------



## Steve5D (Aug 5, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> What term should we use?
> 
> I thought fauxtographers was just a shorthanded way of negatively regarding someone's business tactics/attitude/work.
> 
> It's so much easier than being politically correct all the time, which is just as obnoxious



I see it used, primarily, when discussing someone who's _actually working_. In that regard, I think there's a level of animosity and jealousy.

A friend of mine used to be a teacher, and she did photography as a side gig. She was eviscerated by established "pros" in town when she started doing kids portraits and the like. She ended up leaving teaching and is doing photography full time. Initially, she was dismissed as a "fauxtographer". The interesting thing was that the people who were referring to her as that were people who wanted to work but weren't, yet she was making some nice money on the side. When she went full-time, she silenced the naysayers.

So, yeah, when I see derogatory terms such as "fauxtographer" or "MWAC", the first thing that comes to mind is that the person using those terms is just pissed because he's not yet attained the level of expertise that people want to hire, regardless of how much he thinks he has...


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 5, 2012)

Steve5D said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > What term should we use?
> ...



thanks steve..im glad i am not the only one a little tired of that term being thrown around anyone who doesn't meet some peoples specific "PRO" criteria. It should be used concerning someones finished product, if it is indeed seriously bad. not based on someone not being a full time pro, or what they charge, or where they advertise.


----------



## KmH (Aug 5, 2012)

Take off your mommy goggles - What is a Fauxtographer? | Take Off Your Mommy Goggles

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fauxtographer

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fauxtography


----------



## usayit (Aug 5, 2012)

KmH said:


> Take off your mommy goggles -


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 5, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> thanks steve..im glad i am not the only one a little tired of that term being thrown around anyone who doesn't meet some peoples specific "PRO" criteria. *It should be used concerning someones finished product, if it is indeed seriously bad. not based on someone not being a full time pro, or what they charge, or where they advertise.*



*FAUXTOGRAPHERS!!!!*  The thing is.. that we see so many "PRO's" that produce horrible images! And most of them have several things in common! These *COMMONALITIES* are:

1.  Very little time behind the camera.. usually less than a year before they go "PRO"!

2. They are usually part-time PRO's because they are at home with the kids! (or if male.. unemployed, and cant' find work!)  (If female, the husband is really supporting the family and the "Photo PRO business".. as they don't charge enough to make the "business" a success on it's own! See #3 below)

3. They usually aren't licensed, they don't pay / report taxes, and usually don't have ANY insurance on their gear or Liability insurance to cover their clients. They have NO CLUE as to what their true CODB is!

4. Most advertise on Facebook, and / or Craiglist!

5. They usually give away a CD with a HUGE amount of images (along with full printing rights), usually poorly edited, if edited at all!

6. They usually have a large, obnoxious watermark (makes them a PRO, right?)

7. They almost always have low end, entry level gear.. and kit lenses. Some upgrade to better gear, thinking that will help their poor photography... and are devastated when it doesn't!

8. Image are always far from being technically perfect.... under / over exposed, OOF or soft, Very contrast due to poor lighting choices, Bad color due to bad WB choices, ridiculously bad processing with odd color skin, strange skys, etc...

9. Composition is usually non-existent... or EVERYTHING will be on the ROTS lines, because they think that is the way to do it. Tight framing, head chopping, vertical subjects shot horizontally and vice versa, Seriously mind numbing TILTS, bad horizons, blown skies, etc, etc, etc.....

10. Most have no clue about lighting, or fill... and even if they own a flash, don't know how to use it!

11. Most shoot newborns, babies, toddlers, kids, senior portraits, pets and / or weddings! (all poorly, of course), and do it for extremely low prices (see #3 above)!

But even with all this... they are* PRO's,* right? And we shouldn't call them *Fauxtographers,* right?

Really.. these are all very common traits in the people that are often labeled FAUXTOGRAPHER! One or two of these items alone would not classify them as such! But most of them share a minimum of five or six of these traits... and many have all!

Does this help clarify the issue?


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 5, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> FAUXTOGRAPHERS!!!!  The thing is.. that we see so many "PRO's" that produce horrible images! And most of them have several things in common! These COMMONALITIES are:
> 
> 1.  Very little time behind the camera.. usually less than a year before they go "PRO"!
> 
> ...



I completely agree. Thats why i said judge based on the quality of their product. Which all stems from the things you mentioned.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 5, 2012)

3 for me above is my biggest gripe. I have no issue with anyone wanting to start a business heck I did it. But do it legally. If your not paying your taxes or protecting your client and your business I can't respect that. Call it what you want but its not jealousy. 

Reality is in any group or hobby or sport people tend to lump people into groups and give them labels. this site and photography in generall are no different.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

So much time and energy invested in worrying about what others do... Labeling them, and even creating a field guide!


----------



## HughGuessWho (Aug 5, 2012)

Why is it necessary to call "them" anything? I stopped name calling when I left elementary school. My 5 year old knows better. If their stuff is bad, just say its bad. That's just my opinion. But then again, I'm just a GWAC, what would I know.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 5, 2012)

Good photographers. Bad photographers.  It's still labeling.   We can change it to lawbreakers if it would appease everyone. Since most Arn't paying taxes.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 5, 2012)

KmH said:


> Take off your mommy goggles - What is a Fauxtographer? | Take Off Your Mommy Goggles
> 
> Urban Dictionary: Fauxtographer
> 
> Urban Dictionary: fauxtography



anything quoted from urbandictionary is, in my opinion, in the same league with the photographs that the "fauxtographer" puts out.


----------



## KmH (Aug 5, 2012)

Opinions are like rectums, everybody has one.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> So much time and energy invested in worrying about what others do... Labeling them, and even creating a field guide!



Others affect me.

Not judging and labeling people is impossible.  I'm not gonna pretend that I'm "above" it, because I'm not.

The "holier than thou" attitude goes both ways


----------



## amolitor (Aug 5, 2012)

It's extremely human to mock, bully, and otherwise try to put down those people you perceive as just below you on the ladder.

The take off your mommy goggles web site is pretty much just this, as near as I can tell. Some people who have managed to lift themselves up from being completely awful by mastering a few technical details and some rote poses now want to make it VERY MUCH CLEAR that they are NOT those guys.

When you actually get good, you stop worrying about the people who are lousy.

What does this say about me? aww, crap.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 5, 2012)

I shall refer to them now as "photographers who I perceive as having less photographic skill as well as less professionalism and etiquette as the average professional."

So that I don't sound too mean.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 5, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I shall refer to them now as "photographers who I perceive as having less photographic skill as well as less professionalism and etiquette as the average professional."
> 
> So that I don't sound too mean.



you know what..I officially rescind my previous aversion to the word "fauxtographers"... it is at least short.   :mrgreen:


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

rexbobcat said:
			
		

> Others affect me.
> 
> Not judging and labeling people is impossible.  I'm not gonna pretend that I'm "above" it, because I'm not.
> 
> The "holier than thou" attitude goes both ways



I'm not naive enough to think we don't judge and label... We do.  However, the discourse around here seems to spiral pretty significantly into this defensive hatemongering and people love to spit out these trite terms and judge others unworthy.

How many threads do we have a week here where people fight over who gets to call themselves a photographer?

How many over who gets to claim the glorious title of professional?

If trying to raise the discourse a bit is holier than thou, then I stand accused and ask that you be sure to tithe before you post going forward, and thank you in advance for your piety.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> I'm not naive enough to think we don't judge and label... We do.  However, the discourse around here seems to spiral pretty significantly into this defensive hatemongering and people love to spit out these trite terms and judge others unworthy.
> 
> How many threads do we have a week here where people fight over who gets to call themselves a photographer?
> 
> ...



It's not the fact that you raised it, but instead you sound like you think that you are better (or something...) than those who use the word fauxtographer.

Countering accusations with more accusations is  just...not effective...

I just asked a simple question about sociology and business practices, and I used the word fauxtographer to help people understand the general people who I was talking about. I don't care how subjective it is, but some people just are bad at what they do in terms of the products they produce. Those are the people who I was referring to - people who are successful while delivering a subpar product.

I don't know why everyone had to get all self-righteous about it. If you want to rant about people ranting then start another thread.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 5, 2012)

This is just the post that keeps on giving and giving...


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> I'm not naive enough to think we don't judge and label... We do.  However, the discourse around here seems to spiral pretty significantly into this defensive hatemongering and people love to spit out these trite terms and judge others unworthy.
> 
> How many threads do we have a week here where people fight over who gets to call themselves a photographer?
> 
> ...



Well damn... the bunny is right. Sorry people,  guess its time to get back on track and take some pictures.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



All pray to the Lop Eared Bunny God! hooyah  hooyah hooyah hooyah!!


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

rexbobcat said:
			
		

> It's not the fact that you raised it, but instead you sound like you think that you are better (or something...) than those who use the word fauxtographer.
> 
> Countering accusations with more accusations is  just...not effective...
> 
> ...



So you're ranting about my ranting that others are ranting?  But somehow my ranting has crossed the line and I'm holier than thou for ranting that you're ranting?  But you're not holier than thou for ranting?  Nor are you holier than thou for ranting that I'm ranting?

Really?

Really?


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> All pray to the Lop Eared Bunny God! hooyah  hooyah hooyah hooyah!!



/me blesses the bison.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

pixmedic said:
			
		

> Well damn... the bunny is right. Sorry people,  guess its time to get back on track and take some pictures.



Rabbit is good, rabbit is wise...

(10 points if you can name the misquoted movie)


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Twister!


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> Twister!



Wow.  Very nice.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

I'm sitting here chuckling because rexbo is ranting that I'm ranting and my wife is like "what's so funny?"


----------



## MTVision (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> So you're ranting about my ranting that others are ranting?  But somehow my ranting has crossed the line and I'm holier than thou for ranting that you're ranting?  But you're not holier than thou for ranting?  Nor are you holier than thou for ranting that I'm ranting?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Really?



That's a whole lot of ranting....


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 5, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> So you're ranting about my ranting that others are ranting?  But somehow my ranting has crossed the line and I'm holier than thou for ranting that you're ranting?  But you're not holier than thou for ranting?  Nor are you holier than thou for ranting that I'm ranting?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Really?



Aren't you clever.

You missed my point. I was saying that you began ranting for no other reason than to rant. Pointing out the regress doesn't change that fact. An saying "Really? Really?" doesn't really add anything to the discussion either.

I'm sure your chuckle at an Internet forum is worth it. May it raise your self-esteem.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

rexbobcat said:
			
		

> Aren't you clever.
> 
> You missed my point. I was saying that you began ranting for no other reason than to rant. Pointing out the regress doesn't change that fact. An saying "Really? Really?" doesn't really add anything to the discussion either.
> 
> I'm sure your chuckle at an Internet forum is worth it. May it raise your self-esteem.



Haha... Nice deflection.  Very nice.


----------



## pixmedic (Aug 5, 2012)

well, its hard not to at least chuckle a little whenever Manaheim posts something when you picture the bunny saying it  
CUTEST. AVATAR. EVER.

that, and I mostly agree with him. 

LOVE THE BUNNY


----------



## Tee (Aug 5, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> This is just the post that keeps on giving and giving...



It's the herpes of TPF.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 5, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> This is just the post that keeps on giving and giving...


----------



## HughGuessWho (Aug 5, 2012)

KmH said:


> Opinions are like rectums, everybody has one.



And of course, many "are one".


----------



## KmH (Aug 5, 2012)

For humans, there will always be - THEM and US.

We be done here.


----------

