 Laljit S. Sidhu |
Competition in Pro Photography I have recently been reading a number of books on the business side of photography in different areas of photography - portraiture, stock, nature, glamour, etc. - and it seems every one says "such and such" is the most competitive area of photography. Nature photographers say nature photography is the most competitive, stock photographers say its nearly impossible to break into the field, and portrait photographers seem to imply that the market is so flood that any attempts are probably going to be futile. Is photography any more competitive than any other business venture? Or is there someting inherently more cut throat about photography?
|
|
|
|
||
|
John A. Lind |
IMO it is more competitive than most careers, but no more so than a number of "service sector" small businesses. The difficult part is building a profitable business. Anyone can buy a big box of tools, including some specialized ones most would not own, and claim to be an automotive mechanic. One can buy another set of tools for working with dirt, rocks and plants, and claim to be a landscaper. Likewise, one can buy camera equipment, the required business and tax licenses, and claim to be a professional photographer. The tools are important. Having the proper ones are "enablers" that provide basic capabilities, or at least make accomplishing specific tasks easier. Not having them can create failure. Having them does not guarantee success (thinking that it does is one of the myths). The number of people who own cameras is quite enormous. The number of them who would like to be paid photographers, full-time or part-time, is sizeable. The number of those who can create truly special photographs is comparatively few. The successful ones know how to operate a profitable business doing so. As with any service sector business, consistently getting the job done well makes an enormous difference. Make too many mistakes with customers and the cost of recovering from them can quickly kill the business: unhappy customers (who are the greatest potential advertising), and the cost of redoing work (if it's even possible), or making partial/full refunds that very rapidly consumes profitability. As with a number of "service sector" businesses, there are many who do it "on the side" . . . part-time after retirement or while holding a "day job" that generates a larger, steady income. Likewise, there are others whose spouses are the primary "breadwinner" and benefit provider. They can potentially run at lower cost by leveraging on benefits from other sources. You must be able to create special photographs, artistically and technically, that very vew can do, and then make a profitable, competitively priced business of it. That's my take on it . . . from my view of it. There will likely be other opinions expressed as well. BTW, I fall into the "part-time" with "day job" category. -- John
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||