Photography Income – How To Make Money From Digital Photography?

Freelance photography and stock photography are two clear options you can explore for photography income. Certain niches like fashion and advertising photography can make you more, but they're very hard to get into and the competition is fierce. By contrast, wedding and portrait photography gives you faster breaks. You can start making money from your local area while gaining the experience & skills to become a professional. Based on where you live, you can make $1000 per wedding photoshoot or about $300-400 for portrait photography.

http://www.deviantart.com/ provides an option where you can sell your uploaded digital photos as prints. The prints will be delivered worldwide. To create an account and explore :] I’m not too sure, either. Here’s the FAQ link in the case. http://help.deviantart.com/ Well, that’s one way. Luck!

sell it

I am getting ready to start wedding photography, can someone honestly tell me how much I can expect to make on average per month living between Los Angeles and San Diego? I would think to be between 2 major cities, advertising on craigslist, and in the local papers, being part of a church group, I would do fairly well and should be able to pull between 3 and 7 weddings each month. Does this sound realistic? I have an SLR with a hot box and flash, other lighting equipment. I believe as far as the equipment I'm ready and will probably do the 3 weddings for almost free. I am and business-minded I have run my own business before so I know how to market myself, I also sold cars before, so I am good at building customer relations. I think I take great pictures and have heard the same from other people. I'll let you be the Judge at www.yountphotographyonline.com. I can handle constructive criticism. I just started this website. Comments/Suggestions plz email me @ j_yount_3@yahoo.com Thanks Josh

Here are my two cents worth: First of all, your website has grammatical and spelling errors that would stop me from hiring you without even having to see a single photo. So you have a camera and a flash. You need a backup camera and flash at least equal to your main setup. You need duplicates of everything. You need brackets, sync cords, diffusers. Lots of memory. A fast, powerful computer with a backup hard drive. Adobe Photoshop. The skill to use PS. You also need people skills. Maybe you have it. You need management skills, Business savvy. Now we get to photographic skills. I don't mean to be harsh, Certainly, I'm sure the original pictures are higher resolution than the web posts show, but that doesn't hide the fact that your subjects were poorly lit and exposed, and the posing was awkward and utterly lacking in knowledge and style. These are things you need to study before presenting yourself as a wedding professional. At weddings, you usually have to use available lighting, sometimes in impossibly dark churches. Then you have to corral and arrange individuals and small and large groups into pleasing compositions. And this has to be done quickly with impatient people who are anxious to begin the party. The best way to get into wedding photography is to find an established professional willing to let you assist for a season or two while you hone your photography skills without someone's "special day" is on the line. Some photographers in a resort or high volume areas do manage 4 -7 weddings a month. I don't think a newbie, particularly one with questionable skill and no portfolio, should expect to book that many, at least not at an income level enough to sustain you. Don't forget the post-processing time that a wedding takes. I have a full-time day job in the industry and shoot weddings on the side. Even if you nail exposure and WB every shot, the post-work is time-consuming, and I shudder to think of doing that many albums and coordinating that many print orders by myself. Good luck to you if you decide to go for it.

I just attended a class with the Texas Professional Photographers Association in College Station and spoke to several wedding photographers. Just a note that they were averaging 25-50 weddings a year. You are talking about 26-84. Weddings are alot of work – after the shoot. I would suggest you start out with just 2 a month. Good luck to you!

PS I took a look at your photos. You might think about taking a course to improve your lighting.

The wedding seems easy but they are among the most difficult events to shoot. You have only a couple of hours to make memories for people that last a lifetime. Def. take classes on lighting and maybe start by assisting another wedding photo.

It will take you quite some time to build up a following that would allow you to do nothing else. I would also offer portraiture. Some regions have high school students pick there own photog for yearbook shots look into this in your area. Building a photo business is something you can do while you work another gig …photo assistant.

you will need to be ready to photograph on a couple different sites…bride home, church, reception, and the obligatory garden scene. Lighting is the killer, you will want a short lens 28mm for close-ups and a longer lens for church shots 135mm. go slow people remember bad photography and business before they remember good Wedding primarily come from word of mouth…also do bridal trade shows

Constructive criticism….1) based on your spelling, if you handed me a pamphlet or ad, I wouldn’t hire you…ever. 2) It seems to me if you are so business-minded, you should already have the answers to the specific questions you asked.

Market research to establish the viability of any business is the first step. That you ‘think’ you take ‘good pictures’ and that you used to sell cars..really does not appeal to me as far as taking a chance on your success. These things wouldn’t help convince me to use your services. Wedding photos are ‘priceless’ and with the cost associated, no new bride or groom wants to find out their ‘photographer’ has suddenly gone out of business. Consider a better business plan with much more market viability research (should include average prices etc.) before you take the step.

Ah, to be that young again…. Dude, I have great hopes for you. But those pictures you have on your site, aren’t the quality that people will pay for. (Then again, my early work wasn’t that great and I got paid…) You need to watch your lighting. Too many shadows and not enough light. Learn about ambient light, fill light, short lighting a face, and most definitely how to pose a subject. I am not being critical…..as a matter of fact, I am encouraging you to do the above to make yourself better. I wished my photography professors told me what I just told you…would’ve saved my A LOT of time and money. As far as getting that many weddings a month….Don’t hold your breath. In other words, don’t count on that as your sole support. Do other things as well. Photography is a general animal, and lots of places to find your niche. I don’t know any sole SEASONED PRO photographer who does 5 or more weddings a month. Then again, who knows, you may be the next GARY FONG. Good luck, Josh. And please research what I told you earlier, and try to work under a pro before you make the leap. Trust me. Been there and done it.

okay so I need 3 body paragraphs about why photography is great and what its about. My first paragraph is what photography is, second is what’s so great about photography, and i don't know the last paragraph. HELP!

How about giving some examples of people that made photography great? Who invented the camera? Which artists/photographers have utilized photography in a unique way?

I have Tesco reward vouchers to spend and want to subscribe to a photography magazine but which of the 3 listed is best for me? I am happy with the camera I have and just want to learn more about photographic techniques and just general photography stuff.

•Practical Photography Magazine
•Digital Photo Magazine
•What Digital Camera Magazine

Practical Photography is mostly about technique, irrespective of what you shoot with. Digital Photo is more about the equipment and software and is totally focussed on what the title suggests. If you read only this you could be forgiven for incorrectly thinking that 35mm film and transparency use is completely dead and that digital shooting is better in every single way (not so).. What Digital Camera is fine when you're looking for pre-purchase information whilst researching your next digital camera, but much of the information can be found already online. But it is convenient and handy and looks good in the toilet library ;-) . So of the three, I'd recommend Practical Photography, but variety is good so vary the reading diet once in a while and buy others to see what they're about.

Practical Photography is the daddy… longest running… though there are many really good photography magazines, like Photography Monthly… Digital Photo tends to be a lot about Photoshop…

it’s probably best to have a flick through them, look at their websites and see what one stands out to you as they are all helpful

answer here

Also, if I enter pictures in a portfolio can they be pictures that I have taken, but also edited, like enhanced the picture using a photo editing software?

"photography camera"? all cameras are made to photograph so that part kind of makes no sense.

Get a Nikon D40 or Canon Digital Rebel. Your portfolio should be photos that you took.

1) photography implies that you are using s fully adjustable camera like a 35 mm SLR or DSLR
2) most of the first classes in photography use film cameras. This is to a) allow the instructor to see all your images on each roll of film you use b) to slow you down, so you have to actually think about each shot you take and
c) limit you to one or two rolls of film per assignment (36 exposure rolls)
3) portfolios are supposed to show the best work you are capable of doing. This means perfectly exposed and composed images (with NO need to later ‘fix’ using a photo program).
4) if you are making composite images or want to show off some amazing before and after work, then using a program like Photoshop may be indicated.

answer here

A Canon Cyber-Shot 10.1 :) I love mine.

The Canon XS or XSi and Nikon D40 or D5000 is very good entry-level DSLR cameras.

Yes, it’s fine to include photos that have been post-processed (S/W edited) in a portfolio. Try to show a range of different types of phototypes/subject matter in the portfolio (nature, animals/birds, landscapes, portraits, macro, monochrome, etc.). Make sure they’re technically and aesthetically solid.

I highly recommend something from Nikon.

The new Nikon d3000 model has a new user interface, that's great for beginners, it shows them what there doing in detail. If you're wanting something better, go for the Nikon D5000, Nikon D60, or if you can afford it the Nikon D90 as a first DSLR.

Nikon:

Nikon D40, D60, D3000, D5000 = Entry Level DSLRs

Nikon D80, D90, D200, = Semi Professional Cameras

Nikon D700, D300 = Pro/Semi Pro Camera

Nikon D3, D3x = Professional Line Cameras

I have used canon’s brand so I couldn't tell you what their line is like but I have watched reviews.

If you're into the canon, I recommend there new basic DSLR, the Rebel T1i I think its called, just barely got released.

Good luck!

ALSO: Sony, Pentax, Olympus make great DSLRs. If you want reviews, I watch this guy on youtube all the time,

http://www.youtube.com/cameralabs

If you are really on a budget and want the best quality for the money, check out the P&S Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 [with a Leica lens and Live View] which has more features than most pro DSLRs that require auxiliary lenses not even equal to the single initial full-range lense that comes with the FZ28. It is reviewed at:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2008_reviews/panasonic_fz28_pg5.html

It’s an all-in-one 10.1-megapixel digital camera which includes (i) built-in image stabilization; (ii) HD720 quality video [Quicktime] which permits zooming while videoing skateboarding, action sports; (iii) an 18x zoom [27 - 486 mm (35mm equiv.)] “Leica” lens for nature and concert photography; (iv) up to 0.39-inch macro option; (v) up to 6400 ASA; (vi) takes up to 380 pictures per 120 min. battery charge; (vii) has a “burst speed” of 13 fps; and sells new for $464 at amazon.com. in the U.S.

Here’s an actual handheld picture of the moon:

http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/bf/1b/a83ac060ada0881604bad110.L.jpg

Re: Portfolio.

Almost any photos you have taken are allowed in a portfolio. However, the ones with the greatest value are those which you were able to sell to major publications or were commissioned for pay.
Good luck!

If you are talking film cameras, I would still say Nikon F4 with a 50mm or 85mm f/1.8 lens. Look on eBay. They are still inexpensive at around $150.

If digital, go now. Since many people ask similar questions, here is what I wrote for another person addressing the matter:

Professional cameras run around $2200 just for the body. A D300 or D700 (I use Nikon) are pro-grade. D90 (what I have) is semi-pro… between an entry-level and pro-grade.

-Camera with different lighting features – Nikon or Canon has this.

-I’m planning to take nature photos so a camera that takes pics with crisp detail – now you want a good lens that has a high focal length. I use a Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 VC. It does me just fine.

-can take photos with no glare (like if you’re taking a photo of water.)-think about polarizing filters then. It would be the best way to reduce such glare.

-Can take not blurry photos-honestly, this on is on you. You must learn to use the camera/lens to reduce blur. Usually, blur is due to either photographer motion or subject motion.

-I’m also doing portraits of others (black and white.)-get a good prime lens or a good zoom.

-good quality-Canon or Nikon again!

-good features of being able to take crisp pics at night time and daytime- again, Canon or Nikon.

-many options of how to take a photo-again, Canon or Nikon.

-can zoom in and zoom out a lot-like I said, the Tamron 18-270 does alot and covers most focal ranges with more than adequate quality.

-can take photos very fast-how fast? is 1/4000 sec fast? How many frames per second (fps)? Anything more than 4fps will cost $$$

-I’m willing to spend $1000 or less- Well, I can recommend a D40 with an 18-55 f/2.8 and a 55-200 f/2.8 for around $1200. My realistic recommendation is a D90 +Tamron 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 for around $1500 if you shop around. Don’t go used. You don’t get the warranty. Pay for new stuff and get the 5/7 year warranty!

I absolutely love photography and im going to take it after school, I have this image in my head that I want to travel the world taking photos of amazing views etc is there a type of photography like this?:(

Read these:
Note who is being interviewed - professional photographers who make their living doing travel photography.
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/can-you-make-it-travel-photographer-working-pros-reveal-market-realities
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/business-travel-photography-great-work-if-you-can-get-it
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/business-travel-photography-lots-clients-plenty-competition-too

travel photography 8) or photojournalism, reportage

landscape I can guide you on the net……visit web shots and post your pics there and then, set up a competitor web site!

What copyright do I own over my own photos?

I was fired from work today on unfair grounds(Plan to chase it up with the citizen's advice bureau). On Saturday I had been working at an Art Fair for my employer and was asked to take a number of photos and email them to her, which I did yesterday. When I was fired today (Unfairly) I decided I do not want her to use the photo’s as she had planned to use them in newspaper articles in the local press. I have sent her an email saying I own the photos and do not give her permission to use them but was wondering do I Have any other copyright over the photos? Thanks for the help.

YES, you own the copyrights for the photos, unless taking photos was your actual job at the company. Even if your employer asked you to take photos, the copyrights in the photos are still yours, unless taking photos was an official part of your job description. If she uses the photos without your permission, you can sue her. The only problem is that you'll have to hire a lawyer to do it, and you should probably register the copyright in the photos before you sue. Any photos you take are copyrighted by you as soon as you click the shutter, but in order to sue, it's best to register your photos with the government first, which you can do here (it's not free, though): http://www.copyright.gov/eco

You do not have any rights over those photos. You were there and taking pictures on the behalf and at the behest of your employer. As long as you were in her employ your work product belongs to her. Any pictures you took that day at that Art Fair belong to her whether you thought you were taking them for her project or not. If you are going to freelance you had better get a contract lawyer to help you draw up a protective contract so you don’t get your work stolen by overreaching clients.

They are NOT your copyright if you took the images in the course of your employment. The copyright belongs to your employer.

The “author” of a photo is the person who snapped the photo, and owns the copyright, unless you are employed by a photography studio or the media. If your job does not entail being a photographer, you own those photos, including publishing rights. If you were working the fair as a photographer for your employer, she owns the copyright. Note that registration is not required for photo copyright protection.