The Future of Photography as a Business

The Future of Photography as a Business

This may be appalling to some, or realistic to others, but I think if we don't discuss the state of the profession of photography we will eventually regret it. When it is more than a hobby, how has the industry changed? Is it a good change? Has technology helped or hurt the professional?

The Reality

As with everything in life, the only constant is change. We would be foolish to accept that photography as a profession is indeed changing. It's subjective as to if the evolution of the industry is good or bad for the professional.

The Industry

In the past I've known several professional portrait photographers that easily made a great living by photographing families, seniors, and children. Two studios in my hometown had both existed for over 30 years and made a living by selling good quality work at industry standard pricing. Today, both of those studios are out of business, I suspect for slightly different reasons. Trying to investigate the reason for the failure would be somewhat challenging because in my opinion, it's not just one thing to blame.

Back to the way the industry has changed, I know that one of the studios continued to do things exactly the same way they always had and that is almost never a recipe for success, if you don't adapt with changing technology and times, it's likely you will fall behind and eventually become irrelevant. But that alone didn't do it. Combine some bad customer service, aggressive sales tactics, and a lack of marketing, all the while with tremendous increases in number of competitors, and it shouldn't be too difficult to start to see why the business would begin having some problems.

Blame the WACs

Everyone wants to quickly blame the WACs (With A Camera, referred to as MWAC, GWAC, etc.) for flooding all the local markets with subpar work and cheap or free pricing.

This has been a huge hot-seat topic locally in my area as there are well over 600 photographers in a town with about a 10 mile radius. It's seen as a double-edge sword to some, since many of us want to help like-minded folks, and let's face it, photography is a fun and rewarding thing to do. Teaching and watching someone grow is also a fun and rewarding thing to do. But I think we'd also be foolish to think that the newbies aren't affecting at least some of the professionals' client base. Many professionals (including one of the long-term studios I mentioned earlier) took the stance of "our work is better, and our customers will see that." That held true for some time, and you can't just always blame someone else when your business begins to have issues. 

But have the newbies hurt the industry? Some will argue they have, citing the flood of work across social media and word of mouth tremendously overpowering any other source of marketing.

Technology advances have made it appealing for many new photographers to jump into the industry, and after awhile many newbies begin to charge (often too little) for the work, which in turn over the past few years has conditioned many customers' expectations to that of $50 sessions with all images provided on a disc. Whether you agree or disagree with this practice, I think we can all agree it does have some form of effect on the industry as a whole.

Help the Newbies?

This has been an interesting chapter in my career from when I started to where I am now. Full disclosure: I used to work as a retoucher for one of those long time established studios. Spending 50-plus hours a week with an older established photographer sort of molded me to have the same views on the newbies, amateurs, and the like. It wasn't a positive experience. For years I had the same attitude they did. I hated the newbies and I wanted to really make sure people saw my work quality and I thought I would be fine on that path. I was pretty dense looking back at the situation, and had I continued on that path acting the very same way I'd fail just the very same way.  It was obvious a change was needed so I sort of did a reboot and looked at everything with fresh eyes.

I now have a different view on the industry, and it has helped tremendously for the things that are in my power to change (me, basically). Being negative hadn't helped anything grow. I currently teach, and it has not affected my business in either way. 

Established Versus Starting Out

Many of the successful studios have been established and solid in the community they've been in for years. Some will say that in today's market, becoming established or getting off the ground is much more difficult than it once was. Not necessarily impossible as there are new success stories, but I think we can all agree that the level of difficulty has certainly increased. I know many very talented photographers who are often more skilled than these established ones and they just can't seem to gain any traction.

Having a reputation and established customer base can most definitely help keep a business going. Return customers and referrals are often the lifeblood of a studio. But where does that leave the new crop of talented professionals? Is it possible to still get established as a new studio, or has the industry crossed a threshold where there's no going back?

It's not just photography. I was speaking to an established taxidermist who said the crop of new taxidermists flooding the market would make it impossible for him to get going if he were only starting his business now even with his same skills. He is very busy and successful, riding on his business of over 20 years. He cited another local taxidermist with excellent skills who could not make it due to the sea of competition and now works a regular job. Sound familiar? It's not just photography, but the way I see it we have two choices: we can stay doing what we have been doing or we can adapt and do what we must to keep the industry going. But my research has indicated that the photography industry is growing faster than almost any other industry. So that only perpetuates that same situation.

Part-Time Professionals

I have observed and learned that a great many of the professionals in the industry that I have always looked up to now have a main job, or secondary source of income. In an industry that was once booming with full-time professionals, I think it's an interesting shift to see highly-talented folks working regular jobs and doing photography "on the side." Has that in itself hurt the perceived legitimacy of the professional?


Technology has certainly given us some awesome new tools to work with: cameras with incredible low noise, low-light capabilities, lights that pretty much remove the sync speed with flash, lenses that are razor sharp wide open, beautiful touchscreen LCDs for zoom and checking on photos that were just taken. All those things are wonderful tools but they also make it that much easier for more and more people to jump into the industry. Again, just an observation. I am not stating this is necessarily a bad thing, just assessing how it may be affecting us all and our business bottom line.

Is There a Future for Full-Time Professionals?

So in summary, is there a future for full-time professionals in the industry?

Personally, I think there is a future but we need to adapt and change to be able to sustain. Running things the way they always have been will almost certainly guarantee failure. This is a difficult pill to swallow because most humans like to keep things as they are. We are resistant to change, but learning to adapt is likely to be crucial to survival in an ever-increasingly saturated market.

This certainly isn't meant to sound like a negative article, but rather observing and learning and making sure we are aware of the changes around us. It's often so easy to get lost when you are too close to the forest to see the trees. It's an elephant in the room that many photographers don't wish to discuss, but I feel that being aware is a vital element to continued success.

What do you think? Is there a future for a full-time professional?

Image via Little Visuals.

Bill Larkin's picture

Bill is an automotive and fashion inspired photographer in Reno, NV. Bill specializes in photography workflow and website optimization, with an extensive background in design and programming.

Log in or register to post comments

I always hear about people complaining about others shooting for cheap or free, but I always think "Is that a gig you really wanted?" Right now, a woman in a local FB group is looking for photographers to shoot multiple weddings for the price of $150. The amount of people falling over themselves to do it made me laugh, but others got seriously upset about it. Why? Were you going to do it for that price? I've been shooting weddings for about 4-5 years now, and none of my former clients were looking for someone to do it for $150. Just find better clients.

she is actually offering $15 per hour to shoot, not 150. and you are right, it's crazy the amount of people trying to get onboard.

Yeah, you're right! It was $15 an hour. A wedding I shot last weekend took me about 11 hours, but most are around 8. So most likely they're not even pulling in $150.

Amazing...but unfortunately for those who have no expectations or with little money it’s the way to go? They will end up some crappy images as their wedding day memory for sure.

If they don't pay 3000$ for a wedding I am not getting out of bed. they have to do a full package before, during, after wedding photographs. I don't take make stories.

Agreed and disagreed. It creates a precedent and you better wish your next clients do not hear of that $15/hour thing because that won't help you increase or keep your prices... I did some of what this article is about and changed. 90% of the weddings I did this year were cheaper weddings where I earned 1/4th or less than what I usually charge. But I also worked an awful lot less. And I was amazed to see clients rushing to me because I was the only one to offer a package under $1000 - I think most of them didn't even pay attention I was only covering the wedding for 4 hours. Many of them let me off the hook after 3 hours because they had poorly planned the whole thing and were starting dinner. I am talking about 90% of clients from UK and Ireland and I am based in Spain by the way... And I have seen a few pompous and expensive weddings covered with a cheap ass camera and a consumer zoom in the hands of a very unprofessional looking young man or woman with dirty trainers and a pair of jeans. Guess what... no one gave a damn. What people want are a few good looking classic wedding shots they have friends and iphones for the rest and selfies !!! They want immediate satisfaction and recognition. Perhaps the next thing will be to offer a service of feeding a facebook or an instagram feed for your bride and groom to let all the people they didn't invite how good looking they are and how nicer is their wedding on their respective social medias ! Oh wait some of them are already doing that themselves with their freaking phones while you try to get them nice natural shots... I'm out

I've seen it done at a wedding I attended as a guest. The couple set up a hashtag for their wedding day and people instagram their phone photos with that hashtag - a short while later the photos appear on a projector screen on rotation.

P.S. Saludos desde Valencia.

Quite an informative dissection.

It’s different though because you need good eyes to make good photos..not only that..good social and business sense are prerequisites for wedding business.

Such a camera already exists.

Lytro has proven failure lol

oooohhh no ! Like Justin said, they just moved up their game, A LOT onto 3D cinema. Just watch some stuff about them & what they do. You will be amazed.

They’re not even bothering with handheld cameras anymore. They’ve moved on to 3D cinema cameras.

We are definitely heading towards this direction. Everything will be digitalised and recorded but still you need someone to make a decision on which frame to extract not be mention the lighting and arrangement of the shot. That requires a lot of artistic decisions.

Sticking to the past? We need to imagine the future!

Bob is correct, AI will reduce the massive data down to a select few and people will simply select the content they like the iPhone already does that, so does EyeEm, Instrgram and various others.
Yes it can produce duds, but its only going to get better..

That kind of makes me sad. So, essentially, technology/AI is removing the humanity from art.

I have to disagree there. I did an awful lot of darkroom from when I was 17 until 23. Darkroom is easy peasy. I find it even easier than Lightroom. The only this that is harder is to source your chemicals. I stopped because it became a pain in the arse to find the ingredients and film became SOOOO expensive. But the limitation made it way easier to find the look you were after. You had to commit.
Now you have so many opportunity and variants that it is harder to produce the work you want.
I tend to become over-zealous with the size of the grain I want to use in a said shooting, do I want my colors to be pastel or saturated? Warmer or colder? Or maybe black and white? Do I want this BnW to look like my old Delta3200 or maybe like my PanF?
The only thing that happened is that it became more accessible. And that is a good thing.

For the majority, yes.

Art will continue and photography will have a small role in there somewhere but the original article is about the business of photography.

iPhone tech could be heading in a wrong direction though since Apple doesn’t invest in optics so they only care about how to make photos LOOK better on their phones. Look at their Studio mode. Yes they can get better but only in software realm.

You are missing the point - which is the role of the photographer for consumers is disappearing...(rolling eyes and clutching forehead)

Consumers don’t care about the difference between optics and software archiving a ‘look’ or style.

I find myself getting busier and busier which contradicts to what you are claiming? I was referring to he perceived “look” technical firms like apple are trying to market...when everyone’s “portrait” mode photos look the same this look will no longer be desired by customers. People only look for the new thing which only creatives can offer.

Why didn't you say just pulling frames for pictures of a high-speed camera at 120fps at wedding video session it easier now.

It’s exactly like pulling frames. But with current tech you still need to get it right in camera. Even with future tech allowing you to create any scene with any composition such as need to know what’s good and create attractive content. That’s certainly not from some artists brain from a hundred year ago. Mastering art and style is very different from mastering software and a “camera”.

I saw the future... those Hospital Medical Photography Jobs closed down in 5 years off 1982. Outsourced to external forces. Like Weddings it the Art just like commercial photography. The kind of tech you need to do that is all about the lighting equipment. If you can find people who need your talented Art type skills they may be high-end clients, the average middle-class cant and wont afford it.

Video is the future of photography. Clients want more video for website and weddings if you could do both at the same time you win. I took a photograph of a group and for some reason, this lady would not keep her eyes open. when I took the picture. I tried 3 shot in a row. still, her eye were closed I used no flash. I ended up photoshopping other peoples eyeballs onto her. Creep I know a video grab would have been better.

What ai? Siri can barely talk. Ai means programmed not creative. Not for another few more decades.

Yes because its a New market and its not saturated with similar ideas and technology.

I am saying AI does not have the capacity to be creative, not for the foreseeable decades.

Instead of playing the dictionary game, can you prove your ai can take better photos? How about showing us some?

I get your point but honestly think you're fooling yourself. At least where we are the fist professional wedding clients turn to is a wedding planner and that's purely because 90% of them are from the UK and we're in Spain and they don't speak the language. And they get fed what they're given and give very little though now to your artistic eye or none of that fancy stuff. What they look at in their photos is how good they look, not more...99% of the time

Another good article by Fstoppers however this is not the first article written about this very subject and like many it ends with the acknowledgment that evolution is required - which it is - however it appears the foreseeable answer is create YouTube content about photography, teach others to do the last point, Sell kit, promote kit, make kit, sell kit, repeat, repeat, repeat.

I think the hard reality is the answer to the question is define by the industry which makes the most out of photography and its nobody holding the camera.

Canon, Nikon, LeeFilters, Sigma and hundreds more do an excellent job at 'selling the dream'

Take fstoppers for example; producing engaging content and tutorials which are in service of 'selling the dream' and very little content on actually running a business. This is not a criticism but simply my personal opinion and acknowledgment that is the modern world of photography.

Excellent point indeed.

What dreams does fstoppers offer other than some articles? I don’t know many sites who writes photo related articles and that’s why I am here. Maybe I should read something else though lol

Photographers suck at sales, they cant sell themselves, the ones who can thrive, the ones who cant complain about this and that. It is like this in all the arts, people want to pay for things, artists are just not very good at getting them to do this.

Value of artwork is esoteric, you cannot put a price on Art and say it is right or wrong as it is one of a kind. Something is "worth" what someone is willing to pay.

I agree, amateurs usually overcharge for subpar work.

You're right. If you have a good handle on marketing nothing else really matters. Not the equipment, not the technology and not all of those WAC's out there flooding the market with low quality work.

Maybe... But for wedding photography for instance, sell me why I should hire an expensive pro while at least 3 or 4 of my guests are some of these newbies who own a decent camera a couple of prime lenses and are so passionate about their hobby and not stressed about making a living of it that they actually get quite decent result...You know in many places in Asia you have foot massage for $3 half an hour and they're fool. Raise the price at $10 and people will start rubbing each others feet at home !

I subscribe to the philosophy that now is a better time than ever in history to be a photographer. If you shoot like an artist, but think like a businessperson, what the WACs do is irrelevant. Marketing, marketing, marketing. I'm talking about shoe leather marketing, not wasting effort trying to hit the perpetually moving SEO / social media algorithm target. Meeting people in your target market and engaging them in person over time (the pre-Internet way of building a word-of-mouth network) works as well today as it ever has. It's the "slow and steady wins the race" method, but it works.

Buyers shopping for the lowest price will never be the premium shoppers you want as clients. Premium shoppers will never hire the $150/day photographer for the same reason they buy luxury cars, even though Toyota and Honda offer excellent vehicles at a third of the price.

Those traditional portrait studios need to adapt to the times. People are busy and don't have time to coordinate everyone's schedules and get matching outfits for everyone and haul them off to a studio for old school family portraits. But there is a market for Family Photojournalism IF the photographer educates the consumer (MARKETING). The luxury car buyer is intrigued by the notion of having a photographer come to their home to create family photos that capture what the family truly looks like, as opposed to what I call The Simpsons Photo where everyone sits on the couch perfectly behaved. And, by the way, Mr. or Mrs. Client, with today's technology, I can bring two light stands, an umbrella, and one or two speedlites and create a professional, studio headshot for you while I'm there.

Family photos, headshots, environmental portraits of them in their home hobby space making whatever it is they make...How much you sell that "personal photographer service" to a potential client for is entirely a matter of your business savvy. And how you get that product into the right circles (where WACs don't even get considered) is about marketing.

That's just one example. For photographers who focus on studying business and marketing, there couldn't be a better time to be a photographer. For people who focus on being an artist, yeah, it's way harder to make a living than before the smartphone/DSLR era.

Peter Drucker (anybody running a business should learn who he is) said that all successful businesses are built on two things: marketing and innovation. Those two departments pay the salary of everybody else in the company, regardless of how big the company is. If you have a great product (innovation), but you fail at marketing, you go out of business. If you're great at marketing, but you have a bad product, you go out of business. That's only partially true in photography, though. You can be a great marketer and a subpar shooter and make a fortune while a truly gifted photographer in your city has no clients. It happens all day, every day. Running a successful photography business is about running a successful business. It's not about photography.

Love your Hustle and Vision Lenzy.

I'm actually referring to this being the best time in history to be a professional photographer and I'm speaking from the perspective of an on-the-ground, full-time working professional, not a cheerleader. What an unnecessarily nasty tone you've taken in your reply to comment. I'd much rather invest my efforts in being a cheerleader than in being a troll. I don't know what more tangible proof you're looking for than paying customers, which is the proof my statements are built on. I went full-time around this time last year and I now pay my mortgage with one client per month. My business is steadily growing and I don't see a shrinking market. Comprehensive forecasts are just that. Comprehensive. Individuals who get out and hustle can create a market for themselves and make money. People like me do it every day.

Bradford Rowley, who charges $10K per portrait, has said he doesn't participate in photography forums because there are too many negative people who insist on disputing others' success and the revenue potential of a well-run photography business. I totally see his perspective. I went from hobbyist to making a little money to making decent money and I'm on the way to making great money. And I see people in forums that just keep saying it's not possible to do. Nothing is possible if you decide that it isn't. I don't let forecasts and analyses determine what I'm able to accomplish. I decide what I want from life and I put the work in to make it happen. We can all do the same. Not sorry if it bothers you that I try to inspire others rather than discourage them.

That may apply to some areas in the world (US perhaps) but I can assure you that's getting really rare in Europe. People have good technology to document themselves their everyday life and feed their social medias. And in the unlikely event they want more, there always is one of the free "newbies" photographer with a decent enough camera and skills in their close circles. they don't even have to let a stranger in on their private life !

Your points are well taken. However, in addition to reading Drucker, any business person should read “The Innovator’s Dilemma” by Clayton M. Christensen. In short, digital technology has disrupted traditional photography. Not only has it hurt photography as a business, it has also supplanted the great photo labs. The great wedding photographers had the unique skill to shoot film and use lights to create amazing photographs for weddings and model shoots. These negatives were sent to print labs with skill craftsmen processing prints. Digital cameras and Lightroom/photoshop has made it possible for those with less skills to produce decent work. The market is now flooded with photographers putting out acceptable work. Whenever there is increased competition, prices will drop thereby destroying margins. The true artist will always rise to the top. However the portion of the market willing to pay their prices is shrinking. More soccer moms are shooting snaps than pros shooting portraits. Even Canon, Nikon, Leica et. al. are losing market share to iPhone. The great pro nature and landscape photographers are making the bulk of their living doing workshops for amateurs. Message: never give up your dream, but understand your market.

If you establish a brand for yourself, you’ll be fine. If you think your work should speak for itself or your pricing will solely lead to your ongoing success; and in turn the future of your career, better get ready to go back to collage. You need to get people, companies and brands to hire you because you’re you. No price will be too high, your competitors will not even be considered as part of the conversation. Your portfolio isn’t enough. Your pricing isn’t enough. Build a brand and a name for yourself, if you don’t, be prepared to fail. I just quit my job of 20 years working on Honda’s in May and now I shoot all of the photography and make all of the commercials for a multimillion dollar world wide electronic company. The only reason I was able to fabricate what I consider a ‘dream come true’ career at 37 years old was because I branded myself and hustled that brand. Hate it, disagree with it, ignore it; this is the game of Professinal Photography in 2017.

Outstanding. You are a perfect example of what I'm talking about, Martin. The whole "Is the photography business dead?" conversation that keeps coming up is absurd. People who understand business will always be able to make money.

My alma mater has a business school that people come from around the country to attend. I never understood how a general business degree could be useful or what it was good for since it wasn't specific to any particular kind of business. It wasn't until I started my own business and learned through trial and error what it takes to run a successful photography business that I realized that I could apply 100% of the business aspects of running a photography business to running any kind of business. The end product I deliver is a photo. Everything I have to do to position myself to get someone to pay me to deliver that photo is universally applicable. The end product could be shoes, life coaching, home improvement services...anything...and the business activities are identical.

Now, I get why an MBA is valuable. Running a business is running a business is running a business. Too many who want to run a photography business are interested only in photography and have no knowledge about business or interest in learning it or the motivation to do what it takes to run a business. 95% of my daily photography business activities are in no way specific to photography. It's a lot of not cool, not exciting business activities that don't involve me holding a camera. When you spend your days that way, you see unlimited revenue opportunities...polar opposite of the "Is the photography business dead?" mindset.

I'm in discussions with a rep for a major telecommunications carrier to be the house photographer for one of their conference/exhibit spaces. We're talking about me pricing event photography for them on a quarterly basis as opposed to one-off events. I created this opportunity for myself while wearing a business suit at a chamber of commerce event. What could be more boring? But that's what my days look like and I see plenty of money out here that WACs, cell phones, etc don't interfere with in any way. Photography is an unlimited revenue industry for those who focus on the business tasks.


But have the newbies hurt the industry?
Depends on what industry.

Wayne Gretzky famously said "I skate to where the puck will be, not where it has been."
The newbies, for the most part, are concentrated in the most obvious and popular markets namely weddings and portraits. Fashion and sports follow closely.

And yes, newbies have hurt that industry.

Commercial photography is a different fish.
While some commercial clients are low end many are willing to pay fairly for good work. It is also a field where a beginner can develop skills with less demanding and lower paying clients and grow a client base and make a transition to better clients.

It takes time and lots of work.
It also takes luck.

Luck is largely how I can say I have arrived at a very good paying level in photography.
Yes, I work hard but so do many. Luck favors the prepared but sometimes luck smiles on the unprepared.

Some people have shit luck.

It's incredibly refreshing to see someone admitting that luck plays a part in life. Most want to imply that they have just worked harder and smarter, and that's why they are successful where others have failed. I used to be an artist, and I was given an opportunity to apply, for lack of a better way to explain it, for a life-changing job with a multi-billion-dollar company. I was accepted, and it just became a matter of a lot of paper work. In the 2 weeks following, there was a sudden shake-up at the company, and my opportunity was swept away. It had nothing to do with me, but I was collateral damage. In another instance, I did a shoot for a rising star in the music world. He had already been the opening act for one of the biggest names in the industry. He was going to hire me as his personal photographer, and he wanted to introduce me to so many of the top people. He was in the final stages of signing a huge record and tour deal when something went south, and he walked away from it all.

I'm sorry for the long comment, but I could actually go on. I've worked 18 hour days. I've worked 3 jobs while going to school. Hard work often can't overcome terrible luck.

Now I'm at a crossroad, trying to decide which way to go. I spent 6 years taking care of my parents who got sick and died within 15 months of each other and then my sister, who had major complications from a car wreck, and I missed too many opportunities to do all that I had planned.

More comments