Re: [Leica] What's a photographer worth?

[Ted <tedgrant@home.com>]

Somebody wrote:

>>>>We are, after all, talking about photos you have already taken for another
purpose, so it's gravy.<<<

And this dumb ass  "so it's gravy"  business philosophy is why
photographers aren't millionaires!
Very few who primarily work as documentary photographers really make the
kind
of income they should without re-selling every image they shoot more
than
several times. And even then, there are many scratching the bottom of
the
barrel all the time who work as independents / freelancers compared to
staff
shooters.

Just because someone goes off to a far away place to photograph "neat
things"
doesn't mean they have buckets of money to do it, as most struggle
constantly
to break even at best.

So there isn't anything like, "photos you have already taken for another
purpose, so it's gravy."  Never ever!  And unless you've done this for a
number
of years you haven't got a clue of what you're talking about. And if you
have
time in,  you sure as hell wouldn't make that kind of remark!


Tina Manley put it in a very understandable way:

>>>>>>No! No! No!  It is called "stock" and it's how a lot of photographers
make their living.  If other photographers are giving away their stock,
it
makes it very difficult for those of us who are trying to make a living
from
it.  Documentary photography does not even pay expenses - as you point
out.<<<<<<<<<

And Tina, many a "stock / documentary photojournalist"  has gone broke
simply
by giving their work away not understanding the profit-loss scenario of
doing
business!

ted