what's the secret to being one of the top 2% of successful photographers?

<p>I believe it was Galen Rowell who said he wasn't successful in photography until he married his wife. She had a head for business and was as much resposible for his success as he was.</p>

<p>Unfortunately Steve R above told the truth. Besides know how and talent kissing up and schmoozing are necessary in the world of any business. I work for a fortune 500 company and talent, work ethic and kissing up are all vital attributes.</p>

<p><em>I am a little unclear on the concept of asking people here what it takes to be in the top 2% of successful photographers, with all due respect to the excellent photographers here.</em><br>

JDM, it is not the practise on photo.net for contributors to present resumés, list professional qualifications and achievements, etc. but you would be making a big mistake to conclude that they are all know-nothing amateur wannabees. I personally would not dream of giving anyone advice on professional advancement unless it was based on solid first-hand personal experience. Enough said?</p>

<p>Here at PN, the self promotion model works well. Complement a photographer by a positive critique and it may very well be reciprocated. In that comment, I don't mean to imply that photographs that are not worthy receive attention. What I mean is that you need to develop a base of photographers that are interested enough in your body of work to look at it and offer some comments. It takes work to write something about a photo. Here on PN, it takes almost nothing to offer a rating, and you should treat these ratings accordingly. Keep expanding that base by offering comments. Look to other sites as well. I really like 500px.com.<br>

So, you need to attract attention. The best way to do that is to <em><strong>give</strong></em> attention, IMHO. And it doesn't hurt if you shoot nudes. I haven't figured out how you can make money at it, but it seems to draw attention and praise. It would be much more difficult to be acknowledged if you shot only ferns or goldfish.<br>

Do you have to be the best photographer. No. The hype created about mediocre stuff creates demand. How many recording 'artists' do I have to cite to make that point. Photographs are no different than the top 40. Were the Beatles the best musicians or was their success a result of the hype ( and perception) created around them? That's even in light of the 'White Album'.<br>

Great topic. Thanx for posting it.</p>

 

JDM,

 

Considering that this is the Business forum, that context would imply monetary success.

Start by being in the top 99%.

<p>I said the photographers here were excellent, as many of them really are. But the OP was not asking about 'excellence' - but rather about the "top 2%"</p>

<p>"Top 2% successful" is an awfully high bar. If it is to be defined, as indicated by Richard, on a financial basis, then I suggest that there is no reason for anyone here to get any body parts into a wringer over my comments.</p>

<p>Nothing I said was meant in the slightest degree to imply that all here are "know-nothing amateur wannabees." Nor on rereading my words do I see where that interpretation is justified.</p>

<p>I apologize to anyone who is among the top 2% of professional photographers in cash terms. Such a person would clearly be competent to tell someone how to join with them.<br>

By definition, 98% of everyone is not in the 2%. I personally would have no way of knowing who of us is in the top 2%, but I suspect that at least 98% of us are not.</p>

<p><em>I apologize to anyone who is among the top 2% of professional photographers in cash terms. Such a person would clearly be competent to tell someone how to join with them.</em><br>

JDM, I’m having trouble following your logic. You appear to be saying that anyone who is not among the top 2% highest earners is utterly incapable of giving any worthwhile advice on this subject. I’m not clear how this applies to, for example, most college lecturers, who are certainly not among the high earners but impart useful advice to students year in, year out. I’m also not sure how it applies to me – I worked professionally as a photographer from 1969 to 1976. During that time I took a handful of photographs of David Bowie which even today often appear on the walls of top galleries alongside the likes of David Bailey and others and, if I says it as shouldn’t, hold up quite well in this company. I furthermore have no hesitation when asked in giving demonstrations of basic portrait photography, studio still life work, etc to camera clubs, since I am fully trained in lighting techniques and have considerable experience as a demonstrator and studio photographer – notwithstanding the fact that I have taken no more than around 30 professional portraits in total in my career, mainly while employed as a staff photographer, and have earned no money to speak of through this whatsoever.<br>

False modesty apart, I feel fully entitled to regard myself as a world class photographer and well qualified to give advice (when asked) to students and those starting in the profession, Invariably I give them some general tips from my own experience but make sure above all that I point them towards the work of leading practitioners in the particular field in which they are interested. In the case of social photography in Britain, Annabel Williams has been THE outstanding success in commercial terms of the last decade, so I very often recommend a study (NOT slavish copying) of her work. On the other hand, I make no bones about stating that my annual income from photography is squarely in three figures. According to what you seem to be saying, in view of this income level, I have no business in giving advice to anyone. Or have I misunderstood something?</p>

<p>That's great for you David. If you feel that way, go ahead, advise, all you want. I know I did.<br>

Geez..<br>

My main point, which you never got to--having somehow felt that I was insulting your personal level of success on whatever area--was that the OP should do what fulfills his purposes in life, for which advice from others is only a small part.</p>

<p>By the way, I never mentioned money until Richard chimed in.</p>

 

<p><em>That's great for you David. If you feel that way, go ahead, advise, all you want. I know I did.</em><br /><em> Geez..</em><br /><em> My main point, which you never got to--having somehow felt that I was insulting your personal level of success on whatever area--was that the OP should do what fulfills his purposes in life, for which advice from others is only a small part.</em><br>

<em>By the way, I never mentioned money until Richard chimed in.</em><br>

I'm not really insulted or taking this personally, JDM, but I am trying to address the wider point that you seemed to be suggesting that only advice from cutting-edge practitioners is worth listening to and that others who offer advice are deluded time-wasters. Advice from top-notch people is of course valuable IF YOU CAN GET IT - very often these people are too busy to teach or advise or like to keep their cards close to their chest.<br>

Yes, you are completely right that people who want to succeed need to have a clear sense of purpose in their own heads, but taking advice and comparing notes with others I have found at all stages of my career to be a valuable way of acquiring knowledge much faster than I could have done on my own. Even after 55 years of picture-taking, I'm always learning something new on photo.net!<br>

And just to make it clear - there is no way I am suggesting that making money is the only objective of photography. There are vast non-material personal esthetic benefits, which to be frank interest me a lot more at my time of life than money making - dealing with even top galleries has been less than a pleasure, even when I sold work I often had to send reminder after reminder to get paid, whereas in my day job as a writer, my major corporate clients pay up after 3 to 4 weeks with no prompting.</p>

 

<p>The successful photograph is self promoting. You can even start that promotional work right here on photo.net. You can write a book about your photography, you can go to trade shows about photography, you can participate at a photography trade show, you can work with other photographers to network your work and on and on. The more you are interested in you the more you will succeed in your profession. Networking is a big tool even if it is at a party. Doing some free be's doesn't hurt either. Getting local recognition can go a long way. Traveling is also a way to promote yourself. You know you can rent a room at a YMCA or local recreation center and hold educational classes on photography incorporating your work and how you developed your style to help others succeed. Everyone you meet needs to know you are a photographer it really does help.</p>

<p>If I knew a foolproof answer to Laura Hendricson's question I'd write a book about it , make millions disclosing the secret , forget about beating my brains out with photography, and concentrate on collecting busty blond nymphomaniacs who are deaf and dumb own liquor stores for the rest of my short life.</p>

<p>top 2% is not good enough anymore, with the proliferation of photographers you need to be top 0.002%</p>