Professional Associations

[robert_sholl]

<p>I searched the board for questions on Professional Associations and the newest one I could find was from 2008. <br>

So my question - Is joining a professional association worth the expense, what specific benefits are most valuable and which ones are recommended?<br>

I have done some research and tentatively narrowed my my focus to PPA, ASMP and NPPA. <br>

Since photography will not represent more than 50% of my income for at least 5 years, ASMP membership will be limited to Associate status and therefore not include "Find a Photographer." In the short term, I think that disqualifies ASMP. Thoughts?<br>

PPA does not have an income standard for full membership and the two year associate membership would fit nicely into my 5 year plan for building my business. My ability to do commissioned work will be severely limited for the next 2 years.<br>

NPPA is the least expensive and least restrictive and includes "Find a Photographer." <br>

I am just starting on the business side of photography. I am building a stock portfolio (just sold my first image! Woo Hoo $.30!) and doing some very basic portraiture work. Additionally, I am selling nature/wildlife images through my own website. Im not sure if the more general nature of my work fits NPPA. In 5 years I will retire and my hope is to have a photography business that I both enjoy and provides with additional income. My retirement includes full medical/dental so I am not worried about group health plans.<br>

Thanks in advance!<br>

Rob</p>

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

<p>It depends.<br /> I'm active with our local TCPPA group and we provide quite a few benefits to our team that helps each member do better and better with their business. The dues are low (less than $100.00 per yr.) in comparasion to the benefits received.<br /> Do you have a local PPA affiliation that you could join?</p>

<p> </p>

[robert_sholl]

<p>Bill,<br>

As far as I can tell, the closest PPA is in San Francisco - about 2 hours away.<br>

Im guessing from the crickets here that there are not may photo.net users in a professional association.</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>Robert:<br /><br />I think there are a lot of people here that belong to various professional organizations. Maybe not so many that belongs to professional organizations and submit to micro-agencies. Your $.030 sale suggests you do.<br /><br />But check the ones out that seem to fit what you do and what you want back from an organization. I shoot prisons, police, forensics etc so I'm a member of the American Correctional Association as well as a few different police organizations. I'm also a member of the International Federation for Journalists.<br /><br />US photo organizations have never been really interesting for me because I live out in the sticks and there's nothing around really. Also, I don't license or sell any images at all to the public so my marketing needs are both limited and specialized so the "find a photographer" stuff that some organizations offer have zero appeal to me. If I liver in a metropolitan area I would absolutely be a member of an organization or two.</p>

[robert_sholl]

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe not so many that belongs to professional organizations and submit to micro-agencies. Your $.030 sale suggests you do.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL. I have noticed that micro stock is not exactly popular around here :<br>

I may have answered my own question because the benefits, such as they are, dont seem that significant. Im not sure what I was expecting but I have been underwhelmed by what professional photographic associations offer. I was hoping someone here could "sell" me on a membership but so far, nothing.</p>

<p> </p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>Robert:<br /><br />Typically things like networking with other photographers in your area, access to cheaper (group rate) insurance, classes, "find a photographer" services, discounts on books, rental cars, etc. Networking and insurance being the two most beneficial - unless you don't need networking. I really don't being a stock photographer not the slightest interested in licensing/selling to the public.<br /><br />Yes, supplying the micros will get you... ehm... disliked by many. Most people probably doesn't care, while others again are there right beside you. Personally I couldn't care less really since the micros - at least so far knock on wood - isn't taking much business away from me. Also note that you might be limiting yourself severely when it comes to submitting images to "real" agencies if you have them with micros. I don't have much against micros myself but I'd rather take 50% to 60% of a $250 licensing fee than $0.30 any day of the week. I'm fortunate enough that my images license well with traditional agencies. For others I'm sure the situation is different.</p>

[robert_sholl]

<p>Mikael - I think we can all use networking but right now it is not as important to me simply because I am not at a point where I could do much referral work. Business insurance is something I need but I have health care covered. I think for the next year or so I will continue to monitor the associations and see what I like about them.<br>

For the most part, the images I am submitting to microstock agencies would have just sat on my hard drive. Microstock has been a GREAT education for me. I initially submitted my "best" images only to discover that micro's dont care about artistic quality, they want flexible images. And I also discovered my version of "sharp and noise free" was neither. The brutal feedback ("image not selected, image not selected, image not selected") was really a good thing. I think it has made me a better photographer and it has certainly made me a better editor of my own pictures. I feel like I am better equipped to submit to a "real" agency because of my micro education.<br>

Thanks again for the feedback and advice.<br>

Rob</p>