Photo Blog

« March 2008 | Main | May 2008 »

April 2008

April 29, 2008

Some wedding photography statistics and estimates

According to this web page, there are 2.4 million weddings per year in the United States, generating “over 60 billion dollars a year in wedding and ceremony related expenses.”

The same source states that wedding photography averages 6.6% of wedding spending, so wedding photography is a $4 billion industry.

How many wedding photographers are there? Well if two-thirds of the weddings have a professional photographer, and each photographer averages 20 weddings per year, then there are 90,000 wedding photographers. That means there are five times as many wedding photographers as there are actuaries in the U.S.

But how many of these wedding photographers are making six figure incomes? Alas, probably not too many. You need to charge a lot more than $2,000 per wedding to be a six figure wedding photographer. The six-figure wedding photographer needs to charge $8,000 per wedding, and if he clears $6,000 net income per wedding, and shoots only 20 weddings per year, then his income is $120,000 per year.

But there are top wedding photographers who shoot one wedding per week, and have a low paid staff to do the dirty work like photoshopping the pictures and putting albums together. These top guys are making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

Are amateurs with digital cameras threatening the industry? Not for the top guys. The people who are paying for six-figure weddings will always be willing to spend in excess of $10,000 on photography for the wedding (as long as people continue to believe that photography is a "required" part of a wedding).

April 24, 2008

Joe Buissink: rich wedding photographer

The story of Joe Buissink is inspiring to anyone who might want to be a wedding photographer. He was in his forties, and in the third year of a Ph.D. program in neuro-psychology when one day he decided he wanted to be a wedding photographer. Maybe he realized that wedding photographers make a lot more money than neuro-psychology professors, yet they need a lot less education?

So there he was, a guy who was a hobbyist photographer who shot landscape photos but had minimal if any experience with portraiture or photojournalism. Nevertheless, he shot two weddings by offering to do the work for free, and then he had a portfolio in which to get paying gigs. Now he gets paid five figures per wedding, and even once shot a $100,000 wedding. Yes, Joe Buissink made more money shooting just a single wedding than the average guy makes working for an entire year.

With regards to the best way to start out, Joe Buissink clearly had the right idea to shoot the weddings for free. A lot of wedding photographers try to start out by offering their services for really low prices, and then all they get to shoot are blue collar weddings with fat brides in cheap-looking low class venues. This is not a good way to build a portfolio that will bring in the high-end clients.

Internet bibliography

February 2003 Rangefinder Magazine article
July 2005 Rangefinder Magazine article
Joe Buissink’s website

April 23, 2008

Wedding photography, part II

Two days ago, I wrote a post about how wedding photography is easy money. The post picked up a surprisingly large number of comments from angry wedding photographers. Many comments accused me of writing the post only to get “hits” for my blog. Believe me, I had no idea that so many people would find the post—I figured that ten or twenty people would read it and one person or so would leave a comment, like most of my other posts.

What I did learn about wedding photographers is that they are a very defensive bunch, and they have a very inflated sense of their self-worth. I suppose that the defensiveness is the result of the cognitive dissonance caused by the difference between their self-view and the reality.

Brady, the wedding photographer from Rochester New York, was kind enough to fill in the numbers in a comment he left to the previous post.

  • His normal large wedding package requires 30-40 hours per work.
  • The price for a normal package is $6,000 to $8,0000.
  • Brady didn’t say what his profit was per wedding, so here is some guesswork. The normal package includes a medium or large album, two parent albums, and a second photographer. I’ll guess that the blank albums cost $800 (fancy-shmancy wedding stuff is ridiculously overpriced) and that the second photographer gets paid $250 (photographers who don’t own their own wedding photography business get paid crap). It also costs him some money to printout all the photos. $250? This probably leaves Brady with a $5,500 marginal profit for a normal wedding.
  • Brady shoots only 20 weddings per year, but he makes so much profit per wedding that he still has an estimated gross income (that’s revenue minus cost of goods sold) of $110,000 per year.
  • Brady has some other expenses such as equipment, liability insurance (the PPA charges $1000 to $1500 per year for this), and advertising/marketing. Perhaps Brady only makes $100,000 per year after these expenses?

Is Brady making easy money? For Rochester, NY (far away from New York City), $100,000 is a damn good income for a part-time job. He seems to work less than half as many hours per year as a regular full-time white collar worker. If Brady can increase the number of weddings he does to 30 per year, he can get his income up to around $150,000, meaning he’d be earning more money than most medical doctors in the Rochester area.

Now, let me address some of the weird comments the previous post received.

One day of work huh?

My first post never said the wedding photographer only works one day per week, the post said that the wedding photographer “only has one high stress day.” The photographer has to do additional work during the rest of the week, but it’s low-stress work, done without a boss breathing down his back or artificially imposed deadlines. The wedding photographer has complete flexibility to take a day off whenever he wants, as long as it’s not one of the few days during the year in which he has to shoot a wedding. Based on Brady’s explanation of his work habits, he has a lot more days off than the regular white collar worker.

Brady himself asks the following question:

A question for you, Michael, how many people, who just so happen to have a suit in their closet, are trying to take your 9-5 job each day, despite having no or limited qualifications, and of those very few people trying to take your job just by showing up in a suit, how many of those people are actually being hired by your boss to replace you?

Actually, for the typical white collar worker, there are two billion people in China and India willing to do your job for a fraction of your salary. Pick up the Wall Street Journal sometime. People are being outsourced left and right. One of the big advantages of wedding photography is that your job can’t be outsourced.

Sam wrote:

The waitress who toils to earn tips, the miners who work 15 hour shifts in dangerous conditions...all good examples of jobs that are harder than wedding photography, but guess what...they CHOSE those jobs

Sam must have been smoking the Ayn Rand weed. No one would ever “choose” a crappy job like coal mining if he had a better option available.

Brady, again, said:

The barriers to entry in this field are surprisingly low…

Another commenter echoed that notion. Whenever someone can make $100,000 per year in a part-time job, there are obviously barriers to entry that allow him to do this, otherwise everyone would crowd in and the cushy job would disappear.

The guy who charges $500 for a wedding is obviously not making the six figure salary. What prevents him from increasing the price to $7,000 like Brady charges and doing 20 weddings per year? Those are the barriers to entry.

In order to get to Brady’s income level, you need (1) above average intelligence (this disqualifies 50% of the population); (2) a few years of experience photographing weddings so you can get to Brady’s skill level; (3) a marketing network.

Finally, let me address the supposedly expensive “equipment costs” that several comments mentioned. In reality, wedding photography is a very cheap field to enter from a capital perspective. That’s the ironic contradiction of the comments—one commenter says photographers face high equipment costs, and then another commenter bemoans the fact that anyone with a camera can compete against him.

It costs a lot more money to become a doctor or lawyer. Just a single semester of graduate school tuition ($20,000+) is more than enough money to completely equip the photographer with expensive camera equipment for many years. White collar professionals often find themselves paying monthly student loan payments exceeding $1,000 per month, and unlike the equipment and insurance costs of the self-employed wedding photographer, student loan payments (except to a very limited extent) are not tax deductible at all.

The following comment was written elsewhere on the web, but in response to my post:

Anyone with a bit of common sense can tell you that real estate, banking and currency trading is where the BIG money is.

It's true that there's much bigger money in investment banking, trading, and money management, but in order to get a job like that you need an MBA from Harvard, Wharton, or Columbia. If you can get into a top business school, then it would be dumb to pursue a wedding photography career. But on the other hand, for people who can't get admitted to the Wharton MBA program, wedding photography looks like a pretty lucrative field.

April 21, 2008

Wedding photography: easy money with a camera

The easiest way to make money with a camera is by becoming a wedding photographer. If the average wedding photographer earns* $1,900 for a wedding, he only has to shoot 53 weddings per year to make a six-figure income. Wedding photographers who earn $5,000 for a wedding are making more than a quarter of a million a year. Not bad for one day of work per week. No wonder why Marketwatch reported that wedding photographers are one of the ten most overpaid jobs.

Wedding photographers, if asked about their status as top ten overpaid jobs, will whine about the “stress” of shooting a wedding. I have no doubt that it’s stressful, but so is every other job in the U.S. The regular working stiff has to work in a high stress job eight hours or more per day for five consecutive days, while the wedding photographer only has one high stress day, then six days to relax before his next wedding.

Someone will probably ask the question, “if wedding photography is such easy money, why isn’t everyone doing it?” The answer is barriers to entry.

There are two barriers to entry: acquisition of knowledge capital, and acquisition of marketing capital. The only way to learn wedding photography is to apprentice to another wedding photographer, and even if you want to apprentice for free, you probably won’t find any takers. The smart wedding photographer doesn’t want to train the competition.

Even after you learn the business, it’s difficult, at first, to find any clients.

But once you learn the business, and once you acquire a reputation among wedding planners and others in the wedding industry/scam so that you get a lot of referrals, it’s all easy coasting along on your six-figure income.

Footnote

* The Marketwatch article says that an average wedding photographer "earns" $1900. That's "earns", and not "grosses." Indeed, in looking through wedding photographers' websites, they typically charge $2000 for a wedding package that does not include a wedding album, just a few prints that maybe add $100 of costs, so yes, the average wedding photographer seems to earn about $1,900 on a wedding. Furthermore, most wedding photographer websites don't list prices, so I suspect that only the cheaper photographers put a price on their website.

For example, this wedding photographer in Rochester NY charges a minimum of $2000 to take five hours of photos, and that includes no extras at all, if you want an album you have to pay him an extra $2,150 for a "medium-size" album. So yes, maybe it takes him some time to make the album, but he's making quite a bit of profit on the album. This guy is probably pulling in over $150,000 per year if he's well booked, and that's a damn high salary for Rochester, NY. That's more than a family doctor makes, and unlike the doctor, the wedding photographer didn't have to borrow six figures to attend many years of medical school. A wedding photographer doesn't need to go to college at all.

UPDATE

Apparently, if you want to get a lot of people to visit your blog, all you have to do is write a post about how wedding photography is easy money. But you have to put up with a lot of nasty comments.

Someone who calls herself “Hope” wrote a great response to this post on another internet message board (original can be found here). I repeat it below:

Wedding photographers can make as much as doctors without the years of school, long hours clocked in the ER for the first few years and extremely high cost of keeping a practice. They can make as much as or more than miners without working twelve or fifteen hour shifts in a mine where they are putting their life at risk. Wedding photographers make more than nurses and nurses' aids, who get paid only slightly more than minimum wage to wipe people's butts, wipe up vomit and watch people die on a regular basis. Wedding photographers make more than prison guards, who on a regular basis are assaulted, stabbed, pelted with feces, sexually molested or even raped, and through it all have to worry about being sued/fired for so much as laying a hand on said prisoners who revile them so much.

Tell a cop to "outsource" being in the line of fire. Tell a waitress she should demand higher tips because her time is valuable and she should refuse customers who give her a hard time. Tell someone in the military just back from two tours in Iraq that wedding photography is not easy money.

Let's be honest here. You set your own hours. You decide what clients you work with and when. You don't have to answer to anyone but yourself and to some extent the specific person you're working for. A "hellish day of work" would consist of poor lighting conditions and rowdy or rude wedding guests. Does wedding photography take talent, good business sense, etc.? Yes. Is it "easy" in the sense that any untrained person could, with fortitude, randomly decide to get into it and plausibly make a good living for themselves with a small investment? YES.

There are jobs that are easier than wedding photography. And there are jobs that garner more money. But no one can convince me that all things considered, wedding photography is anywhere NEAR the bottom of the pyramid. When people say, "OMG, I could be a wedding photographer and it'd be easy money!" often times they are comparing wedding photography to the jobs they have had or the jobs their loved ones have had -- and you know what, in that respect, they are absolutely right.

UPDATE 2

I wrote a followup post in response to the angry comments that this post received.