Category Archives: photographer

Don’t blame Marissa Mayer if your photo business sucks

flickrPRO Dont blame Marissa Mayer if your photo business sucks

Shooters are a bunch of over-sensitive wusses. I shot stock from 1983-2003 (for The Stock Market which became Corbis and for Pacific Stock) and people were saying that stock was the death of professional photography, or digital was or the Internet was or Photoshop was. Stop being such little whiny babies — besides, most of the people who are complaining about Marissa’s statement aren’t REALLY pros and I have seen lots of their stuff and while they have DLSRs, they’re not very good, either. So, better to blame your images than blaming the CEO of Yahoo! and Flickr and now Tumblr.

OK, background.  This is all the brouhaha happening right now, real time, all over social media about this article written over at Petapixel, RIP “Professional Photographers” — you might want to go check that out and the above will make more sense.

My dad started shooting in the 70s when you could become rich as a professional photographer — or at the very least make a professional living. And you can now, too. You just have to treat photography like a full-time business. And you’ll hate that doctors and lawyers always have much better equipment than you do, too. When I did commercial, editorial, and stock photography, things were harder. My failings had to do with the fact that shooting slide film for Corbis meant that I would shoot and label 10,000 images, send them on to Corbis, and then over 9,000 of them would come back to me — they’d keep a thou if I was lucky.  And that 10k of slides were already edited down from who knows how many, dumped in the can (these were film days with slides).

I am no longer a shooter. I love photography and the prestige associated with having a contract with a big NYC agency; however, I loved being a geek more and I loved that my mad skills with computers, the internet, coding, and the web allowed me quite a bit more money and security than being a professional shooter did.

That said, the images paid my way around the world in 1996 as I traveled from DC to New Zealand; Australia; Bali, Indonesia; all up and down Thailand; and then to Paris, Utrecht, Amsterdam, Helsinki and all around Finland; Saint Petersburg, Russia, and then back home — all porting a Domke full of two bodies, a Nikon N90s and N90, a bunch of expensive 2.8 glass, and loads of batteries and Fuji 100 and Velvia slide flim — and also mailers. Lots and lots of mailers.

I haven’t even tried to embrace digital photography at the professional level, though I am tempted.  Then I remember how much work it takes to be a shooter. Only 1/3 is shooting and doing cool shit. Another third is editing and labeling and captioning and deleting and uploading and identifying and I guess doing Photoshop (see, back in the day, a slide was a slide, it was what it was), and then there’s the final third: business!

So, pro shooters (though all of your complaining and hating on Marissa are probably more along the lines of advanced amateurs, fan boys, and possibly even talentless technophiles.

If you’re not making a good living being a shooter right now, you probably never will because Marissa is right: the world is conspiring to make getting the perfect image easier and easier — and for free!

Continue reading

My Former Life as a Fashion Photographer

I bet most of you didn’t know that my first career was as a photographer, shooting for Corbis née The Stock Market and Pacific Stock. I also had the honor of having Willow Chang as my best model — but shooting her was cheating.

WillowPortrait My Former Life as a Fashion Photographer

She is the most vivacious, creative, playful, and beautiful subject imaginable. She also made all her own costumes.

WillowFullBody My Former Life as a Fashion Photographer

There was noone easier to shoot. She has always been kinetic, playful, energetic, eccentric, fun, playful, and game. Plus, she designed and made her own stellar outfits. Amazing.

Maybe I should return to the world of photography.

Continue reading

Make money slow: why stock photography residuals rock

110243v2 max 450x4501 Make money slow: why stock photography residuals rock

Image via CrunchBase

My dad, Bob Abraham, was a very successful photographer who moved into stock photography early on.  He also got me into it in a big way and I shot for Corbis née The Stock Market and Pacific Stock actively until 2003. I have over 100,000 images somewhere working for me. If I were to do it again today, I would add Fotolia to my list.

Why? Because I don’t want to carry around expensive digital SLRs and all the associated glass but I still want to shoot and an agency like Fotolia meets my needs as a second job, second profession, second income, only requiring a good eye, a passion to shoot, a good enough modern digital camera and a commitment to following Fotolia’s uploading, labeling, and business processes.

I have not been shooting for stock in ten years; however, I still receive stock photography royalty checks from both Corbis and Pacific Stock to this day. While I am not able to live full-time on what I make, there has also been a fallow decade.

My residuals for stock photography almost completely petered out until my agencies offered me options to make my images royalty free and to partial-pay to convert decades of slides into high-quality scans that can be sold digitally.

If I were to re-kindle my past life as a shooter and gear up with some top-of-the-line digital SLRs to replace my Nikon N90s then I would surely put all of my chips in on an easy-to-use, royalty-free, still photo and video stock media agency like Fotolia.

Fotolia’s a client of Abraham Harrison and I have a feeling that I am probably just a royalty check away from getting myself a gorgeous Canon or Nikon DLSR and some expensive glass — or maybe just add a Canon S95 to the mix — and start uploading and labeling the best of them to Fotolia — I already upload every snappy photo known to man to Flickr as it is!

Too many shooters don’t want to choose the royalty free model of stock photo selling; however, most photographers also over-value their ability to shoot, the quality of their images, and also the desirability and marketability of what they have to license and rights managed can get very expensive, both in terms of tracking licenses and also in missed sales.

Be honest, are you as good, consistently, as you think you are?  Also, are you as productive and as serious as you perceive yourself?  Also, if you’re interested in holding out for 100% of the fees for your images, you’re a fool because 100% of nothing is nothing.

Let other people who are invested in selling, marketing, promoting, and delivering do the heavy-lifting for you.  When I shot, I didn’t even like complying with all of the slide-labeling requirements that my agencies demanded.  If it were up to me, I would shoot and just leave all that Fuji 100, Velvia, Kodachrome 64 and Kodachrome 25 in a box, undeveloped.

I wanted to shoot, not label; I wanted to shoot, not file, promote, market, and sell.  There’s the rub.

I have made only between 40% and 50% from my stock.  I am making 40% now.  But I am grateful because Pacific Stock does an amazing job of tracking down copyright infringements and also doing the business of stock and sending me monthly checks.  I hate that stuff!  But, Pacific Stock also will only take image that are a minimum 10MP+ through a professional digital SLR like a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III or Nikon D3x. No way!  I am a PR executive of sorts now and would be happy to keep a Canon S95, Canon G12, or a Panasonic Lumix on me at all times, shoot in RAW, and even do some post-production work on Photoshop, however, I will no longer gladly schlepp a Domke F-2 filled with Nikon bodies, Speedlights, battery packs, and an assortment of 2.8 AF Nikkor glass from 24mm-200mm.

Forget it!

Also, don’t be naive — if your stock photo agency doesn’t hold an exclusivity contract over your head, be sure to spread your love — and images — around to as many online digital stock photo agencies you have the time to do right.  And when I mean doing it right, I mean that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush — cliche #1 — and garbage in, garbage out: don’t do any of this half-assed.  Too many people make nothing in their pursuit on making money slow in stock photography because they:

  1. Don’t shoot enough (stock is a numbers game)*
  2. Don’t edit enough (do not upload anything but your best)*
  3. Don’t label well or accurately
  4. Don’t caption well and accurately
  5. Don’t tag well or accurately
  6. Aren’t honest about their ability

(* Yes, the combination of #1 and #2 is a paradox but you really do need to upload loads and scads on only your best images.  Just because you can fit 10,000 images into your new card doesn’t mean you have 10,000 stellar images, sorry to say, even if your mother loves them.  She’s lying. You have a fragile ego and she’s afraid of you a little because you tend to rage.)

Additionally, if you do your homework, you’ll be able to find cheap ways to scan your old slides and negatives into a viable digital format.  You don’t need to over-sample if your agency doesn’t require it.

Finally, last time I looked, I think there might be applications or intermediary services that allow you to upload your images once and have the images and videos uploaded to all or most of your online photo agencies — but, again, don’t be naive — if your agency does insist on keeping an exclusive on you, on your particular images, and on their similars, you can get in a lot of trouble over that as well.  So, ask questions and be careful.  I don’t know if there’s a stock photo agency wide black-balling process, but stock agencies are supposed to be your friend, your business partner, and your advocate so please show them all due respect.

I think Fotolia is the answer.

Continue reading

An Ode to Slides and Kodachrome 64

Stevie Wilson didn’t know that I shot pro for Corbis and Pacific stock for well over ten-years, doing editorial and travel photography for one of the two biggest stock photo houses on the planet. Back in the day, Corbis was called The Stock Market, and I shot hundreds of thousands of slides through an assortment of Nikon bodies and Nikkor glass and onto lots of my favorite film: Velvia, Fuji 100 (not Provia, just regular Sensia), and my most beloved Kodachrome 64.

While Fuji Ektachrome tended to be bright and brassy and a little green, K64 was always warm and rich and the favorite film of National Geographic shooters the world over for its grain. Well, Kodachrome is no more, which is a Kodacrime; however, if you can grab any of it anywhere, please grab as much of it as possible. Here’s a little known fact: Kodachrome gets better with age. It doesn’t get more predictable, but it gets better and in its age, magic happens.

In fact, lots of shooters used to keep K64 in the trunks of their cars in order to make it “better, quicker,” which has resulted in some of the most creative work I have musters, pre-Photoshop. Anyway, for those of you who don’t know, I was a photographer.

Also, the above photo was made by my dad, Bob Abraham, who was a shooter from the day I was born until the day he died. He collected all of these discarded slides forever until the day he made this image.  There is a photo of him rolling around in the slides and I will post that one when I find it.

 An Ode to Slides and Kodachrome 64

My Dad Was a Brilliant Shooter

bob abraham outrigger canoe photo My Dad Was a Brilliant Shooter

Continue reading