Photography Freelancing
January 6, 2005 3:08 PM Subscribe
I've been interested in photography since I was a kid, starting to take it more seriously as a hobby in 2000, and have taking it very seriously since last year, especially photojournalism. I had some experiences photographing last year that made start to wonder if this wasn't something I was good enough at to do and now I'd really like to start thinking about freelancing as a photojournalist as a sideline to my day job. I've built up a decent amount of good equipment that would allow me to make a start. I'm not sure how to go about it, short of writing off to publishers with a portfolio and a letter, which has come to nothing so far.
Have any photographers - especially photojournalists out there got any advice? Thanks in advance!
Have any photographers - especially photojournalists out there got any advice? Thanks in advance!
Well, I'd start in a smaller market. Your profile says that you are in Dublin, Ireland. If you are in Dublin proper, it would probably be difficult to get anywhere with the major papers unless you know someone. If you can go do some freelance work for a few small-town papers, you will get some actual work experience that would help get professional attention. Media professionals don't really embrace people who think they "want to get into" the field that those pros have spent years building their careers in. Work experiences, references, and most importantly, the knowledge that you won't just give up within a few months, will help.
Also, you mentioned equipment. Before you go bragging that you have amassed this collection of equipment, make sure that it is actually professional quality gear.
After you've gotten real news experience under your belt, start asking people at those smaller papers if they know anybody in the larger markets. Usually, they will, and if they aren't complete jerks, they'll help you with making some contacts.
Good luck!
By the way, I'm a former news photographer...lots of people quit. The work is great, and it sucks, all at the same time. You'll either love it or hate it. I can honestly say that nothing made me stop wanting to take pictures for fun like taking pictures for a living.
posted by MrZero at 4:14 PM on January 6, 2005
Also, you mentioned equipment. Before you go bragging that you have amassed this collection of equipment, make sure that it is actually professional quality gear.
After you've gotten real news experience under your belt, start asking people at those smaller papers if they know anybody in the larger markets. Usually, they will, and if they aren't complete jerks, they'll help you with making some contacts.
Good luck!
By the way, I'm a former news photographer...lots of people quit. The work is great, and it sucks, all at the same time. You'll either love it or hate it. I can honestly say that nothing made me stop wanting to take pictures for fun like taking pictures for a living.
posted by MrZero at 4:14 PM on January 6, 2005
For info/discussion on some of the legal (business issues) that you will meet in the future I heartily recommend Epuk.org (Editorial photographers of UK and Ireland). They probably can't help with the 'getting started' thing but lurking on the page and/or mailinglist will gather you some jobsmarts.
posted by dabitch at 4:32 PM on January 6, 2005
posted by dabitch at 4:32 PM on January 6, 2005
I checked out a bit of your photoblog as linked in your profile, and I can't help but wonder where all the people are. The main thing I do as a photojournalist is capture moments; people at the height of being people. Inextricably attached to that is a very strong sense of community awareness. Photojournalism is not a field that requires an advanced degree of any sort, but it would do you and your eye worlds of good to be taken under the wing of an experienced photojournalist.
The trade shares similarities with other lines of photography, such as fine art or commercial, but there is something about it that distinguishes photojournalism from all other photography. Fundamentally, you have to be able to tell stories with pictures. This is a great deal harder than it sounds. A good eye and artistic sensibility can only take you so far in this field. Unless you can afford to take classes at an institute with a strong photojournalism reputation, I highly recommend finding a mentor.
posted by TheGoldenOne at 5:27 PM on January 6, 2005
The trade shares similarities with other lines of photography, such as fine art or commercial, but there is something about it that distinguishes photojournalism from all other photography. Fundamentally, you have to be able to tell stories with pictures. This is a great deal harder than it sounds. A good eye and artistic sensibility can only take you so far in this field. Unless you can afford to take classes at an institute with a strong photojournalism reputation, I highly recommend finding a mentor.
posted by TheGoldenOne at 5:27 PM on January 6, 2005
People do go to journalism school for this. Not everyone agrees that J-school is always the way to go, but if you're stuck, have no clue, want to learn, and need some practical experience and networking connections, you might consider checking out some programs.
Mind you, anyone who says you don't need to go to J-school to be a photo/journalist is correct. But it is helpful for some folks, and you can get a lot out of it.
posted by scarabic at 5:32 PM on January 6, 2005
Mind you, anyone who says you don't need to go to J-school to be a photo/journalist is correct. But it is helpful for some folks, and you can get a lot out of it.
posted by scarabic at 5:32 PM on January 6, 2005
I'd like to second everything that TheGoldenOne just said, by the way. Nail on the head.
posted by MrZero at 5:33 PM on January 6, 2005
posted by MrZero at 5:33 PM on January 6, 2005
I've done a little freelance PJ work, so maybe I can help by telling you what I did.
First, as Mr. 0 mentions, get out of big markets. Unless you're extremely well-connected, it will be very hard to get work in a big market because there's so much talent already in residence.
In my case, I moved to the middle of nowhere, U.S., but because it's the state capital, there are two dailies. They're both almost completely AP-wire stuff -- no real journalism to speak of, but they do have "special interest" sections to round it out. That's where I targetted.
The way I approached it was to shoot events that might provide interest for the editors, but that they wouldn't already have someone assigned to. While "public interest" (suffering poor people) stuff is nice for the portfolio, it's crap for newspapers. Dynamic subjects are good (hope you have fast glass). Multi-cultural subjects are great.
I shot a native American pow-wow in the northern part of the state (I was just interested in seeing it), and naturally the local papers had nobody there to cover it. I called the paper the next day and asked if they were interested in the shots. I sent them over, and they ended up in color on the front of one of their inside sections. Time is really of the essence, though, if you're trying to do freelance. Newspapers basically don't close, so if you can, streamline your production to be able to send them shots of events the day they happen. Don't forget the "new" in newspaper. Some pretty pictures of something that happened a week ago probably aren't going to run.
If you want to do spot-news, you'll have more difficulty. You can just show up to public forums where "Important People" will be and shoot them, but usually anything important enough to publish will have some paper staff members already there. And they have press passes, you don't. That's a pretty big disadvantage.
You could invest in a scanner and listen to when there's fires or whatnot, then ambulance-chance stories. Personally, I'm not interested in the shock and horror pictures -- the only accident-scene shot I got was one that I literally stumbled upon right after it happened. A semi hit a guy in a wheelchair crossing the street, and the wheelchair got wedged under the front bumper (it saved his life). After he was taken away by the ambulance, the image of the wheelchair under the semi was a powerful image (but newspaper-safe, i.e., no bodies & blood, just inferred bodies & blood).
Get to be good friends with the photo editor. Just call him/her up and introduce yourself. If you've already got an event or some shots you think they might want to see, all the better. Just let them know that you're in the area, you'll be sending them stuff, and of course, if they have any extra work and they need some help, you're always available. Editors are busy people, so don't expect a long conversation. Just be efficient, follow their submission guidelines, and they'll let you know if they want anything.
I set up a temporary website where I could dump images. Then I would send off an email to the editor describing the shots and any pertinent information in them (details for captions are important; do the leg-work so they editor doesn't have to). If I didn't hear from him in a week, I'd assume he wasn't interested. Sometimes he'd be nice enough to send me a reply email telling me he wasn't interested, but you know, they're busy people.
It's a tough game to get into. Best of luck. If you need any additional advice, just ask.
Oh, and as for equipment: it doesn't matter what you're shooting with as long as you get "the shot". If you're applying for an actual job at the paper, they'll provide you with equipment if you need it; if you're just freelancing, you better have your own equipment! Also, keep in mind that newspapers have pretty piss-poor submission requirements. You can usually get by with a 1 meg JPG file.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:05 PM on January 6, 2005
First, as Mr. 0 mentions, get out of big markets. Unless you're extremely well-connected, it will be very hard to get work in a big market because there's so much talent already in residence.
In my case, I moved to the middle of nowhere, U.S., but because it's the state capital, there are two dailies. They're both almost completely AP-wire stuff -- no real journalism to speak of, but they do have "special interest" sections to round it out. That's where I targetted.
The way I approached it was to shoot events that might provide interest for the editors, but that they wouldn't already have someone assigned to. While "public interest" (suffering poor people) stuff is nice for the portfolio, it's crap for newspapers. Dynamic subjects are good (hope you have fast glass). Multi-cultural subjects are great.
I shot a native American pow-wow in the northern part of the state (I was just interested in seeing it), and naturally the local papers had nobody there to cover it. I called the paper the next day and asked if they were interested in the shots. I sent them over, and they ended up in color on the front of one of their inside sections. Time is really of the essence, though, if you're trying to do freelance. Newspapers basically don't close, so if you can, streamline your production to be able to send them shots of events the day they happen. Don't forget the "new" in newspaper. Some pretty pictures of something that happened a week ago probably aren't going to run.
If you want to do spot-news, you'll have more difficulty. You can just show up to public forums where "Important People" will be and shoot them, but usually anything important enough to publish will have some paper staff members already there. And they have press passes, you don't. That's a pretty big disadvantage.
You could invest in a scanner and listen to when there's fires or whatnot, then ambulance-chance stories. Personally, I'm not interested in the shock and horror pictures -- the only accident-scene shot I got was one that I literally stumbled upon right after it happened. A semi hit a guy in a wheelchair crossing the street, and the wheelchair got wedged under the front bumper (it saved his life). After he was taken away by the ambulance, the image of the wheelchair under the semi was a powerful image (but newspaper-safe, i.e., no bodies & blood, just inferred bodies & blood).
Get to be good friends with the photo editor. Just call him/her up and introduce yourself. If you've already got an event or some shots you think they might want to see, all the better. Just let them know that you're in the area, you'll be sending them stuff, and of course, if they have any extra work and they need some help, you're always available. Editors are busy people, so don't expect a long conversation. Just be efficient, follow their submission guidelines, and they'll let you know if they want anything.
I set up a temporary website where I could dump images. Then I would send off an email to the editor describing the shots and any pertinent information in them (details for captions are important; do the leg-work so they editor doesn't have to). If I didn't hear from him in a week, I'd assume he wasn't interested. Sometimes he'd be nice enough to send me a reply email telling me he wasn't interested, but you know, they're busy people.
It's a tough game to get into. Best of luck. If you need any additional advice, just ask.
Oh, and as for equipment: it doesn't matter what you're shooting with as long as you get "the shot". If you're applying for an actual job at the paper, they'll provide you with equipment if you need it; if you're just freelancing, you better have your own equipment! Also, keep in mind that newspapers have pretty piss-poor submission requirements. You can usually get by with a 1 meg JPG file.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:05 PM on January 6, 2005
Does the advice given here also apply to magazine work as well as newspaper work? I've been giving a bit of thought recently to trying to work as a travel photographer, for a travel magazine. I have very little experience in photography, and I'm wondering how one goes about getting started in the field. (I'm not asking about doing it part time, however, like the original poster, I want to make a career out of it).
posted by Inkoate at 6:48 PM on January 6, 2005
posted by Inkoate at 6:48 PM on January 6, 2005
Everyone I know who has broken into photojournalism (I've worked for a lot of photographers) has started at a small local paper (or college paper). The pay isn't great, but it allows you to build up a portfolio and show that you can shoot assignments, not just your own stuff. From there, one can usually keep the small paper gig while doing occasional work for one of the wire services, which in turn can lead to much bigger gigs.
Another thing that seems to help is getting to know assistant photo editors all over the place. These people have occasional jobs to offer, but more importantly, they are the ones who will take over as photo editors down the road. Networking is key in freelance work, as with any small business venture.
If you're really interested in doing this, don't be afraid to work for free or really low pay, it will get you in the door and will lead to much better work at other publications.
posted by spaghetti at 7:22 PM on January 6, 2005
Another thing that seems to help is getting to know assistant photo editors all over the place. These people have occasional jobs to offer, but more importantly, they are the ones who will take over as photo editors down the road. Networking is key in freelance work, as with any small business venture.
If you're really interested in doing this, don't be afraid to work for free or really low pay, it will get you in the door and will lead to much better work at other publications.
posted by spaghetti at 7:22 PM on January 6, 2005
Inkoate, magazines are tough, most magazine photographers are not staff and the magazines are reducing staff positions left and right. Your best bet is to build up a location/travel portfolio, get your stuff published any way you can and then market like hell to the magazines. Additionally, make friends with an established travel photographer and try to get an assistant gig. If you establish a rapport with them and your work is good, they will recommend you to editors they work with regularly. This is your best bet in the magazine world, since there are so many photographers who want those jobs.
posted by spaghetti at 7:27 PM on January 6, 2005
posted by spaghetti at 7:27 PM on January 6, 2005
Does the advice given here also apply to magazine work as well as newspaper work?
Sort of. As spaghetti points out, most magazines are getting rid of their full-time photogs; it's more expensive to keep them on staff then hire some starving newcomer. It helps to specifically target a certain type of magazine, then produce either a mock story or killer portofolio dedicated to that subject. Another method is to be friends with someone starting their own magazine.
I worked with a fashion photographer who already had a good relationship with a magazine, so they just kept using him. That's pretty much the way photo editors like to work: namely, they don't like to work. Or rather, they give the good assignments to people who have demonstrated that they can get the job done. No point testing out new talent and risking failure when there's already a slew of starving pros that can do it right the first time.
I've been giving a bit of thought recently to trying to work as a travel photographer, for a travel magazine.
Yeah, you and everyone else and their sister and their dog. Join the big line of people forming behind me. :)
(I'm not asking about doing it part time, however, like the original poster, I want to make a career out of it).
You have to start somewhere. Let me give you an idea of what the competition is like out there: There's a town about an hour north of where I live (Lincoln, Nebraska). It's called Fremont. Fremont is the biggest town in the area (a swath of several hundred miles) and it's a medium-sized town of about 25,000 people. Medium-sized for Nebraska.
They had an openning for a staff PJ position a couple of months ago. I talked with one of the people working there who let it slip that they received hundreds of resumes. Hundreds, in a town of 25,000. In a section of the state the size of New York (state), with, at most, 75,000 people in it total.
The competition is fierce, and it's only getting worse now that every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks they're Robert Capa with their gee-whiz digital SLR. You have to be creative, not only with your shots and ideas, but also with the way you market them, if you want to stay alive as a photographer these days. It's tough.
One of the single best explanations I've ever seen of how one person got "in the game" comes from this video. If you're serious about going pro, you'll watch it now. :)
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:53 PM on January 6, 2005
Sort of. As spaghetti points out, most magazines are getting rid of their full-time photogs; it's more expensive to keep them on staff then hire some starving newcomer. It helps to specifically target a certain type of magazine, then produce either a mock story or killer portofolio dedicated to that subject. Another method is to be friends with someone starting their own magazine.
I worked with a fashion photographer who already had a good relationship with a magazine, so they just kept using him. That's pretty much the way photo editors like to work: namely, they don't like to work. Or rather, they give the good assignments to people who have demonstrated that they can get the job done. No point testing out new talent and risking failure when there's already a slew of starving pros that can do it right the first time.
I've been giving a bit of thought recently to trying to work as a travel photographer, for a travel magazine.
Yeah, you and everyone else and their sister and their dog. Join the big line of people forming behind me. :)
(I'm not asking about doing it part time, however, like the original poster, I want to make a career out of it).
You have to start somewhere. Let me give you an idea of what the competition is like out there: There's a town about an hour north of where I live (Lincoln, Nebraska). It's called Fremont. Fremont is the biggest town in the area (a swath of several hundred miles) and it's a medium-sized town of about 25,000 people. Medium-sized for Nebraska.
They had an openning for a staff PJ position a couple of months ago. I talked with one of the people working there who let it slip that they received hundreds of resumes. Hundreds, in a town of 25,000. In a section of the state the size of New York (state), with, at most, 75,000 people in it total.
The competition is fierce, and it's only getting worse now that every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks they're Robert Capa with their gee-whiz digital SLR. You have to be creative, not only with your shots and ideas, but also with the way you market them, if you want to stay alive as a photographer these days. It's tough.
One of the single best explanations I've ever seen of how one person got "in the game" comes from this video. If you're serious about going pro, you'll watch it now. :)
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:53 PM on January 6, 2005
I have a friend who loves photography. His dad is the senior photojournalist at the local paper and told him never to sell his work because then it would become his job and he would no longer enjoy doing it for fun. Food for thought.
posted by grouse at 4:02 AM on January 7, 2005
posted by grouse at 4:02 AM on January 7, 2005
Oh, and one more salient piece of information for those interested in a career in PJ that grouse reminded me of: if you work for a newspaper, your work belongs to them. That famous 9/11 flag-raising scene at the World Trade Center? All the rights belong to the Bergen Record. The photographer doesn't see a dime of all the (highly lucrative) reprints. This is the decision you have to make when choosing between freelance and in-house. You trade the rights to your work for a steady paycheck and (hopefully) health benefits.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:23 AM on January 7, 2005
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:23 AM on January 7, 2005
I looked at your site and only saw one photo (of a power box--captioned "Street Power," very funny). Judging from this one photo, I will be bold and offer a tentative surmise--that perhaps photojournalism is not what you're really interested in. That doesn't mean you can't work in the field. Henri Cartier-Bresson loved to brag about what an awful photojournalist he was. I agree with him that news photography was not his passion, even though he got some very memorable "news" photos. I think what he meant was that he loved taking pictures of whatever caught his fancy in any particular moment or place, not of what the news-based contretemps of the day demanded. One great benefit to being a photographer is that it constantly reminds you and redirects you to what you're passionate about...just follow your lens, don't force your lens to follow you.
I photographed (and wrote) for a small paper in the American South for a while. After that, I applied for grad school in Comparative Literature. I hated working the news. After taking up photography again years later, I realized that what I loved to photograph was similar to photojournalism (people-based and candid), yet fundamentally different from it. I still hope to make real money from photography someday as well as maintain my love for taking pictures of people in their lives.
Re equipment: Shoot with whatever you feel and shoot best with: slr, rangefinder, zooms, primes, etc. I shoot with slrs and rangefinders, and I only use primes, not only b/c they're faster and sharper than zooms (a high-end prime will almost always razor out a high-end zoom on pretty much every level of performance), but b/c each of my primes has a different quality that I treasure, whether it's rendition of the out-of-focus areas, the contrast, the way it handles flare--whatever.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
posted by Il Furioso at 5:33 AM on January 7, 2005
I photographed (and wrote) for a small paper in the American South for a while. After that, I applied for grad school in Comparative Literature. I hated working the news. After taking up photography again years later, I realized that what I loved to photograph was similar to photojournalism (people-based and candid), yet fundamentally different from it. I still hope to make real money from photography someday as well as maintain my love for taking pictures of people in their lives.
Re equipment: Shoot with whatever you feel and shoot best with: slr, rangefinder, zooms, primes, etc. I shoot with slrs and rangefinders, and I only use primes, not only b/c they're faster and sharper than zooms (a high-end prime will almost always razor out a high-end zoom on pretty much every level of performance), but b/c each of my primes has a different quality that I treasure, whether it's rendition of the out-of-focus areas, the contrast, the way it handles flare--whatever.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
posted by Il Furioso at 5:33 AM on January 7, 2005
Il Furioso -- There are a number of his images available in his archive. I'll second what was said earlier about there not being a lot of people in your shots (the exception being the Ugandan images) and there not really being much story in the images. If I might be so bold as to offer a suggestion, if you have a larger telephoto lens, crop head-shoulders shots more tightly. If you're shooting atmosphere you can go wide, but if you're shooting people, really fill the frame with person.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:52 AM on January 7, 2005
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:52 AM on January 7, 2005
Thanks for pointing me to the images Civil. After reviewing the photos, I will offer some observations, and I hope they help you think about what kinds of photographer you might want to be, whether it be pj or other. A good rule of thumb I think when doing pj photos is to answer the question “What’s going on?” with your lens. Your photos show a lot of people being. By that, I mean often times your shots amplify the fixedness of a person in a scene, and this reportage on the person’s essence seems more important than the activity engaged in. You've got a portrait feel to me more than a pj feel. Many of your shots are of people from behind, and many are more or less centered; these elements lend a settled, contemplative feeling to your photographs. They suggest to me that you’re looking at the essence of something, perhaps, rather than the action of something.
Exceptions to this: The middle photo of the anticapitalista series does double duty; it hints at who he is by his expression. His clenched fist, which seems to be swinging, amplifies his resolve. Old City New Citizens tells a story, too. I like the idea in this photo. In the tambourine man photo, even though it’s an action photo, what’s going on is not entirely clear. Again, you seem to be seeing something other than what’s going on in an outward sense.
Keep shooting and following what feels good. It took me a while to figure out what I really loved photographing. I knew I wanted to be a “professional” photographer, but how, and…well, how? I got stuck on the how to be something I thought I wasn't yet. The money-making aspect of it only got in the way of my clarity. Only when I really let go of all that professional and money stuff was I able to be honest with myself about what I enjoyed (what you enjoy might not at first correspond to what you think a paid photographer does).
In the photographs I saw, you do street photography, which is not quite photojournalism. Street photography is challenging on many levels. I have a personal credo that I try to stick to when I do it: have chutzpah, follow my gut rather than my head, get in close, have more chutzpah, and smile. Smiling is the key. You can get right in someone’s face and *take* their photograph (you are taking something from them, and it can feel exploitative to you and the subject; smiling is my way of giving rather than simply taking, and being open; after the initial shock of the encounter, often the subject and I wind up talking and laughing together, and that makes the whole thing so much more enjoyable); if you give a big smile, you’ll most likely make a friend rather than put someone on edge.
Civil seemed to suggest that you might want to get in closer with people. I’ll leave that to you to figure; I see his point on some shots. If you're shooting slr, do know how much of the field your viewfinder covers? Does your viewfinder show 100% coverage, or less? Some of mine show 100% and some are almost 10% less than 100%. For the ones that are less than 100%, I always try to remember to crop a good deal tighter than I do with the 100% viewfinders. I don’t like cropping the negative later.
posted by Il Furioso at 8:12 AM on January 7, 2005
Exceptions to this: The middle photo of the anticapitalista series does double duty; it hints at who he is by his expression. His clenched fist, which seems to be swinging, amplifies his resolve. Old City New Citizens tells a story, too. I like the idea in this photo. In the tambourine man photo, even though it’s an action photo, what’s going on is not entirely clear. Again, you seem to be seeing something other than what’s going on in an outward sense.
Keep shooting and following what feels good. It took me a while to figure out what I really loved photographing. I knew I wanted to be a “professional” photographer, but how, and…well, how? I got stuck on the how to be something I thought I wasn't yet. The money-making aspect of it only got in the way of my clarity. Only when I really let go of all that professional and money stuff was I able to be honest with myself about what I enjoyed (what you enjoy might not at first correspond to what you think a paid photographer does).
In the photographs I saw, you do street photography, which is not quite photojournalism. Street photography is challenging on many levels. I have a personal credo that I try to stick to when I do it: have chutzpah, follow my gut rather than my head, get in close, have more chutzpah, and smile. Smiling is the key. You can get right in someone’s face and *take* their photograph (you are taking something from them, and it can feel exploitative to you and the subject; smiling is my way of giving rather than simply taking, and being open; after the initial shock of the encounter, often the subject and I wind up talking and laughing together, and that makes the whole thing so much more enjoyable); if you give a big smile, you’ll most likely make a friend rather than put someone on edge.
Civil seemed to suggest that you might want to get in closer with people. I’ll leave that to you to figure; I see his point on some shots. If you're shooting slr, do know how much of the field your viewfinder covers? Does your viewfinder show 100% coverage, or less? Some of mine show 100% and some are almost 10% less than 100%. For the ones that are less than 100%, I always try to remember to crop a good deal tighter than I do with the 100% viewfinders. I don’t like cropping the negative later.
posted by Il Furioso at 8:12 AM on January 7, 2005
There is a lot of good advice here. I would suggest that you put together a real portfolio that illustrates your aims in photography. If you want to be a photojournalist build a portfolio of images that illustrate your ability to tell a story or document a scene. Only show your very best work. Then show that portfolio to people working in that field and get their opinions. What you're looking for is people who are going to be brutally honest, yet fair. You're looking for people that you respect who are going to give it to you straight. Then take that advice, don't get discouraged, and keep shooting. Make another portfolio, which is what I'm working on right now, and repeat.
It's a tough field right now. It seems like everyone is a photographer these days, so try to find ways to set yourself apart and get your photos seen and published. I've done a lot of work for our smaller local magazines and papers, school papers, websites, bands, whatever. Last year, after shooting on and off for 15 years, I had a shot in the New York Times and I was way stoked to see my name and photo in that paper. Hopefully, I'll get there again. Anyway, if this is what you want, don't get discouraged. Just keep shooting and keep learning.
posted by trbrts at 10:01 AM on January 7, 2005
It's a tough field right now. It seems like everyone is a photographer these days, so try to find ways to set yourself apart and get your photos seen and published. I've done a lot of work for our smaller local magazines and papers, school papers, websites, bands, whatever. Last year, after shooting on and off for 15 years, I had a shot in the New York Times and I was way stoked to see my name and photo in that paper. Hopefully, I'll get there again. Anyway, if this is what you want, don't get discouraged. Just keep shooting and keep learning.
posted by trbrts at 10:01 AM on January 7, 2005
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Doohickie at 3:23 PM on January 6, 2005