Can you make a living as just a photographer?
Would it be possible for you to make photography your sole source of income without experiencing any burden on your finances? You can, in fact, do that, but it might not necessarily be a pleasant experience. Please allow me to share my experience with you since, despite the fact that I consider myself to be a photographer, I do not derive all of my money from photography alone. Unless I've had a few beers, at which point I might tell folks that I'm an artist; but, the majority of the time, I stick to the term "photographer."
Investments are something that I have, just as a lot of other people do, since, well, it's simply the standard procedure. This brings me to a crucial point: the majority of people I know, including those who have occupations that need them to be present from 9 to 5, do not rely primarily on a single source of income. They might be the owners of rental homes, stock investors, or people who have side businesses. It is not a rare occurrence. For some reason, however, there is a widespread belief, particularly on the internet, that in order to be a photographer, you are required to do nothing more than shoot photographs.
It makes sense to me. Once upon a time, I was of the same mind. What does it mean to call oneself a photographer if forty-five percent of your income comes from, for example, rental properties (which, by the way, I do not have, but perhaps I ought to look into investing in them)? But here's what I think: it is entirely up to you to decide what you will call yourself. Your thoughts should be always focused on photography if you want to continue being a photographer at heart even if you work a 9-to-5 job. What will happen if you are successful in making any money from it? You are a photographer who works professionally. However, just because you are a professional does not necessarily mean that you are superior to an amateur. In point of fact, when someone emphasizes that they are a "professional" photographer, I occasionally inquire as to whether or not they are any good. This is because, to tell you the truth, the greatest photographers I know simply state, "I am a photographer."
Suppose I am a photographer. In a word, yes. All the time, I find myself thinking about photography. Every day, I make my way to my studio home. To answer your question, yes, I do generate money from other activities, but photography is the primary focus of my work. Regardless of whether my money was primarily derived from YouTube or other endeavors, I would continue to refer to myself as a photographer so long as I continue to hone my skills in the field.
Consequently, is it really feasible to be a photographer in the most basic sense of the word? Certainly. By relying solely on photography as my source of income, I would still be able to maintain a comfortable standard of living. On the other hand, why don't I do that? Having a cushion, not having to worry about money, and not having to stress over the next major industry shakeup are all things that I particularly enjoy. Also, I take pleasure in being occupied. I'm not very good at taking time off since it tends to cause mayhem. I have a well-organized and packed life, and it is working out for me.
Do not feel as though you have to follow my identical path in order to become a photographer, even though you can easily just be a photographer. I am represented by a number of agencies, and the majority of the photographers there do not have any side hustles as I do. The fact that they make photography their primary focus is sufficient. It is possible for you to be a photographer alone, and I am going to presume that you already are. How are you doing?
Suppose I am a photographer. In a word, yes. All the time, I find myself thinking about photography. Every day, I make my way to my studio home. To answer your question, yes, I do generate money from other activities, but photography is the primary focus of my work. Regardless of whether my money was primarily derived from YouTube or other endeavors, I would continue to refer to myself as a photographer so long as I continue to hone my skills in the field.
Consequently, is it really feasible to be a photographer in the most basic sense of the word? Certainly. By relying solely on photography as my source of income, I would still be able to maintain a comfortable standard of living. On the other hand, why don't I do that? Having a cushion, not having to worry about money, and not having to stress over the next major industry shakeup are all things that I particularly enjoy. Also, I take pleasure in being occupied. I'm not very good at taking time off since it tends to cause mayhem. I have a well-organized and packed life, and it is working out for me.
Do not feel as though you have to follow my identical path in order to become a photographer, even though you can easily just be a photographer. I am represented by a number of agencies, and the majority of the photographers there do not have any side hustles as I do. The fact that they make photography their primary focus is sufficient. It is possible for you to be a photographer alone, and I am going to presume that you already are. How are you doing?
