The "wealthy" photographer thread.

[jwbryson1]

Ryan Brenizer shoots over 70 weddings per year. I'd guess he charges at least $4,000 for each event. To be conservative, let's say he averages $3,000 which I think is low. Add to that the "one-time" fees he earns from wedding (or other) portraits, corporate events and the like.

So, he's probably earning easily $300k per year, before costs, and if his costs are 50% of his fees he will walk away with $150k net.

Is that considered a "wealthy" photographer? And don't quote me the name Peter Lik because he's in a different league altogether. I know he's made kazillions of dollars from selling his images, but aspiring to be the next Peter Lik, while not a bad idea, it is, I think, beyond most of us.

[Ads]

[fjrabon]

From what I've heard, the people who make the big dollars make a lot, if not most of it from workshops they do.

Also, not sure where you got the 300K mark, as using the numbers you provided, 70 X 3,000 = 210,000 before costs, which is substantially different from 300K (perhaps you're counting other income streams, but you didn't mention them).

[Big Mike]

Without knowing more about it...a few things come to mind.

Most wedding/portrait photographers are small business, usually just themselves and maybe one or two other people. But to shoot 70 weddings a year, you'd probably have to have a staff of a few people. And the estimate of costs being 50% is pretty arbitrary. It could be much higher, or it could even be lower.

But yes, I'd say that if their personal income is $150k, they are doing pretty well for themselves...although the amount of work might also be well above average.

I was shooting a wedding recently, with a very good photographer friend of mine. He's being doing it for 13 years and charges $3900 basic or $6500 premium. At one point, he was shooting up to 50 weddings a year, plus his wife worked a full time job. He said they had more money than they knew what to do with, but it didn't make them happy. He said they just bought stuff for the sake of buying it, and there wasn't the same excitement you have when you have to save up for something....and so on.
He scaled back his weddings to 20 a year and she only works part time (plus they now have a couple kids)...and he said they are much happier now than when he was a 'wealthy' photographer.

I felt a little resentful, as I'm working 3 jobs and swimming in debt, but I know that he was completely honest about it.

[jwbryson1]

Also, not sure where you got the 300K mark, as using the numbers you provided, 70 X 3,000 = 210,000 before costs, which is substantially different from 300K (perhaps you're counting other income streams, but you didn't mention them).

Umm...Did you see the sentence where I wrote: Add to that the "one-time" fees he earns from wedding (or other) portraits, corporate events and the like.?

[jwbryson1]

And the estimate of costs being 50% is pretty arbitrary. It could be much higher, or it could even be lower.

Exactly. That was for illustration purposes only.

I was shooting a wedding recently, with a very good photographer friend of mine. He's being doing it for 13 years and charges $3900 basic or $6500 premium.

Again, exactly. My guesstimate on Brenizer was a low-ball figure. I'd guess he wouldn't even start below $4,000 for a wedding or it's not worth his time, especially in NYC. I was being conservative.

[KmH]

His costs are likely 80%+ of his total revenue.

Few legal retail businesses have a 50% profit margin. Most retail photography businesses struggle to attain, and maintain, a 20% profit margin.

$4000 for a wedding or corporate event is not expensive. Some of the top wedding/event photographers in the US charge well north of $10,000 per event.

In some markets, like NYC, top wedding photographers get $50,000+ to shoot weddings.

Then there are the top shelf destination wedding photographers who are also in that $50,000 and up price range.

[Big Mike]

From what I've heard, the people who make the big dollars make a lot, if not most of it from workshops they do.

That is indeed a direction that many of the 'wealthy' and well-known photographers take. It's not hard to figure out that you can make a lot more money charging a room full of people to hear you speak, than to work for one client for a day. I'm often quite skeptical when I see these 'Rock Star' photographers with their seminars and tours etc. If they were that good at photography, wouldn't they be so in-demand that they wouldn't have time for a tour? I think that most of them are more 'motivational speaker' first and photographer second. I don't begrudge them that...it's a free market economy and they figured out a way to make lots of money...but they would have a hard time getting any of my hard earned money.

It's like they say about fishing lures...they are not designed to lure fish (fish don't have any money)...they are designed to lure fishermen to buy them. So it's easy to see that in photography, the biggest revenue stream is other photographers (or wanna-be photographers).
Gary Fong stuck a plastic tub on a flash and got rich .

[jwbryson1]

$4000 for a wedding or corporate event is not expensive. Some of the top wedding/event photographers in the US charge well north of $10,000 per event.

In some markets, like NYC, top wedding photographers get $50,000+ to shoot weddings.

Then there are the top shelf destination wedding photographers who are also in that $50,000 and up price range.

Then my numbers are very VERY conservative. I'd guess for every photographer with Ryan Brenizer's skills, there are 100's in line behind him with a fraction of his skills...making much less money.

[fjrabon]

$4000 for a wedding or corporate event is not expensive. Some of the top wedding/event photographers in the US charge well north of $10,000 per event.

In some markets, like NYC, top wedding photographers get $50,000+ to shoot weddings.

Then there are the top shelf destination wedding photographers who are also in that $50,000 and up price range.

Then my numbers are very VERY conservative. I'd guess for every photographer with Ryan Brenizer's skills, there are 100's in line behind him with a fraction of his skills...making much less money.

Well, they aren't particularly conservative with you assuming a 50% profit margin. If he's shooting 70 weddings a year, I guarantee you he has a relatively large full time staff working for him that he pays relatively well. It's just impossible to get that many weddings, with that high of quality, done without it, especially given the amount of post work Brenzier does (which is what he's 'famous' for).

I think the point here is that this just seems like such a wild guessing game with completely fabricated numbers that could, and likely are, wildly inaccurate, that what's the point?

You'd have probably been better off just asking "what do the highest paid photographers make?"

[jwbryson1]

$4000 for a wedding or corporate event is not expensive. Some of the top wedding/event photographers in the US charge well north of $10,000 per event.

In some markets, like NYC, top wedding photographers get $50,000+ to shoot weddings.

Then there are the top shelf destination wedding photographers who are also in that $50,000 and up price range.

Then my numbers are very VERY conservative. I'd guess for every photographer with Ryan Brenizer's skills, there are 100's in line behind him with a fraction of his skills...making much less money.

Well, they aren't particularly conservative with you assuming a 50% profit margin. If he's shooting 70 weddings a year, I guarantee you he has a relatively large full time staff working for him that he pays relatively well. It's just impossible to get that many weddings, with that high of quality, done without it, especially given the amount of post work Brenzier does (which is what he's 'famous' for).

I think the point here is that this just seems like such a wild guessing game with completely fabricated numbers that could, and likely are, wildly inaccurate, that what's the point?

You'd have probably been better off just asking "what do the highest paid photographers make?"

I'm a numbers guy. I like to know the details.

[fjrabon]

Then my numbers are very VERY conservative. I'd guess for every photographer with Ryan Brenizer's skills, there are 100's in line behind him with a fraction of his skills...making much less money.

Well, they aren't particularly conservative with you assuming a 50% profit margin. If he's shooting 70 weddings a year, I guarantee you he has a relatively large full time staff working for him that he pays relatively well. It's just impossible to get that many weddings, with that high of quality, done without it, especially given the amount of post work Brenzier does (which is what he's 'famous' for).

I think the point here is that this just seems like such a wild guessing game with completely fabricated numbers that could, and likely are, wildly inaccurate, that what's the point?

You'd have probably been better off just asking "what do the highest paid photographers make?"

I'm a numbers guy. I like to know the details.

The problem though is that we don't know ANY of the relevant details. We don't know how much he charges, we don't know how much he makes in other income, we don't know what his expenses are.

For someone with a mid sized small business, how efficiently you manage that business has much more to do with your take home profit than your total revenue does. And we don't even know total revenue.

We're like 4 steps away from having even vague notion of what he makes.

[unpopular]

One reason why photographers like this are so successful is their tolerance for rich people at weddings.

[fjrabon]

One reason why photographers like this are so successful is their tolerance for rich people at weddings.

I remember a Zack Arias quote of "Well, one of the nicest side benefits to going medium format was that I no longer had to hear the rich guy talk about the D4 he just bought his wife, my camera might cost as much as a BMW, but at least I don't have to listen to that guy any more."

[spacefuzz]

figure out what car he drives and guestimate from there.

Now me, I will try the peter lik route.....

[slackercruster]

OP...yes $300K a year is wealthy and successful to me.

Mary Ellen Mark gets $3,000 per print and $15,000 per 20 x 24 polaroid. If she is not a millionaire...I wanna know ow why!

(Image removed - violates forum policy)

She sells her books for $500 a pop at her store as well!

(Image removed - violates forum policy)