JFW
Member
I was curious if anyone knows approximately how many professional wildlife or nature photographers there might be? Not photo-tour leaders, authors, etc, just people making their income from selling their photos.
Professional wildlufe or nature photographers?
- Thread starter JFW
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
You will never get an answer to that question in my opinion. I don't think there is even an answer.
Perhaps why you ask the question might help define an answer?
Perhaps why you ask the question might help define an answer?
Ignoring "how many" - far fewer than 15 years ago - and declining using the above definition.
Selling prices have reduced dramatically - with newspapers rarely paying to use images and net payment after commission from stock agencies having often collapsed to the one £/$ level
30 years ago as a primarily amateur photographer I could get £/$1,000 (after inflation) for a small magazine front cover - now much more likely to be an online publication.
Much more affordable high quality equipment such as the Canon 200-500, Olympus 100-500, Nikon 800 PF lenses etc, high MP bodies and dramatic PP improvements reducing high ISO noise have led to many more photographers being able to own equipment able to take "professional quality" wildlife photos.
Most "former pros" using the above definition have a significantly reduced income from photographic sales compared to 10 or 15 years ago.
Many have turned to a business mix including tour leading, perhaps an active web-site big enough to earn a small commission from advertiser links, book authors (of their work) and 1 to 1 training to maintain or increase income levels.
Selling prices have reduced dramatically - with newspapers rarely paying to use images and net payment after commission from stock agencies having often collapsed to the one £/$ level
30 years ago as a primarily amateur photographer I could get £/$1,000 (after inflation) for a small magazine front cover - now much more likely to be an online publication.
Much more affordable high quality equipment such as the Canon 200-500, Olympus 100-500, Nikon 800 PF lenses etc, high MP bodies and dramatic PP improvements reducing high ISO noise have led to many more photographers being able to own equipment able to take "professional quality" wildlife photos.
Most "former pros" using the above definition have a significantly reduced income from photographic sales compared to 10 or 15 years ago.
Many have turned to a business mix including tour leading, perhaps an active web-site big enough to earn a small commission from advertiser links, book authors (of their work) and 1 to 1 training to maintain or increase income levels.
Vincent_VdB
Well-known member
Impossible to answer. There is no region defined in your questions for starters. Second, most prof wildlife photographers do things on the side for extra income such as being a tour guide and/or writing books and/or e-seminars, .... It is not like these persons are listed in the yellow pages.
Doug Herr
Well-known member
+1Ignoring "how many" - far fewer than 15 years ago - and declining using the above definition.
Selling prices have reduced dramatically - with newspapers rarely paying to use images and net payment after commission from stock agencies having often collapsed to the one £/$ level
30 years ago as a primarily amateur photographer I could get £/$1,000 (after inflation) for a small magazine front cover - now much more likely to be an online publication.
Much more affordable high quality equipment such as the Canon 200-500, Olympus 100-500, Nikon 800 PF lenses etc, high MP bodies and dramatic PP improvements reducing high ISO noise have led to many more photographers being able to own equipment able to take "professional quality" wildlife photos.
Most "former pros" using the above definition have a significantly reduced income from photographic sales compared to 10 or 15 years ago.
Many have turned to a business mix including tour leading, perhaps an active web-site big enough to earn a small commission from advertiser links, book authors (of their work) and 1 to 1 training to maintain or increase income levels.
I suspect very few earn much of a living from selling photographs alone. Multiple revenue streams are the norm for those whose income is based more-or-less on wildlife/nature photography and is a wise hedge against normal market fluctuations.
In the 1990's I was doing semi-professional work and relied on nature photography to supplement my meager teaching salary. I was represented by a stock agent that specialized in hunting and fishing, and I was his one aesthetics photographer that provided a mix of non-hunted wildlife, landscapes, and nature vignettes. A postage stamp sized picture would sell for about $400 to a magazine like Field and Stream, and my cut would be $200. If I sold 10 pictures a quarter, I made anywhere from $2000 to $3000 in that period.
My now good friend who I did not know at the time, was close to quitting his job and being a full time wildlife photographer as anyone I knew. By the late '90's he was making more from photography than his day job. Even back then, he had multiple streams of revenues that included magazines, books, ad-copy, and "guest photographer" at camera clubs. He was a regular in a few periodicals, and was hired by the state of MN to do various special documentary projects. When digital came on the scene, he was slow to adapt, and by the time he did, the market of nature images collapsed. We laughed together as he showed me his check for $23 that came from the stock agency. He told be that 20 years ago that check would have been $5000.
Unfortunately, the career path for most fields of photography have been narrowed dramatically. As others have shared, one needs to be a multi-talented and multi-media person willing to spend much more time with people and creating content than a photographer.
While I suspect that there are a few people like Paul Nicklin, Cristina Mittermeier, and Art Wolfe still earning a living through their photography, even these legends (and others) lead tours and do guest lectures to fill out their income.
cheers,
bruce
My now good friend who I did not know at the time, was close to quitting his job and being a full time wildlife photographer as anyone I knew. By the late '90's he was making more from photography than his day job. Even back then, he had multiple streams of revenues that included magazines, books, ad-copy, and "guest photographer" at camera clubs. He was a regular in a few periodicals, and was hired by the state of MN to do various special documentary projects. When digital came on the scene, he was slow to adapt, and by the time he did, the market of nature images collapsed. We laughed together as he showed me his check for $23 that came from the stock agency. He told be that 20 years ago that check would have been $5000.
Unfortunately, the career path for most fields of photography have been narrowed dramatically. As others have shared, one needs to be a multi-talented and multi-media person willing to spend much more time with people and creating content than a photographer.
While I suspect that there are a few people like Paul Nicklin, Cristina Mittermeier, and Art Wolfe still earning a living through their photography, even these legends (and others) lead tours and do guest lectures to fill out their income.
cheers,
bruce
Last edited:
arbitrage
Well-known member
Probably can count them on one hand if you are disqualifying tour leaders.
Does Back Country Steve make his coins selling photos or --? He has all the latest gear, cash flow from somewhere
I don’t think you could ever get an accurate answer to that question, sorry.
Doug Herr
Well-known member
The forum itself is a revenue stream, as are the items in the "Store" at the top of the page.
Exactly what I was suggesting.. I'd assume many here believes he sells a lot of his photos.. but.....
Another popular photo forum has a 2 year $90 membership... he has 365,000 members
Like others, I don't believe that you'll get an accurate answer to your question. It is many fewer than it used to be, say thirty years ago. Just like with many other genres of photography.
I used to belong to a local photo guild, and when I started, there were about eight full-time photographers. I was allowed to join because I did some assistant work for one of the members. Over a period of about five years, the number of full-timers dwindled to three, as of about seven years ago. As far as now, I know of only two still working full time in the photography business, and only one of them still has their own business.
Yes, there are many others who call themselves professional photographers, but I've worked with some of them on service projects and they are not making enough to live on. One once asked me if they could borrow my D750 for a shoot because their camera wasn't working, and they didn't have the money to have it repaired or replaced. IMO, if you can't afford backup equipment, especially a camera body, you're not really a pro. A pro has all but the severest contingencies covered.
And don't even let me get started about the quality of some of the work...
I used to belong to a local photo guild, and when I started, there were about eight full-time photographers. I was allowed to join because I did some assistant work for one of the members. Over a period of about five years, the number of full-timers dwindled to three, as of about seven years ago. As far as now, I know of only two still working full time in the photography business, and only one of them still has their own business.
Yes, there are many others who call themselves professional photographers, but I've worked with some of them on service projects and they are not making enough to live on. One once asked me if they could borrow my D750 for a shoot because their camera wasn't working, and they didn't have the money to have it repaired or replaced. IMO, if you can't afford backup equipment, especially a camera body, you're not really a pro. A pro has all but the severest contingencies covered.
And don't even let me get started about the quality of some of the work...
As others said, very few make a living selling prints these days (which includes both publication and prints for display). A handful who do so have their own gallery, usually in a prime tourist destination where they specialize in that area. For example, I have visited a couple photo galleries in Jackson who do Grand Teton and Yellowstone, I visited a photo gallery in Springdale who specializes in neighboring Zion, but those are few and far between. Almost every professional nature photographer, even the established big names, now lead tours and workshops in order to survive.
It's not just nature photography. Portrait and wedding photographers, (a genre that was traditionally easier to earn a living with), are a fraction of what they once were. I worked for twenty years at Tucson's largest photo lab (Jones Photo) and when I started in the mid 1990s they had a separate professional division that catered to portrait and wedding shooters and it made up the bulk of their income. When I left in late 2015 they had maybe half a dozen pros still using them. In 2023 they went out of business (after 70 years).
It's not just nature photography. Portrait and wedding photographers, (a genre that was traditionally easier to earn a living with), are a fraction of what they once were. I worked for twenty years at Tucson's largest photo lab (Jones Photo) and when I started in the mid 1990s they had a separate professional division that catered to portrait and wedding shooters and it made up the bulk of their income. When I left in late 2015 they had maybe half a dozen pros still using them. In 2023 they went out of business (after 70 years).
