If you missed the show, please enjoy the presentation here:

Please take a moment to read Trudy’s entire article and then come back here for my discussion of a few key points.

“Many photographers turn to older and/or more experienced photographers for help in understanding the business of photography. Many face insults, closed doors or guidance on everything except business.”

Sorry for the photographers that don’t help. I can’t speak for them, but I have always considered it both an honor and a responsibility to help startup photographers. The question I would ask is how they came to ask the established photographer? Was the shooter being asked the right one to ask? Was there research done to find out if the questions would be appropriate for that specific photographer? Was it a request for a favor or a demand… I get both. Requests do get answered, demands not so much.

I have also had the occasional “hey, you are really busy, but can you take a few minutes and tell me how to be successful? Can you give specific things to do and review my portfolio and give me some advice on where to show the work and who would be interested in what I do and … …?”

Well, no. No I can’t.
No one can.

However, there are different associations established for the very real agenda of teaching the younger shooters how to survive, negotiate, and learn the business ups and downs. They are more than happy to have the opportunity to help a young shooter understand how not to undercut themselves and the industry, and be more professional in the industry.

The ASMP (American Society of Media Photographers) and the APA (Advertising Photographers of America) are two that I am familiar with for the commercial side of the business. The direct to consumer shooters have the PPA (Professional Photographers of America) The Phoenix chapter has monthly meetings in my town. At least half of the meetings I am aware of are business related.

From dealing with clients to marketing on a regional scope, these organizations offer guidance, mentors, bidding strategies, pricing guidelines, tax planning and more.

The truly sad thing is how low the attendance is. Workshops on business are not as much ‘fun’ as workshops on shooting ‘hafnekkidchicks’ and ‘fashun’. Sorry for the attitude, but it is what it is. I would love to be proved wrong.

“A great business person with average work will always do better than a poor business person with stellar work. And who makes the decision that the work is good enough to be a business? Other photographers?”

Nope. The market decides. The clients who see the work decide. Other photographers have no point of influence in the decision of who is worthy and who is not.

Seeking validation from Flickr, or Facebook is not as conducive to your career boost as getting validation from the industry itself. Once the industry acknowledges you, there will be less problems with the validation from other photographers.

If you are getting work, you are a photographer. If you are growing and challenging yourself, you are a photographer. If you are trying things and failing once in a while (although, not on a gig) you are a photographer.

There seems to be a lot of angst on the interwebs about the terminology of ‘professional photographer’ and what that means. I think it means nearly nothing… you can be a weekend warrior and behave and act far more ‘professional’ than some full time photographers I know. Legally… you make money, you are a professional. I am simply not that into ‘terminology’.

More after the jump here:

“The truth is there is a certain point where every photographer (who wants to be more than a hobbyist) feels they are of the level to move their passion towards passion and profession.”

Yes, but “feeling” and knowing are two separate things. “Feeling” is subjective – “Knowing” is objective. And it takes a lot of work and self exploration to become educated. It takes asking questions that have uncomfortable answers. It is facing the fact that there is more to do, and then doing it, that makes the difference – and becomes the challenge.

Feelings cannot be measured, or confirmed. ‘Feeling’ that I am ready can be a truth or a delusion… it hasn’t been challenged, proofed, measured or controlled… it is an emotional decision that may be a totally different reality.

Knowing means I have measured, challenged, compared, contrasted, done the research, and found some (not all, but some) solutions and wins. I take that knowledge and filter it through what I already know about myself and the business. Then I KNOW what I can and cannot do… at that particular moment in time. Growth is easier when we know where to grow.

Way too many people make decisions based on what they ‘feel’ and that can be a terrible mistake.

“We can argue that some photographers aren’t “good enough” to be making money or to be successful, but the truth is business is about business. And if this business was one where only the most talented with the best images were the most successful, the need for the personal brand might be a completely mute one.”

Well, probably.

Maybe.

There is simply a lot of great work out there. There are more wonderfully talented photographers than there has ever been. They are everywhere. Many of them are part-timers, weekend warriors and such. Some of them are making great money and have a real part-time business.

And there are many many talented photographers who rock photographically but who aren’t making a single penny. And that is generally because they are not good at the other parts of this multi-faceted crazy business. They believe the work should speak for itself. And they are wrong.

But the really interesting group are the ones who are not terribly great, in fact, not good at all. And making money. Lots of money. They are the ones that are marketing harder, making more buzz than the other shooters. They do all the crap that no one wants to do. They shoot the little jobs and turn them into big jobs. They ‘sell’ whenever they are in a group of people. They can be obnoxious, grating and boorish.

But they are remembered.

Personal brand may be that deciding factor… if all else is considered the same. I think it is one of the most important assets a photographer can have. It can open doors, catch the eye, find more access, and define the work when one is not available. One of the most powerful tools – and one of the least understood.

“So a business degree helps, but isn’t the total answer. Even traditional education in other areas help, but isn’t the total answer.”

No, but then there is no total answer. Looking for one is frustrating and full of dead ends.

Photography is a business built on an art that can be at different levels of value. We tend to throw it all in the pot of “photography” and that pot actually doesn’t exist as a single receptacle.

There are levels and genres and demographics and perceived value and the ability of the photographer to control that perception.

And throwing in all the different regions, neighborhoods, levels of income, regional differences and personalities.

There can be no ‘one-size-fits-all’ answer to marketing. There are so many personal challenges that can get in the way.

I know one photographer who does 30 cold calls a week – another who has NEVER done a cold call, but sends out direct mail like crazy. There is nothing similar in their approaches, but both are keeping head above water in tough markets. Actually doing a bit better than head above water.

I have worked with a lot of photographers, and nearly every one who was in ‘trouble’ had issues that went beyond the images. They wouldn’t market with consistency. They had poor social skills, or egos that were not quite in line with the talent they believed they had. Some would proclaim there was no time, but they had no gigs… soooo, how does that work? And others were in the ‘blame game’ mode of believing there was some great conspiracy that had been in play to keep them from getting the work they deserved.

There isn’t a conspiracy, and there is no silver bullet. As well, there is no answer other than to keep looking for the authentic ways that make you stand out.

Yes, I know it sounds too simplistic… and hard, but it is simply such a personal thing to work on.

My friend Selina works with photographers one on one. She has her ways of drawing out the best in a photographer. There are many good personal coaches, consultants and photographers groups that can help a shooter develop a style and a marketing plan that makes sense.

“So how do photographers learn the business, which for the most part involves the four components of: sales, marketing, communication and management? From what I have observed and experienced it involves various cycles of learning, trial, error, failure, reinvention, success, complacency, stagnation, failure, learning, trial, error, reinvention, success.”

Well, that is true to a point. It can be terribly frustrating if there is no plan. And the plan has to make sense for the photographer. And that is tricky too.

But there are paths that have been carved into the marketing landscape. There are methods that work. There are ways to create buzz that are defined – at least with a soft edge of definition. It takes the individual to add the clarity. Others have had similar challenges and met them with success. So it can be done.

The challenges of the market, the perceived ‘anyone-can-do-it’ syndrome, and the reality of a very tight economy are some of the most formidable of recent memory. It will take a sustained effort and very focused personal attention to create a value that people want to spend their hard earned money on.

And that is the million dollar proposition. If I had the answer to it all, I would certainly share it with everyone. But I don’t… no one does. I believe there are ways to go, things to try, methods for testing, and people to ‘model’ for success.

It isn’t sexy, it isn’t easy, and it isn’t guaranteed. But it can be done.

One final point: Expectations.

To be a hair cutter in this state costs between $4K and $10K. Learning refrigeration repair, auto repair, computer repair, and other trades can cost $8K – $12K. Becoming a dental assistant, or para legal can cost about $12K – $15K. And all of them produce a competent professional who will be looking at a mid or maybe higher mid 5 figure salary.

Photographers can easily be in the mid to high 5 figure salary range, but most photographers I know balk at spending any money on training or consulting or coaching. There is no end to the money they want to spend on lenses and strobes, but going to a weekend “Learning how to Market” workshop for $500 is considered outrageous on the forums and the boards… “you can learn that on your own…” – “that is just someone wanting to get rich off of your laziness…”

Sure. Whatever. I have two friends who are professional photographer coaches. With track records. With serious credentials. Their fees are not even a quarter that to learn how to cut hair… and photographers balk at the costs. They want it all, now, and without any pain or cost.

And life… she no worka thata way… (thanks, Grandma – you were right.)

Thanks so much for coming along on this fun discussion. I hope you visit Trudy’s excellent blog – and say hi. And special thanks for Trudy for allowing me to take some of her points and fleshing them out a bit.
______________

I am terribly sorry to have just learned that the “Share/Save” thing on my site is actually screwed up. Therefor, I will be adding this to the bottom of each post. It is a place for you to share the stories you read here easier… and sign up for the RSS feed.

For more information on our Learn to Light workshops and to follow me on twitter, just click the links I just provided. And, if you see this post in its full length on any other site, please let me know. Quoting and linking back is fine… sucking the whole thing into another site is not.

Related posts:

1. Thoughts on Photography, and Other Stuff, While Driving Across the Desert. I love to drive. Cars and motorcycles and trucks… I...
2. Branding Your Photography Business: A Realistic View Branding Your Photography Business: A Realistic View Brand. Branding. Words...
3. Ten Things That Can Help You Get a Photographers Assisting Gig Getting an assistant gig is top of mind for a...

I am a voracious reader. I love it. I read all sorts of stuff, and love to learn something new. I also suffer fools badly, so if someone thinks they are gonna say stuff and I will just take it, well… sometimes they get an earful. It is something that makes me who I am. Sometimes I worry that I may piss this group off or that group won’t like me because of something I say. And that may be costly to my business. But it also is costly to me to be quiet when I see/hear/read something that is blatantly false and misleading.

Happens a lot these days. And I choose my battles carefully. The article that I am going to dissect is one that ran recently on Digital Photo Pro entitled: “Misinformation: Copyright Tech”.

Misinformation? Well, the irony is not lost on that at all. Not for me. The article is so full of misinformation, terrible ideas and downright silliness, that I feel a “fisking” is in order. Leslie Burns at Burns Auto Parts has a neat little post about this, and there is a lot more on her site here. And be sure to read her take on CC in a several posts – starting with this one.

As this is a rant, let’s get right to it, shall we?

“There’s no stopping the Internet. Just as independent musicians and the record industry have had to learn to work with unfettered downloading of songs, photographers have to consider the fact that there are a lot of fans out there who want stuff for free, despite what the photographer has invested financially, fiscally and even emotionally.”

Well, where do we begin. No stopping the internet. Got it. What that has to do with stopping people’s actions and the interaction between consumers and creators is lost on me, but the author seems delighted with that statement, so we will let it lie there… ‘cept of course for this.

And in what world have artists learned to “work with unfettered downloading of songs”? What? DRM is over? Is Apple aware of that? Maybe I wont have to get yet another update to my iTunes. Has Garth brooks relented and let people download all his stuff free now? Really? Record companies packing up their desks, covering the furniture and heading home for some more “time with the family?” I think not.

“…photographers have to consider the fact that there are a lot of fans out there who want stuff for free…” – uh, OK. I want a Ferrari. Now. I want my mortgage paid. Now. I want some of those little sandwich things they serve at Chili’s with the Buffalo sauce… and I want it all FREE. Now. I want I want I want.

But I, just as I Montoya had to, must get used to disappointment. I will have to pony up for what I want. Cash. Dinero. C-Notes and coin.

“…despite what the photographer has invested financially, fiscally and even emotionally.” Yeah, there is no problem there. We are mostly independently wealthy and have no emotions at all. And I can’t think of any other places where the investment means anything… seriously. Can you?

And, I wonder, why would I as an owner of Intellectual Property acquiesce to the tantrums of those who simply don’t want to pay? Is it that they cannot pay? Really? Nawwww… I have seen too many owners of companies crying with crocodile tears about having no money, then driving away in their new Mercedes. Sure, wealth is relative, but so is giving a shit. I care about people who actually don’t have anything, but not so much about someone who is having trouble picking out cheap drapes for their second summer home.

Just because people want something doesn’t mean they get it. And, let’s be fair… WHO is it who is actually wanting to use the images without any compensation? 7 year olds working on their first paper on the Everglades? Some teen wanting to use the image on her Facebook? Or media conglomerates trying to scre…, er, re-define the compensation of the artist who created the work?

Yep… it’s the people who want to ‘use’ the work to make what… wait for it… wait for it… MONEY. So they can go to the store and buy them cute little buffalo sauce sandwiches that I would like to buy, but all I got was a friggin’ pat on the back! I don’t really know anyone who gives a ratsass about some kid using an image for their report. I don’t.

But if some bigass magazine wants to use my image, it must be worth something…right? Or are there no more art directors, photo editors, art buyers and creative directors who give a shit anymore. “Yeah, we were looking for some shitty shot of a factory and we ran across yours. We don’t give a damn about the magazine and the people who view it or what it says about us, we just want something free… and your crappy shot looks about like all we want. You game? We’ll give you… nothing. And we feel your work is worth it!”

“Oh boy… the magazine is gonna use my worthless image and I feel sooooo cool!”

“Even just a cursory browse through any number of blogs and image Tumblrs, and you’ll find countless images disconnected from their original sources and re-purposed for the web.”

Look through any jail and you will find people who re-purposed stereo gear and computers they ‘found’ laying around in the hotel rooms they broke into. (And yeah, I have heard it before…”If you don’t want people to steal your stuff, don’t have stuff, man.” Thanks. Now Shut Up.) Re-Purpose? Bwahahahaha… is stealing a car and parting it out now ‘re-purposing’ the automobile?

“Elias Wessel, profiled in this issue, is a good example. Every time he shoots a new project, it ends up spread almost immediately throughout the blogosphere.”

Cool. Great. Wonderful. If it works for him, fantastic. So we should do everything HIS way so it will benefit…? I am a little foggy on that stuff. I know photographers who do all kinds of stuff that I don’t do. I know brilliantly successful photographers who do things differently. There is NO one way. And I can only imagine if I took his images off of his site, did a magazine with them and made a bunch of money… he would be thrilled for me, huh? Can I make prints and hang them in my gallery? Re-purposed, of course.

Maybe I should re-purpose them into my site… it really is amazing work, and I don’t care about his financial and emotional investment, you know.

“The fine line between good publicity and outright thievery is a matter open to debate, and it’s often a heated debate at that.”

(continued after the jump)

No, sport, it isn’t. Copyright violation is fairly clear. Good publicity is something I go along with, thievery is when someone does something without my permission or involvement. I think that we can agree on that simple point… you can use what I say you can use, but you cannot use what I do not say you can use. Otherwise it is, exactly, “outright thievery.”

“Many photographers have a laissez-faire attitude about the public enjoying their work or snagging images for desktops and the like.”

Many photographers think domestic light beer is good and that Kanye West actually has talent. So what? Photographers come in all sorts of configuration. Hobbyists, weekend warriors, semi-pro, professional, and hacks. Sorry about that hack thing… but, unfortunately… What other photographers do is swell to chat about, but not necessarily a basis for changing copyright structure.

“Other photographers are adamant about protecting their images from being reproduced in any form. There’s a slew of programs and sites that cater to this demographic, from simple protections like Adobe’s Flash-based websites that prevent drag-and-drop image downloading to more intricate solutions like PicScout and Digimarc, which use a combination of watermarking and metadata indexing as a way to track images.”

Yes. Yes there are.

Myth: Stolen Images Are A Bad Thing

Stolen Images are a Good Thing then? Stolen music rocks? Stolen movies are swell. Hey, movie industry… you know those cloying little shorts you do before the overpriced shitty feature comes on…the ones about stealing? Yeah… those. Obviously you all are not on board here. Come on… spend 100 million bucks on a film and then give it away. We don’t care about what it costs to make it. We want it now and we want it free. Waaaaawaaaaaawaaaaaaa…. gimmmeee it.

What… you got an emotional attachment to the thing? Get over it, turds… you had your day. And next time, could you make some better special effects? Otherwise, I may not actually steal your movie. That’ll teach ya.

It really is not hard to take on this level of stupid is it? Stealing isn’t bad? Sure. OK. How about plagiarism… err, re-purposing of articles and books. And how about all those crazy bitches at the libraries not wanting Google to simply scan every book to be given away free? Loonies. Writers make too much money and get too many hot chicks for us to give a damn about them.

“Still, a screen grab is often as simple as performing a keyboard shortcut, and information can be stripped from an image almost as easily as it is to add it.”

Ohhh.. so it is easy to do, and therefor it is good to do? And the fact that “information can be stripped from an image almost as easily as it is to add it…” seems to be the same thing as counterfeiting currency. Hey, we can scan this, print it out and make our own money… information can be added/stripped out as necessary! Damn… that’s cool.

What could go wrong there?

Of course the fact that someone opened an image and “stripped out” the copyright information means that they know that the copyright information was there and that it may be problematic for them so they stripped it out. Like filing the ID# off of a handgun, or filing down the VIN# on a stolen car.

Dude… you are winning me over here. I can make my own cash (5′s and 1′s) and steal cars as long as it is easy to ‘alter the information’ I can re-purpose it to my ends. This is sooooo great!

“More importantly, the advantages of allowing images to be seen can’t be understated, even if the creator of the images lacks control over how.”

No. No it can’t.

Not sure there has been any more ignorant statement made by someone regarding the issue of artists rights ever. Ever.

To think that this writer has such a limited view of copyright, control of image, brand, and of course the litigation that can be caused by unauthorized and illegal use of an image simply runs right by him like a freight train, then make statements that sound like some sort of ‘fact’ amazes and dazzles me.

“The Internet can make an artist, literally, an overnight sensation. If a media-hungry public embraces a particular project or image, it may be seen throughout the entire world within mere moments.”

Yes. I know of several, dozens of viral things that have made people famous. Hasn’t put a nickel in their pocket, but made them ‘famous’. Woohoo… as they say. And that fame doesn’t necessarily transfer into a living, does it?

And I don’t have any problem getting famous with putting videos on YouTube. Just one question…

Can you not see any difference between ME putting it up there and having it STOLEN and put up there? Can you really say they are both the same?

If I decide to put up a video and get all famous and stuff leading me to more money which I probably would not be able to deal with and would end up in a clinic with some sort of addictive thing looking to trade on my fame for more drugs and… oh, sorry. Hey, that is MY business.

Why would I get all giddy over you putting my video up and YOU getting to be rich and hang with Lindsay Lohan at the rehabs? Explain that, please?

“All of these sets of eyes on your work invariably bring back revenue in one form or another, whether through commissioned future projects, prints or what have you.”

Money quote coming: “…invariably bring back revenue in one form or another…”

Bwahahahaha… yeah. “Hey, if you give me a good deal on this first job, I will make it worth it to you on the next one.” “We need a new photographer with amazing style and the eyes to pull this off. Right away we thought of you. Unfortunately, we have no budget for this, but knew you would just jump…” “It’s not you, it’s me.”

Sorry, heard all that crap before. “Invariably”… what, you think we were born yesterday? Invariably my ass. There is no ‘invariably’ with this stuff. However, “invariably” you have lost the abilitiy to do anything else with that image… great deal for you there.

“The difficulty is that the photographer doesn’t always get the credit.”"

Duh… ya think?

A watermark can help, though subtle ones that are overt enough to be read while not blemishing an image are few and far between. Another solution is through proper keywording and tagging of images at the source, usually on the photographer’s website or in the original image files. That way, a photographer can leave a path for resourceful Internet seekers to discover the original location of images.”

Simply amazing lack of understanding how the web works. Keywording may work for those who are smart enough to use pure HTML, but not necessarily for database housed images or flash… and, hey… how’s that work on those screenshots we were told were so cool a few paragraphs above? And who can forget the infamous “information can be stripped from an image almost as easily as it is to add it” statement.

Confused? So am I.

“What to do about people or businesses that gain from unapproved imagery?”

Sue them. Fire them if they work for you. Beat the everlovin’… no, I am not violent. Well, I do have a Louisville Slugger that needs a workout… and I can re-purpose someones kneecaps. But more likely I would simply issue a DRM takedown, sue them or their ISP if it was blatant, or turn the wrath of twitter and flickr users on them. Hey, I KNOW that works. Heh.

“Creative Commons is a good middle ground that photographers and artists can explore to allow use of their works without sacrificing the rights that copyrights provide.”

NOPE, big fellah. Hold on there. It isn’t any middle ground. It is abdication and a losing of rights. Once something is set into the CC it cannot be taken back. The artist can only live with the choice he has made… forever. And what does it mean to “explore to allow use” mean? Seriously?

The rights to have the image EVER be licensed or controlled is LOST whenever the image is posted at any level of CC.

“For a good example of what CC-licensing can provide, Flickr is the web’s largest source of Creative Commons content. The community atmosphere of Flickr encourages hundreds of thousands of people to view and rate images, leading to an incredible promotional tool for photographers who know how to use the site to their advantage (Miss Aniela, for instance)—all at the low cost of $24.95 for a yearly pro account, and they even have limited accounts for free.”

“…Flickr encourages hundreds of thousands of people to view and rate images,…” Well, before I take on the ludicrous statement that accompanies this, I must point out that Flickr has NO “Rating” system at all. That’s over at “rate-my-ass.com” and other more artistic endeavors. There are comments, groups, forums and more… but NO rating.

Is the writer clueless about Flickr, or simply mixing it up with “hot-or-not.com”? We report, you decide.

“…leading to an incredible promotional tool for photographers who know how to use the site to their advantage…” – Yes, that may be true, but you do NOT have to have your images on CC to do that. Most, if not all, of the pros and highest followed shooters on Flickr do NOT HAVE CC, but rather have turned it off. I really find your attempt to link CC with a natural use of Flickr somewhat appalling. I really do, sir.

“Rather than the old-school way of saying, “No, you can’t use this image without paying me,” there are six standardized Creative Commons licenses that provide you flexibility in protecting your works for meeting the ever-changing world of supply and demand.”

We all know what a straw man argument is, right. First we create a false “strawman” statement, and then we knock it down. This is classic strawman… the notion that the ONLY way it worked in the ‘old days’ was to demand money sets up the NEED for the CC license.

But people have always been able to say “sure, you can use my image.” Simple… let’s say it again…”sure, you can use my image…without any money. Take it. Use it. Consider it a gift.”

There is nothing new about that…but the author sets up the strawman of that being too difficult, or non-existent then offers something to cure the ‘ills’ that really don’t exist at all. If you want someone to use your image, let them. I don’t care at all if it is what you want to do.

But remember, this valuable, career enhancing information on using CC is coming from someone who just told you that stealing your image is OK! And now he is trying to sell you on a CC license which simply eliminates your ability to ever, EVER, take control of that image again.

“What’s more, Creative Commons is a global solution for allowing or disallowing uses of your work. The set of copyright licenses are available free of charge at www.creativecommons.org. For more on Creative Commons and your rights as a photographer, go to the Business section of DPP on the web at www.digitalphotopro.com.”

Yeah… global… well, I’ll pass on that. I have never been impressed with this CC thing from the get-go as they say. I wonder why corporations are so supportive for this to happen to photographers, while they continue to take steps to protect their property, real or intellectual? Why the desire for photographers and illustrators to give away their work in the desire to be free of that terrible, time consuming, energy wasting copyright protection thing. I don’t see magazines and other publishers rushing out to give their publications away. (And, yeah… we don’t care about the paper, ink, distribution costs or that crap, remember…)

Hey, that stuff is icky… the CC people will make it easy for you to just make pictures and not have to deal with all the encumbrances of having to have an accountant… you wont have any money to account.

But they will… the magazines and media groups that will happily gobble up your work and give you NOTHING back. They will have subscribers and bookstands and advertising and…

But you won’t. You will just feel soooooo cool that a big-time News magazine used your image, after tacitly telling you it wasn’t worth anything at all.

Golly, on second thought… sign me up!

No related posts.

Seems like a crazy thing to say… put the lens cap on. Lens caps make taking photographs impossible. They don’t let any light in. Maximum Density Filters ya know. They keep the lens clean and don’t let images be made unless the photographer wants them to be made.

But I am not talking about putting the lens cap on your camera… I am talking about putting the lens cap on your world… and controlling what comes in. Strictly and with absolute certainty… OK, with as much control as you can manage anyway. It is a noisy world out there, and so much of it is designed to keep us busy without letting us get stuff done. The lens cap on your world means you don’t have anything that distracts you and you control your input.

A few questions for you (and me).

How many times do you check your email during the day? How many times does that email that you are answering impact your life? How many minutes or hours are spent twittering, or facebooking (Mafia Wars and some farm thing seem to be very popular) or simply reading stuff you already know? Be honest. And be aware. Now write down how much income was made from those pursuits… number of emails vs number of gigs. Scary, eh.

How many TV shows do you watch a day? Other than “Burn Notice” and “The Closer”, there ain’t much else on (heh). Ask yourself if watching more than an hour of TV a day makes you better than your competition. I doubt the answer would be yes. And remember that many of your competitors are shooting and editing and showing their book while Oprah and House reruns take your attention.

I am not trying to sound like an ass, but we spend too much time simply spending time, not using time. Only have so many hours a day that we can spend working and being creative, and the hours we lose are lost. Forever.

What would it mean to our creative lives to start to prioritize the things we do into “need to” and “want to”. Want to things are many times the time wasters. Need to things are things that must be done. There is a heck of a difference between the two. Focusing our day on what needs to be done can lead to more shooting time.

Try this… or as much of this as you think you can handle for the addicted among us.

Email: check in morning, right after lunch, hour before end of day.
Twitter: using TeetDeck or any similar product, create columns of your most interesting folks and check them out for a few minutes 4 times a day. Then turn it off so the little ‘tweet’ sound doesn’t keep following you.
Facebook: Look, if you aren’t marketing but have time to play Mafia Wars, I think you need to check some priorities. Evening for 1/2 hour to get caught up.
Phone: We need to remember how to use that thing… it has been left to its own and has become a huge time waster toy… and all that is good, but, DAMN, folks. Voice mail is good.

The point of this? To get more photographs shot. More editing of them and more images into our books and portfolios and projects. I have been talking to too many photographers who aren’t as busy as they would like to be, but are not doing anything about their situation, or taking advantage of the opportunity given them.

Opportunity? Hell yeah.

If you aren’t shooting for someone else, you have time to shoot for yourself. I hear that is what so many want to do. Do it. Create a project, and finish it. Create something to Tweet about. Create something that you can use to show AD’s on your next visit. Make it yours. Make images that you want for your own creative endeavors… and show everyone what you are doing. So instead of looking at the slower periods as disaster, look at them as opportunities to grow.

Have you done a Blurb book yet? If you didn’t watch TV for two weeks, that extra time could have been a Book of your personal images. Or portraits of your kids. Or that migration project you have been working on for a few years… whatever. It would be a book. Your book. And all you had to do was put the lens cap on your world, and focus on what needs to be done. The book needs to be done, the TV wants to be watched. Easy.

Controlling your world means getting a hold of your time, and channeling that time toward endeavors that will grow your work, book and stature. And it has the advantage of opening up more time for those family things… so you can be right there and all there.

Put the lens cap back on some of the things that are keeping you from shooting and working on your own images. Put it over the TV, and the talk radio and the forums and the other distractions aplenty. It won’t hurt a bit… well, maybe a bit, but the scars aren’t permanent.

I am not suggesting being a workaholic, and of course there are things that we can do to eliminate stress (I play my drums or the piano when I need some stress reliever), and there are things we just want to do. My personal distraction audit found some places that were draining my energy and sending back no reward. Continuing to do those things would be silly, don’t you think?

Putting the lens cap on the extraneous distractions may actually give us more real time to create, and more real time to enjoy!

See you soon, and you can follow me on Twitter if you like. I occasionally take the lens cap off and have a few things to say. You can leave comments here.

Related posts:

1. The Rigorous World of Macro Beauty Shots Coming in this close can be a nightmare for the...
2. Tech Sheet: Using a Tilt-Shift Lens Tilt-shift lenses provide the small camera shooter with the functionality...
3. Staying Natural in Front of the Lens: Model Behavior Briana Shaker adds a new article on having fun and...