"The industry" is MUCH bigger than that. And there's damn little creativity in the vast majority of it.

Think senior portraits, Little League team photos and a raft of other jobs done by professionals with cameras.

The Bell curve described above is really only the far right hand tip of the real curve. Look at the number of pictures required for your daily newspapers, your news Web sites (CNN, Fox, et al) and your entertainment programs. That doesn't even count all the public relations claptrap or the official photography done of, for and by the governments of our cities, counties, states and nation.

In sheer bulk of images with which we're bombarded, commercial clients large and small are all on the far right of the above-described curve.

Michael McGowan wrote:

"The industry" is MUCH bigger than that. And there's damn little creativity in the vast majority of it.

Think senior portraits, Little League team photos and a raft of other jobs done by professionals with cameras.

The Bell curve described above is really only the far right hand tip of the real curve. Look at the number of pictures required for your daily newspapers, your news Web sites (CNN, Fox, et al) and your entertainment programs. That doesn't even count all the public relations claptrap or the official photography done of, for and by the governments of our cities, counties, states and nation.

In sheer bulk of images with which we're bombarded, commercial clients large and small are all on the far right of the above-described curve.

Point well taken.  Generally, though, when people in the world of model photography talk about "the industry" I get the impression they're talking about commercial photography, not photojournalism and team sports, and not fine art or fetish either.  From a statistical perspective, I'm talking about a sub-population of the population you're considering, and every sub-population has it's own distribution as well.  Regardless, even though I'm focusing on small-scale commercial photography in the OP, I'm certainly interested in hearing relevant experience and ideas from anywhere on the spectrum.

Tim Hammond wrote:

Michael McGowan wrote:

"The industry" is MUCH bigger than that. And there's damn little creativity in the vast majority of it.

Think senior portraits, Little League team photos and a raft of other jobs done by professionals with cameras.

The Bell curve described above is really only the far right hand tip of the real curve. Look at the number of pictures required for your daily newspapers, your news Web sites (CNN, Fox, et al) and your entertainment programs. That doesn't even count all the public relations claptrap or the official photography done of, for and by the governments of our cities, counties, states and nation.

In sheer bulk of images with which we're bombarded, commercial clients large and small are all on the far right of the above-described curve.

Point well taken.  Generally, though, when people in the world of model photography talk about "the industry" I get the impression they're talking about commercial photography, not photojournalism and team sports, and not fine art or fetish either.  From a statistical perspective, I'm talking about a sub-population of the population you're considering, and every sub-population has it's own distribution as well.  Regardless, even though I'm focusing on small-scale commercial photography in the OP, I'm certainly interested in hearing relevant experience and ideas from anywhere on the spectrum.

In most places not named Los Angeles or New York, the same bloke who's doing the senior portraits is also handling the jewelry store ads and the local billboards.

"Models" are quite often people who work at a store. If you think that's bad, you ought to listen to them talk in TV commercials.

When I hear a photographer talking about "the industry," he's generally talking about editorial shooting. But that's just where I've been hiding out for 40-odd years.

At the time that I was working full-time as a photojournalist, I also made lots of money (and barter) from shop owners who wanted me to photograph stuff for them. They couldn't afford the studio guys, so they'd hire the local PJ to do a down-and-dirty product shoot.

In the size community where I live right now, only a handful of the larger businesses even pay for their own pictures. The rest use stock images from manufacturers. Why get somebody locally to shoot pictures of rings when you already have a kick-ass shot from the manufacturer?

Tailoring a business model to a community is perhaps the toughest task of all. I've mentioned a top-notch commercial shooter I know in (of all places) Peoria. It took him 20 years or so, but he now has a national business, based in his hometown. From what he says, he started out super-small and worked his way up.

Location and learning what people want makes all the difference. And one thing that both makes him happy and generates goodwill in the business community is his charity work. His homespun yet slick TV ads for the March of Dimes showcase his ability with people as well as his techniques.

Reaching out in the community makes all the difference.