illrooster132 wrote in post #12265342
just wondering how many use a home studio and if is working ok.
or is it better to have a store front.
i know is more professional to have your own studio but money is a bit of a problem for now.
has anyone started with a home studio? i want to take off like that for now and want to hear some stories about it,
thankx for the input

The absolutely most important document you can read at this point is PPA's Studio Financial Benchmark analysis (prepared annually). This analysis is prepared by the PPA Studio Management Services. SMS provides education, consultation, and actual accounting services to thousands of photographers around the US. They know what the profitable photographers are doing right and what the unprofitable photographers are doing wrong.
Then take time to peruse the information provided in this area:
http://www.ppa.com/studio-management-services/
I don't know offhand how much of this information is accessible to non-PPA members, but for someone just going into the business, it's overwhelmingly worth a year of PPA membership to pick up as much SMS information as possible.
In a "teaser" to your question, for instance, the Benchmark analysis reveals that the most profitable portrait studios are those in which the photographer lives on the same property as the shooting space. This might be anything from a loft apartment over a downtown studio to a custom-designed shooting space in a residential area.
It should not be surprising that overhead would be lower if one lives where one shoots--what is surprising is how much difference it makes, even for successful studios, and that a "home studio" is probably the best option if it's in any way feasible.
The report also indicates that the least profitable studios are wedding who maintain retail studio space.
SMS says "more" or "less" profitable, they aren't referencing absolute amounts of net or gross earnings, but rather the ratio of expense to profit. A studio with a low gross but a net profit that's a very high percentage of the gross is "more profitable" than a studio with a much higher gross and perhaps even a much higher net profit, but with a net profit that's only barely above the gross.
The latter photographer may be making more money, but he's also working much harder, and with better studio management he could be working less or pocketing more. The former photographer is managing well, but probably needs information on how to market better--what is actually working for the photographers who are successful marketers...and SMS has real-world data on that, too.
That said, there are still some prerequisites for a home studio:
1. Compliance with local residential business laws and zoning--these may directly affect whether you can operate a studio without substantial rennovation, or whether you can have a home studio at all. For instance, some communities may require your business to be fully wheelchair accessible--which might mean ramps, wider doors, wider halls, and larger bathrooms.
3. Full understanding of legal liablity and insurance needs--that might also require rennovation.
3. Separation of business and living areas. A home studio should, ideally, be separated from the living areas. A separate parking area, a separate entrance, and separate client-reception areas if at all possible. Separate bathrooms and dressing rooms, for sure.
I know of numerous photographers who simply moved to buildings and areas that were first suitable for the business and then made a portion of the building suitable for living.