What feild of photography makes the most money

Motion picture still photographers are well paid thanks to our IATSE Local 600 union. We get health insurance, 401k, help on down payments for houses, and many other benefits. I am shooting the top teir of low budget films right now (~$10m budget) and made over $3300 last week (five days). I think that's pretty good to consistently bring home on a pretty easy job.

And the pay goes up even higher as the budget of the films you work on goes up.

tkbslc wrote in post #11198378
IN any field, only the top few make the really big bucks. Photography is likely no different. The top 1% in any segment make a ton, the next 24% make an honest living, and the rest struggle it out.

Sounds comparable to the Gold Rush - mining, put that way.

Getting your self portrait when you were 14 stolen by a porn company pays pretty good...besides that commercial. There is numbers out there that were basically guesses at percentages of what people make. Not many are making a living, I know some full time newspaper photographers who are not making a living without a second income, some stock as well, some weddings, etc. Others though are doing great, it depends.

Someone said it earlier in this thread; the type of photography that you excel in. The top guys always make a good $ no matter what the field. I think it could generally be said that commercial pays better across the board as the barriers to entry are more significant. It's a very relationship-based portion of the profession and you don't have as many of the CraigsListers nipping at your heels.

breal101 wrote in post #11204334
I think that's true, like you say generally. Back in the day I knew a couple of wedding/portrait photographers who were very wealthy, they had a stable of 10 or more photographers working for them and several portrait studio locations each. It may be a model that isn't viable anymore but it sure worked for them.

I still have a couple of good friends that do high end weddings that pull in big $$$$. I think any area like high end weddings (10K +) and specialized commercial/advertising where the clients wouldn't even consider a GWC and price is not the only deciding factor. In fact price is usually secondary. Those are the areas that always will be in demand and because it takes special skill sets and knowledge because of that will usually command higher prices.

None!

http://gawker.com …nobody-likes-her-pictures

for someone who makes $250k/year, she sure cant sell her stuff.
Her photo shoot with the Queen was a disaster.
And yes, how many druggies, homeless, rock stars, celebs can people stare at? After 40 years, enough already, no one cares.

I'd like to get into film photography (stills photographer), they earn alot, more than what I do now anyway, so thats good enough for me!

How do you figure it was a "disaster?" She had one minor faux paux (pretty darned easy to do when you don't know the complex royal etiquette) which the queen laughed off, got more than enough time with the queen, including several different sessions. And got some very fine results.

You aren't judging from the BBC reporting, are you? The BBC originally reported it as a "disaster" but then had to recant the sensationalism and fired the two producers of the story.

Gomar wrote in post #11220578
None!

http://gawker.com …nobody-likes-her-pictures

for someone who makes $250k/year, she sure cant sell her stuff.
Her photo shoot with the Queen was a disaster.
And yes, how many druggies, homeless, rock stars, celebs can people stare at? After 40 years, enough already, no one cares.

Isn't it $250,000 per commercial shoot and a couple of million per year?

Wow - there sure are some high ceilings out there.