Average US Salary 53,000 is this Right?

Hello Photo Pro's,

Do you think the average photographer salary of 53k is correct? The below article states a low of 34k and a high of 71k?

http://www1.salary.com​/Photographer-salary.html

Inquiring minds want to know because I'm thinking it might be a little low.

Everything I've read says $53k would be a little optimistic as an average.

Wow! It would be hard to live on 71K much less 53k. Something to be said for loving what you do for a living but I have 2 kids.

I'm also thinking 53,000 wouldn't include any benifits.

So, for a family of 4 health insurance would run 18,000 a year.

53,000 - 18,000 = 35,000 and this would be before taxes.

So, my guess is that photographers would supplement the income with a 2nd job, or sell new equipment on the side.

I would not be too concerned as averages do not mean much without knowing other factors such as the mean and standard deviation. (Based on averages, half the Doctors graduate in the lower half of their class - that does not mean they are lousy Doctors but one can certainly twist the information to imply otherwise)

That said, for an average photographer $53K is not a bad income. After all, they are only "average", right? However, for those photographers that make business management, marketing and client development their forte, they can (and do) make much more than $53K.

jptsr1 wrote in post #11604425
Wow! It would be hard to live on 71K much less 53k. Something to be said for loving what you do for a living but I have 2 kids.

In California, maybe... here in NC you can make a pretty comfortable living on $71k. It's all about the cost of living where you live, so a national average isn't really going to tell you that much.

Also, the "pro photographer" umbrella covers so many different things.

Markitos wrote in post #11604606
In California, maybe... here in NC you can make a pretty comfortable living on $71k.

exactly why I'm trying to leave California now.

Um in AL, you would be making MEGA bank with 71k. Youre doing great at 40-50k...

also, that doesn't include cash on side for some jobs probably.

Here in Tennessee (Mt. Juliet) if you were in the top 90'th percentile and making 71K, as a photographer, you would be getting by okay.

18.27 Percent of Americans make $50,000 to $75,000 (18.27%)

The highest percentage of Americans make 0-25,000 dollars a year @28.22%

**** So what I gather is the average photographer @ 53k a year is making more than the average salary in America.****

I could be way off, but this is just a logical guess.

53K down here would be pretty well off. Not rich but above average for sure. If that 53k figure is fulltime self employed, that means their gross sales should be in the neighborhood of $150k-$200k. Much higher if they had a studio/employees/etc.

I am sure a lot of that figure comes from corporate fulltime salaried jobs as well. In that case it wouldnt be too far off.

I would guess that for every photographer who actually has a genuine business and who makes 53k or more, there are 3-5 who make less. It is attainable, but you have to be among the best in your city...unless you have a corporate job. Also depends where you live...Michigan isn't the best these days (ok, the last 10 years), but maybe somewhere like NYC is easier?

_______________

Grand Rapids Wedding Photographers

Canon 5d, 5d MkII, 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, 16-35mm L, 50mm f/1.2L, 580ex II.

The county I live in here in Southern Indiana, the avg income is 28k.
Before I lost my job, me and the wife were bringing in close to 60k a year and were living large. So it does highly depend on where you live.

From Internet, the US median income is US$27,100.00. In Australia, the median is $39,080.00.

However, that's partly explained by hourly/weekly pay differences in the lower 50%.

In the US, the Federal Minimum Wage is just under $8.00 an hour, and while State Minimums can be higher, I don't see any over $11.00 an hour.

In Australia the Federal Minimum Wage is $15.00 an hour / $570.00 for a standard 38-hour week. State Minimum Wage Awards can be higher, but not lower.

We also have a large "spendable income" advantage here over some places, on Health Care costs.

Most Americans need to buy quite expensive Health Insurance, that's not so here. All persons of all ages, employed or not, are covered by Medicare. Unlike the US, where Medicare is for low-income elderly, here it describes Universal Healthcare.

That covers GPs (local / family doctors), Specialists, Hospital and other Tests, Operations, Hospital In-Patients, Ambulance, and heavily subsidises Prescriptions/Medicati​ons, etc.

You can freely choose your GP, and change GPs at any time. Those who for personal reasons need a Female or Male doctor, or one of a Faith, can select one to their needs.

Medicare here is paid for by a 1.5% Medicare Levy on all earned incomes. There is no "income limit" on using the Medicare System. However, those who are well-off, and choose to, can pay extra into Medicare Private, to get hospital "private individual" wards, etc. However, many medium or higher income folk, particularly those with families, choose to use the standard system, as it is actually very good.

There is also a non-taxable Baby Bonus - from 1/1/11, $5,294.00, to help families with those "new baby" extra costs. It's "per baby", for Twins, Triplets, etc.

While some EU Countries do Universal Healthcare a bit above our services, Australia on WHO National Healthcare ratings is usually in the top 5, yearly. Australia spends under half per capita than does the US - about 8% compared with 17% of GDP.

I'm on Disability Pension (Shoulder, Diabetes, COPD), and on $632.00 (they put the "Full-Price" on the packages) - of medications, in 6 Prescriptions a month. I pay $5.60 for any Prescription, regardless of the full cost. So I pay $33.60, and this is more than covered by a $38.00 Pharmaceutical Allowance in addition to the pension. (There's also an Essential Communications Allowance, which pays about 40% of my Phone and Internet costs per month.)

Dave.

Depends where you live, the local rag photographer makes 26K with benefits, I can't think of many that make 53K after paying taxes and your own benefits, etc. Most are not even coming close to that!

exwintech wrote in post #11606336
From Internet, the US median income is US$27,100.00. In Australia, the median is $39,080.00.

However, that's partly explained by hourly/weekly pay differences in the lower 50%.

In the US, the Federal Minimum Wage is just under $8.00 an hour, and while State Minimums can be higher, I don't see any over $11.00 an hour.

In Australia the Federal Minimum Wage is $15.00 an hour / $570.00 for a standard 38-hour week. State Minimum Wage Awards can be higher, but not lower.

We also have a large "spendable income" advantage here over some places, on Health Care costs.

Most Americans need to buy quite expensive Health Insurance, that's not so here. All persons of all ages, employed or not, are covered by Medicare. Unlike the US, where Medicare is for low-income elderly, here it describes Universal Healthcare.

That covers GPs (local / family doctors), Specialists, Hospital and other Tests, Operations, Hospital In-Patients, Ambulance, and heavily subsidises Prescriptions/Medicati​ons, etc.

You can freely choose your GP, and change GPs at any time. Those who for personal reasons need a Female or Male doctor, or one of a Faith, can select one to their needs.

Medicare here is paid for by a 1.5% Medicare Levy on all earned incomes. There is no "income limit" on using the Medicare System. However, those who are well-off, and choose to, can pay extra into Medicare Private, to get hospital "private individual" wards, etc. However, many medium or higher income folk, particularly those with families, choose to use the standard system, as it is actually very good.

There is also a non-taxable Baby Bonus - from 1/1/11, $5,294.00, to help families with those "new baby" extra costs. It's "per baby", for Twins, Triplets, etc.

While some EU Countries do Universal Healthcare a bit above our services, Australia on WHO National Healthcare ratings is usually in the top 5, yearly. Australia spends under half per capita than does the US - about 8% compared with 17% of GDP.

I'm on Disability Pension (Shoulder, Diabetes, COPD), and on $632.00 (they put the "Full-Price" on the packages) - of medications, in 6 Prescriptions a month. I pay $5.60 for any Prescription, regardless of the full cost. So I pay $33.60, and this is more than covered by a $38.00 Pharmaceutical Allowance in addition to the pension. (There's also an Essential Communications Allowance, which pays about 40% of my Phone and Internet costs per month.)

Dave.

Seems there are some advantages to living where you do. I'm trying hard not to turn this political because there are great debates in the US on how to handle it. The truth is, and most would agree, Health Care in the US is running rampant and is damaging our country. For example, if your not covered by insurance and something major happened, it would likely ruin your financial future.

I can only hope something is done about the rising costs before my family and I loose our health coverage. My company has already warned its workforce that if cost continue to rise, like that have over the past 10 years, health coverage would be dropped. Keep in mind there are 40 thousand of us, so it would be devistating to a lot of families.

David