Fact 1: It’s not the consensus that shooting film is more artistic at all. The cost of film plus having to wait for processing to see the results WILL make you a more thoughtful photographer however. Digital is fine but you must have the discipline not to just pop off a thousand shots to find 25 good ones. That’s not real photography it’s dumb luck and you will learn nothing if you do that.

Fact 2: Arguing about resolution and specs with gear-heads won’t advance your mastery of the art. It will just make you broke buying a bunch of stupid shit you don’t need.

Fact 3: Photography is mastery of controlling light and using the right glass. Master those two things and learn to have the instincts for their respective application and you’re halfway there.

Fact 4: Many people upgrade because camera companies set marketing traps for consumers. Dumping what you already have when you haven’t pushed it to its technical and limit is foolishness. Don’t buy gear to remove limitations you’re having. Instead work with what you have and try to overcome those limitations in a creative way.

These are great thanks for posting them.

“ it is hunger, anger, ignorance, corruption, insecurity and death”.

You have your assignment right here. If you can find 10 images that convey each of these things (50 or 60 photos) you will have something to work with to refine this idea. You’ll know when you’ve got it.

Your first problem is you’re taking advice from Andrew Tate, who is a world-class douche who is in love with his own reflection. He’s a shit bag.

You’re young and you’re still measuring wealth in dollars. I’m not seeing passion for photography or anything else here except your desire use it as a mechanism to make a million dollars. It’s possible but unless you’re Annie Leibovitz and have a time machine it’s unlikely.

Nobody wants to be a “starving artist”. Hell, nobody wants to be a starving anything, but you’re doing yourself a disservice by being this shallow.

I went back to information technology myself. I work as a contract programmer remotely and even part time I make several times more than I ever did doing photography.

Capitalism ruined art in the US and the attitude is that if it has no commercial value it’s worthless. All the money is in science technology engineering and medical. Sad but true.

I do photography for myself now and I love it more than ever.

Anybody whose been in this industry and have experience making money from photography, is it worth pursuing?

It can be, but it’s likely you’ll enjoy it whole lot less if you’re counting on it (by itself) to pay bills. If you don’t like marketing and sales, I’d forget it, because honestly that’s more than 50 percent of the gig.

How’s the money?

This depends on the market you’re in and what you’re shooting (and for whom). Money can be good, or it can be a race to the bottom depending on what you’re shooting. I’d say do some research and find out who and what you DONT want to compete with, unless you’re satisfied with being a bottom dweller. If you associate yourself with hacks and lowballers you will be categorized as one.

​

would you say it’s enough to sustain financial independence and is there any hope to go further and even think of a above normal life?

Financial independence is a nebulous term depends on factors that make this question impossible to answer. “Above normal” - if by that you mean more money then possibly, but nobody knows what your “normal” looks like.

​

From a business standpoint is there any potential or is it oversaturated?

Potential, sure, there always is. Potential will not keep your lights on however.

Oversaturated? Definitely, for better or worse.