Every week or two, I get an email from someone asking if I'm hiring
assistants. They'd like to work for me, not just for the job, but because
they feel being in my presence will give them insight into the photo
business world. They think they can jump ahead of the pack and learn
the secrets of the trade that no one else knows, or at least, won't for
some years to come.
Well, it ain't that simple. As my saying goes, "if it were that easy,
everyone would do it." While the idea sounds good in theory, reality
tends to play things out quite differently. First, knowing business is
not something you can efficiently or effectively learn by _assisting_
someone else. Doing business well involves knowing basic fundamental
business principles, and most photographers don't know those--nor do
they teach them well. Business school is the best place to learn that;
the second best place is by reading the text books that those classes
use. A pro photographer may be able to teach you how to keep records,
or to fill out a contract, or even to work with a client. But these
are tasks, not skills, and they certainly don't teach the
lower-level paradigms about how business is run--how to assess difficult
financial challenges, weighing between whether it's better to advertise
in the short term, or invest in a longer-term project. Truly difficult
business decisions is what separates skilled professionals from those
who know how to robotically repeat certain tasks.
And while it is important to learn tasks, and you can certainly do so
by assisting a pro, the next question is: do you need to invest that
kind of time and resources into that, as opposed to learning them more
quickly and efficiently elsewhere? And using that saved time doing
other things that build your _own_ career instead?
Another thing to note is that most all photo businesses vary in some
very major way depending on the photographer. Some have great technical
skills, and maybe a great client base, but they may not have the best
negotiation skills or even marketing savvy. Others may have those all
swapped. Photographers are somewhat like snowflakes in that they all
look roughly the same when viewed from afar, but close-up, each is so
uniquely differently, that it's a big mistake if you try to copy one
by observation. If any given photographer is successful, chances are
that he is so because of who he is: his unique qualities and
characteristics happen to make it all work. A different individual will
never be able to match these attributes perfectly, and trying to do so
may cause more harm than good to one's own career.
What will make you successful is by starting first from a basis
of something you know really well. I always recommend to people they
enter the photo business from something that they did before going into
photography--like a previous career, hobby, interest, or anything that
separates them from everyone else. For example: if you come from the
auto industry and know a lot about cars, chances are you will speak
persuasively and authoritatively about cars in general, which can help
you land jobs with clients who need you to photograph cars. Knowing
the business of the marketplace you are shooting gives you immeasurable
insight into the business culture of that target market, which is far
more valuable.
Those who have no substantive background before photography are not
likely to do well in this business, and few careers in "the arts" suffer
fools easily. And, it turns out, many of these very people seem to be
those who want to work as photography assistants. Of course, not all are
like this--but that gets back to my other favorite quote, "even a clock
that doesn't run is right twice a day." (In other words, you can't look
at anecdotal evidence of how "someone" was successful at doing something,
and expect that it presents a tested and viable strategy for you.)
All that said, it's not like I'm totally sour to the idea of being a
photo assistant; if one were to insist on my giving some kind of advice,
here it is: (And you can't look to satisfy just one of these--they are
all important.)
- Work for someone you know. (Asking a total stranger is
guaranteed to fail on the next series of points below.)
- Do not work for photographers who are secretive about their
business practices, or who feel the least bit threatened by other
photographers. These people often have no real understanding of the
business world in general; their success is more due to the narrow scope
of their focus and having capitalized on opportunities early in their
career from uniquely particular circumstances. Their success is like that
of the lottery winner--they think they're smart, but in reality, they are
more the lucky exceptions to the rule. It's not that they did anything
wrong; on the contrary, they did well. But a hundred people could have
done the same thing and not yielded the same success either. Do you want
to be another statistic? Arrogance is a sure way to rule out any given
employer in this field. Success is not about knowing secrets and putting
them together. It's about applying basic, common business sense together,
along with a dose of talent and persistence.
- Try to find those who are used to helping people learn--like
photography teachers--and who are generally good employers.
- Seek photographers who have built their businesses _after_ the year
2000. It's tempting to find seasoned professionals who've been in the
business for years and years, but they built their career at a time where
conditions are too dissimilar to today's economic climate to use them as
effective role models. Today, they only need to maintain their businesses,
not build new ones from scratch. Photographers who became pros after 2000
were more likely to have used the internet as the primary marketing mechanism,
not just a secondary one. They are more internet-savvy and know how to use
it, not learned it reluctantly later in their career. The role that the
internet plays in business development, and the business mechanics of
working in the digital age is rare, if not unheard of, by seasoned pros
who started their career prior to 2000.
Why I don't hire assistants is a catch-22: if anyone were
talented and smart enough to actually be useful to me, they would not
want to work for anyone. They would instead be working on their own to
build their careers. Everyone else, I wouldn't want to hire.
|
|
