A famous photographer explains what it takes to shoot for National Geographic magazine
Known for its decades of astonishing photography, the magazine serves as a kind of Mount Everest for many photojournalists. There are few outlets in the world with as respected a team of photographers. No other publication seems to transform its shooters into celebrities the way National Geographic does.
But it's not an easy lifestyle.
The magazine only lists two staff photographers on its masthead. The rest of the images come from a stable of veteran freelancers.
On the National Geographic website, the magazine suggests aspiring young shooters complete a degree in something other than photography and find a specialty like underwater shooting.
National Geographic freelancer Ami Vitale, who spoke to us recently about her wild photo essay about pandas, said she got her start as a war and conflict photographer before moving into wildlife shooting.
And she explained that sacrifice is a key job requirement.
"I find projects that I'm super passionate about," Vitale said. "And just so you know, I literally invest a ton of money myself in the beginning. Everything I make goes right back into the work."
So, despite its pages being hallowed ground, it can be difficult to make a decent living exclusively shooting for the magazine.
"I've got to do a few commercial things every year to make the documentary work sustainable," Vitale said. "Frankly, I know there's a few people that have been able to do it. But I have to do things like give talks all the time, and do a lot of other things to make this sustainable. It's not really a money-making endeavor."
She's not alone.
Other well-known National Geographic photographers, like Melissa Farlow, Randy Olson, and even the world-famous (and controversial) Afghan Girl photographer Steve McCurry shoot commercial work to supplement their photography for the magazine.
Beyond that, the best thing anyone can do is practice - and know the job is not likely to make you rich.