ssymeono Loc: St. Louis, Missouri

Of course, but let's not overlook the fact that the most lasting feature of the magazine for almost 40 years has been a page on endangered species called: "Wildlife as CANON sees it". Also, National Geographic publishes it own manual for photographers.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

mackolb

One key note is the sheer number of (then, slides, now digital) frames captured in order to find the one that makes the cut.
Back in the 1990s, I was hired to photograph a wedding by the bride's mother whose brother was a NG photographer. He shot the day as well. When we delivered our products, the customer found a vast difference in what I brought to her over her brother's spray and pray deliverables. And we were both shooting negative film. Quality vs quantity. And, of course, having a working familiarity with a Jewish wedding as opposed to an "exotic" event in a far-away locale.

ELNikkor

Nat. Geo. has 5 staff photographers who can make up to $100k per year. They also have around 50 occasional but reliable "per diem" photographers who they may assist on an assignment only basis. The info provided by "Stardust" was only for Nat. Geo.'s "Your Shot" program, which allows anyone with any kind of a camera to submit photos for their perusal.

petego4it Loc: NY

If you visit DC, a MUST for any real photog is to visit the HQ of NatGeo. Try to do a tour where they show how a story is assembled, keyed on the photography of course. Very, very special!!

ashriverguy Loc: Rural Minnesota

I was at a party 50 some years ago and met a guy who was "a friend of a friend" who was a staff photographer for NG. He had been on a shoot in South America on a river and he told me about all
the equipment they took along. CASES of cameras, lenses, tripods, film, you name it. He said it was very hard demanding work; long days, heat, humidity, bugs, reptiles, rain. I can also remember him telling me
about the developing of the film and all the precautions they used upon his return. He also said that they used dye transfer methods for printing. He emphasized that NG went to no ends to get good Photos.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

I think that once you have been shooting awhile, the thrill of bragging about a cover image disappears. You just want to make meaningful images.

BebuLamar

Everybody uses Photoshop today to certain extent but NG photos have been excellent many years ago, way before PS. Most of their photos back then were shot on Kodachrome and there was some manipulation before going to press but I don't think a whole lot. So the photos must be very good to begin with SOOC.

dsnoke Loc: North Georgia, USA

Five years ago I participated in a photography hike in Scotland organized by National Geographic. Description and pictures at http://seven-oaks.net/dickspics/photo-albums/travel-photography/overseas-trips/higlands-and-islands-of-scotland-2014/

During that adventure I had the opportunity to lunch with the Nat Geo photographer who accompanied us. I won't name names in case I recall some of this incorrectly. In any event, the lunch discussion was on the business of photography and how Nat Geo does things.
.
What we were told is that Nat Geo stories almost always originate with a proposal from a photographer. When an proposal is made it includes, among other things, the costs of buying or renting, transporting and hiring assistance with equipment. Most of the photographers don't own nearly all the gear they use on a shoot like these. And he did not mention how much he would get beyond costs, but I have to believe it is more than $500. Perhaps one more zero should be added. That would make sense.

Further, the editorial policy of the magazine is to allow only minimal post-processing (exposure not to exceed 1/2 stop, minor cropping, minor contrast change.) As a consequence the photographers have a tough job. Most, finding a compostion to shoot, will take 30-100 separate exposures of the single composition to get all the permutations of DOF, blur, color balance, lighting, etc. And they'll do that for perhaps 20-50 separate compositions of the same subject to get all the points of view. So thousands of exposures in a two week trip. And perhaps six or seven will be published.

I could go on, but I don't like to rant too much. :)

Cheers,
Dick

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

Even so, it's not easy getting an image published on the website. Consider the number of images that are sent to them every day. Only a few select chosen images make the online website and even fewer make the transition to the print issue. That said, I had an image make the "Your Choice" "Daily Dozen" back in October of 2007 and is still on their website. Wasn't able to make the cut to the print issue though...

Bubbee Loc: Aventura, Florida

The great NG photographer, Joel Sartore, has posted many articles and videos describing his many experiences. One of the most important requirements of his Editor is that he photographs at prime times for the best light....early morning and afternoon's 'golden hour'.
I strongly recommend reading or watching his work....He is a born teacher....like so many of you!

LittleBit Loc: St. Louis, MO

I agree with Nekon. It's not the camera and equipment its the photographer's expertise that counts. When asking about rather I could get pictures with my Canon T5i comparable to those from a Fuji camera. I was referred to a National Geographic Photographer that took pictures comparable to any that Fuji could have taken with his Canon T5i. A National Geographic Photographer making use of a Canon T5i camera convinced me, "That it's all in the photographer, not the camera1".

Stardust Loc: Central Illinois

On a 10-14 day shoot that is $5,000-7,000 dollars plus travel, hotel, meals, etc covered, plus what is it worth in advertising to have your name and photos shown around the world?

Say Cheese Loc: Eastern PA

50,000 images. If you used 36 exposure rolls of film, that is over 1,300 rolls of film. That really seems excessive. Maybe 5,000 exposures?

traderjohn Loc: New York City

Ego gratification for sure. Not so much for paying the bills.