PRO vs. Amateur

[CWN]

I thought about this on my photo walk today and decided to call myself neither - I prefer Recreational Photographer. I think that covers all bases for me, whether it makes me money or not.

"Recreation or fun is the expenditure of time in a manner designed for therapeutic refreshment of one's body or mind."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational

 

[CupCakeCommando]

in my opinion its completely subjective. people who take photo for the white house are by large considered "pros" but i dont consider them pros because to me a professional photographer takes photos with meaning, that are works of art, and the photos invoke feelings and ideas. and i dont see that in their photos. all i see are snap shots of the president and family and national seals. but that's just my opinion. in my photography i strive to get big reactions out of people by taking photos with as much meaning and feeling possible. i still have A LOT to learn though haha.

 

[image hound]

seems irrelevant today with all the technology that is out there. Newbies can get a well designed website, a nice upscale studio and look pro instantly. This well thought out image makes them look much better to the customer than they really are.

Many photographers can see the amature nature of their images, but many in the public cannot, or so it seems.

If you get in the realm of artistic photography the camera and even the lens may make no difference whatsoever. A true photographer could use a Kodak brownie, pinhole or disposable camera to make a great image and could manipulate lesser cameras to get a good job done.

With trillions of images flooing the market today, who can say really that they have a unique image as most of it has all be done before somewhere.

I believe the word professional photographer has lost all meaning at least to the customer and that is who pays the bills.

 

[skieur]

I think that some are getting hung up on one small sector of professional photographers. There is a considerable range.

Some only do weddings. Some only do family, children, shots, engagement shots, etc. Others only do sports and try to sell on location to parents. There are those who do public relations, political shots, photojournalism, work for companies and organizations. Some produce materials for presentations or educational groups. Some are on cutting edge projects that mix stills and video for use on electronic billboards. The list goes on.

All may be considered pros in that they make a living based on their photography but there is a considerable range in this too. I suspect there are some who aren't making very much and I know that there are others who are making well into the 6 figure area. One said that as a studio camera the Hasselblad digital at $24,000 represented the equivalent of 2 photographic jobs for him.

Why should anyone be surprised that the quality of work varies as well. Everyone knows that there are good doctors and those you would not trust, competent successful lawyers who rise to the top of their profession and others who do mostly paperwork in limited legal areas, contractors with flair and some talent for design and those that cannot for example, build a deck with any care, skill and attention to detail.

The same applies to photography.

skieur

 

[image hound]

Doctors have schooling and medical exams, Lawyers have bar exams and law school. I think carpetenters are on a differnet level and probably many of them at least have experience.

Most serious professions are "pro" fessions because of the hoops one must go through to attain "pro" status.

These hoops are also designed as barriers to entry into the profession.

What Photographers have is the major camera brands main advertising campaigns telling total amatures that you too can be a pro, and shoot just like the pros by buying our camera for Christmas.

I see no similiar ads by any other "profession"

So in sffect and defacto I do not see photography as a serious "pro"fession at all.

 

[ashleykaryl]

I see no similiar ads by any other "profession"

So in sffect and defacto I do not see photography as a serious "pro"fession at all.

Photography is a serious profession. This is simply a case of marketing men exploiting a sales tactic to earn more money for the camera manufacturers and too many people believing them.

 

[kamalzharif]

There are now huge numbers of photographers who stand up and call themselves pro or semi-pro based on very meagre skills that would probably have them blacklisted in other professions. They are simply adding a label though to try and make money from being camera owners. That alone doesn't make them a professional.

Their skills or lack thereof are irrelevant. If they are making their living by taking pictures, then technically they are pros.

skieur

To me professional means earning your living from photography but also aspiring to the highest possible standards in your dealings with clients and dedication to your craft. A lack of skills is far from irrelevant and an indicator of not being professional.

I agree with your statement.

 

[manaheim]

Once you get into any definition which includes "to me", or includes something that people may or may not do, you get into highly subjective territory, religious wars, etc.

Professionals make money with their craft, amateurs do not. Period.

 

[ashleykaryl]

If you look up the word professional in the dictionary, you'll find its use in half a dozen different connotations. To suggest it is purely limited to the question of making money is far too narrow an interpretation.

I do make money from my photography, however I know some capable but struggling photographers with many years of experience who aren't making a penny right now and I think that is very unfortunate. I still consider them professionals though.

 

[John Thawley]

in my opinion its completely subjective. people who take photo for the white house are by large considered "pros" but i dont consider them pros because to me a professional photographer takes photos with meaning, that are works of art, and the photos invoke feelings and ideas. and i dont see that in their photos. all i see are snap shots of the president and family and national seals. but that's just my opinion. in my photography i strive to get big reactions out of people by taking photos with as much meaning and feeling possible. i still have A LOT to learn though haha.

You have a WHOLE lot to learn. If you don't think Pete Sousa is a pro and that all he's doing is taking family snap shots, well... I don't even know where to start.

First, photo journalists know how capture the moment with the "right" point of view. A White House photography is capturing history. And, FWIW, Pete Sousa is shooting for Obama and it's his second time being selected as the official White House photographer. He also shot for Ronald Regan.

These guys know how to blend into the wall... stay out of the way... and report / capture the moment. Oh.. and by the way, they don't get do-overs.

I'd suggest you sit down and review Pete Sousa's images from the inauguration. Sit quietly, look closely... deconstruct the image and consider the moment(s). Pretty powerful stuff.

Perhaps the time spent will make it clear to you how much you have to learn.

Pete Sousa is the consummate pro.

 

[John Thawley]

Doctors have schooling and medical exams, Lawyers have bar exams and law school. I think carpetenters are on a differnet level and probably many of them at least have experience.

Most serious professions are "pro" fessions because of the hoops one must go through to attain "pro" status.

These hoops are also designed as barriers to entry into the profession.

What Photographers have is the major camera brands main advertising campaigns telling total amatures that you too can be a pro, and shoot just like the pros by buying our camera for Christmas.

I see no similiar ads by any other "profession"

So in sffect and defacto I do not see photography as a serious "pro"fession at all.

LOL ... well I'd argue that. As would my American Express bill, my grocer, my mortgage company, the guy who cleans my pool, the company who cares for my landscaping, .... and on, and on.

So in sffect and defacto I do not see photography as a serious "pro"fession at all.

You must be kidding? I'm stunned.

 

[icassell]

in my opinion its completely subjective. people who take photo for the white house are by large considered "pros" but i dont consider them pros because to me a professional photographer takes photos with meaning, that are works of art, and the photos invoke feelings and ideas. and i dont see that in their photos. all i see are snap shots of the president and family and national seals. but that's just my opinion. in my photography i strive to get big reactions out of people by taking photos with as much meaning and feeling possible. i still have A LOT to learn though haha.

You have a WHOLE lot to learn. If you don't think Pete Sousa is a pro and that all he's doing is taking family snap shots, well... I don't even know where to start.

First, photo journalists know how capture the moment with the "right" point of view. A White House photography is capturing history. And, FWIW, Pete Sousa is shooting for Obama and it's his second time being selected as the official White House photographer. He also shot for Ronald Regan.

These guys know how to blend into the wall... stay out of the way... and report / capture the moment. Oh.. and by the way, they don't get do-overs.

I'd suggest you sit down and review Pete Sousa's images from the inauguration. Sit quietly, look closely... deconstruct the image and consider the moment(s). Pretty powerful stuff.

Perhaps the time spent will make it clear to you how much you have to learn.

Pete Sousa is the consummate pro.

John, I have to thank you. I'm always grazing to find new photographers to study and I have to admit I was not familiar with Pete Sousa until I was reading these posts. I pulled up his website an hour ago and have been thoroughly enjoying his work. Obviously I've seen many of those images before, but I didn't know the name of the photographer.

 

[ANDS!]

First, photo journalists know how capture the moment with the "right" point of view. A White House photography is capturing history. And, FWIW, Pete Sousa is shooting for Obama and it's his second time being selected as the official White House photographer. He also shot for Ronald Regan.

I saw his Obama shots. Quite a few of them are really what anyone with a film camera (or similar Photoshop action) could accomplish. Not suggesting that photojournalists are artist (because they are), but perhaps that fellow isn't the keenest example to use.

The line between pro and amateur is quickly being thinned with the main differences now being experience and contacts. Talent is not (and truly has never been) lacking on either side of that line - it is merely access that is creating the barrier.

 

[NateWagner]

One thing I would suggest about pro photogs vs. the average amateur is that over a period of time the pro often grows much more in skill and consistency (notice I did not say talent... that is not the issue) than the amateur. The primary reason for this is having much more practice. A pro shooting a sports game will generally be much more consistent than an amateur because he/she has a ton of experience doing it. Same with weddings.

An amateur will get good shots, that may rival the pro's... but the pro will generally get these excellent shots with great consistency which makes him worthwhile.

example link

 

[usayit]

OMG... Pete Sousa not a professional? I'd say he is a classic example of a professional photographer! He's been a professional journalist since the day he obtained a Master's in JOURNALISM. He didn't go from "I think I'll pick up a camera and learn photography"... and try make a living from it. He went from "How do I tell THE story?... oh look... a camera.. that should be a valuable tool".

If you guys haven't found it yet.... he (and the White House) have a Flickr stream:

Flickr: The White House's Photostream

Every time I peak, I find a single frame thats just grand! Just looked... yup.. there's another that caught my eye:

P111209PS-0196 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!