Being a Pro Photographer Isn't What It Used To Be

[imagemaker46]

I don't blame digital cameras for the demise in paying jobs, it certainly hasn't helped in some cases. It's just a changing time in media. I know people will always argue this, but I think the best days for being a pro photographer have passed.

I see there is a disagree without a reason.

 

[The_Traveler]

One can't just blame the company and put the onus on corporate greed. Companies will buy the cheapest product that will do the job; it is irresponsible (in the eyes of the company or corporation) to pay more for unused quality.
I am certain that there are terrific wines in the store, but I don't buy them because the lower cost wines are as good as I need and can appreciate.
My late company worked on used office furniture - because we never saw the client.
We bought low end PCs because we only did order fulfillment - but we spent relatively big $ on web servers, routers and connectivity because they were vital.
If you could show a newspaper that better photos bring a return on the investment, they'd buy.

Some parts of photography have been run over by the wheels of progress.
There is some satisfaction in understanding the reason for the certain parts of the business being in the dumper but that doesn't mean there is blame.

For an example of how smart people understood what was going on and the significance of the changes, look at B&H and Adorama.

 

[runnah]

I think another big issue is the whole term "pro". You have deluded fools that think "pro" means making money rather than the level of their work. So every chump with a DSLR that got Uncle Bob to give them $50 to take some photos of his used snowblower call themselves a pro. Same with the stay at home spouse that takes home $2k a year from photography but is only able to do it because they are supported by their other spouse.

To me the pro photographers who's work I saw in National Geographic, Time, Sports Mags, fashion etc... they were the real pro's.

 

[The_Traveler]

Actually it's Uncle Bob that is at the root of all this.
If we could get rid of him, we'd all be in clover.

 

[imagemaker46]

I've tried to help move out some of the photo-refuse, but like a bad rash they keep coming back. I'm afraid that Uncle Bobs of the world are here to stay.

 

[bribrius]

out of my realm of expertise. i will just chock it up to what i always think about these things. Digital killed photography.

wow. five disagreements now. Looks like I struck a nerve. LMAO

 

[chuasam]

out of my realm of expertise. i will just chock it up to what i always think about these things. Digital killed photography.

If you're talking about journalism and newspaper kind of photographer, I would say that Craig's List killed the Newspaper. Internet Blogs killed the magazines.

 

[bribrius]

out of my realm of expertise. i will just chock it up to what i always think about these things. Digital killed photography.

If you're talking about journalism and newspaper kind of photographer, I would say that Craig's List killed the Newspaper. Internet Blogs killed the magazines.

naaaaa. I am pretty well decided that digital made photography a giant cliché.

Cliché - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A cliché or cliche (UK /ˈkliːʃeɪ/ or US /klɪˈʃeɪ/) is an expression, idea, or element of an artistic work which has become overused to the point of losing its original meaning or effect, even to the point of being trite or irritating, especially when at some earlier time it was considered meaningful or novel

 

[Ilovemycam]

Digital has fomented a golden age of photography.

There are more photos being made now than ever before, and with the Internet, sharing those photos is easier than ever.
Digital photography has lowered the bar for what is generally and commercially considered a 'good' photograph.
Photography users now hire people to comb the photo sharing web sites for the kind of images they want.
They contact the amateur photographer about using the image knowing the amateur has no clue how much value their photograph has.

Some think the Internet is already starting to fade, with phone Apps taking over as the way to advertise.

Generic photos like the stuff you forum photogs do have nil value unless they are very, very special...like newsworthy. Or you have a client that will hire you for a project. There is no shortage of smoky water, burning steel wool and star trails. Sorry, but that is how it is.

Do we need any more flower pix??

Flickr: The FLOWERS Pool

1,228,875 photos just in this one pool. Tens of millions others out there.

Wall hangers are just a few bucks. $10 to $30 on eBay. You can get all the scenic pix you want for free nowadays. Just print them up for a buck or two on your inkjet.

Landscape - Wikimedia Commons

File:2011-08-02 15-07-48 Switzerland Diavolezza 11vl.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

File:Loch Torridon, Scotland.jpg - Wikimedia Commons


But...none of this matter to us. We keep pressing the button cause freezing time is in our blood.

 

[chuasam]

I think another big issue is the whole term "pro". You have deluded fools that think "pro" means making money rather than the level of their work. So every chump with a DSLR that got Uncle Bob to give them $50 to take some photos of his used snowblower call themselves a pro. Same with the stay at home spouse that takes home $2k a year from photography but is only able to do it because they are supported by their other spouse.

To me the pro photographers who's work I saw in National Geographic, Time, Sports Mags, fashion etc... they were the real pro's.

to me, a pro photographer is one who makes more than half his/her income from Photography sources. There are TONS of professionals out there who don't sell their images to magazines and newspapers.

 

[runnah]

I think another big issue is the whole term "pro". You have deluded fools that think "pro" means making money rather than the level of their work. So every chump with a DSLR that got Uncle Bob to give them $50 to take some photos of his used snowblower call themselves a pro. Same with the stay at home spouse that takes home $2k a year from photography but is only able to do it because they are supported by their other spouse.

To me the pro photographers who's work I saw in National Geographic, Time, Sports Mags, fashion etc... they were the real pro's.

to me, a pro photographer is one who makes more than half his/her income from Photography sources. There are TONS of professionals out there who don't sell their images to magazines and newspapers.

Half? I'd say all or nothing.

 

[dennybeall]

Change is always an impact to those that are on the back side of the change. Cobblers are few and far between now as are blacksmiths and farriers and buggy whip makers. Photography has already changed at least twice in a very short time. Digital replacing film was a huge change but that didn't last but a short time as the cellphone and iPad cameras are pushing stand alone cameras out the door. People want the memories but are not as picky about the quality of the image.
Can the "JOB" of photographer be changed to remain a viable career? I don't think so. A new job must be formulated.
Perhaps "Event Documenter"? A person doing stills, videos and coordinating/collecting all the cellphone and iPad photos and presenting the package to the client as a multi-media movie on a tablet?????? Many of todays wedding photographers are doing something close to that now.

 

[chuasam]

Half? I'd say all or nothing.

Let me teach you about the joys of multiple streams of income.
Why would you have photography be ALL your income? And not be considered a professional if you're also getting income from rental, investments, trust funds...that sort of thing.

 

[Gary A.]

To me "Pro" in terms of photography, relates to a degree of skill, experience and consistency. I often consider many photogs as pro because of the exceptional images they consistency capture. I try to overlook the accountant's term for professional and rate the photog's body of work.

 

[photoguy99]

Photography is perhaps unique in that people frequently define 'professional' as 'good at it'.