Everyone thinks they can be a pro! (RANT)

[Battou]

I think this depends on if you advertise a service, or if you are approached.
If someone sees one of my shots and says "I'll give you $20 for a poster of that shot." Then guess what, I just made $20. That does not mean I consider myself a professional, or that I am crossing any moral or ethical lines. That means someone saw a product and wanted it. If I show my work in a gallery show type setting, am I not to sale any, because I am not what some would call a "professional" because I don't have X amount of training or experience? In the same sense if someone sees my work and likes it enough to want me to do some work for them, then they are basing this on their own judgements, not on the fact that I say I am a professional photographer.
I shoot alot of local motorsports, motocross and dirt track stuff...these guys are far from Pros, but if they do good they make a buck or two. Should NASCAR drivers insult them and be offended?

I agree with you to a point on this. I would feel much the same if I where approached in that way and likely would go with it, However I have been approached and requested do do senior portriates and a weddings on several occations. These I turned down, simply because I am not that kind of photographer. I want to do portriates for my own friends and family, these are taken specifically to give away. I don't take requests so to speak, even if the price is right.

 

[DRoberts]

I have been approached and requested do do senior portriates and a weddings on several occations. These I turned down, simply because I am not that kind of photographer. I want to do portriates for my own friends and family, these are taken specifically to give away. I don't take requests so to speak, even if the price is right.

I might do the Senior portraits, as long as up front they knew they have the option to not buy my shots and go with someone else. I would explain to them that I am new to this and would limit it to kids of friends, or friends of our kids. Of course these would be at a discount price. And if I didn't like the results I would suggest them going to a "professional". I would not take money for sub-standard work.
Wedding? No way! I know I am not ready for that. I know I don't have the equipment, experience, or confidence for that.

 

[MelodySoul]

I couldn't agree more, this is one of my major pet peeves. I'm working my ass off in school to become a photographer and there are people who are at the same level (or lower) than I am currently who are going out and charging to do shoots. I have done a few free shoots and I have been offered minimal amounts as well but I'm not advertising my services and I won't be until I graduate (and possibly not till after assisting for a while first). I think it has become far too easy for people to pick up a digital SLR, shoot pictures of their kids for a few months and then think they are a pro photographer. BTW I have nothing against those who are self taught, as many great photographers are...but it takes more than a few months!

 

[Fiendish Astronaut]

This may appear to you to be noble but what you are doing is charging others for your education.
If you are taking pictures in order to learn then you have to expect to pay for it.

This does slightly imply that you have stopped learning, which I would say isn't the greatest professional attitude. I'm sure that's not actually the case but in my opinion a true professional should never consider themselves to be as good as they can be. There is always more to learn... and experience counts too. So a working photographer is always, in a sense, charging for thier education. But they are also providing a service that their customer wants.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

I think this depends on if you advertise a service, or if you are approached.
If someone sees one of my shots and says "I'll give you $20 for a poster of that shot." Then guess what, I just made $20. That does not mean I consider myself a professional, or that I am crossing any moral or ethical lines. That means someone saw a product and wanted it. If I show my work in a gallery show type setting, am I not to sale any, because I am not what some would call a "professional" because I don't have X amount of training or experience? In the same sense if someone sees my work and likes it enough to want me to do some work for them, then they are basing this on their own judgements, not on the fact that I say I am a professional photographer.
I shoot alot of local motorsports, motocross and dirt track stuff...these guys are far from Pros, but if they do good they make a buck or two. Should NASCAR drivers insult them and be offended?

You are missing the point.
If you do Photography for the love of it and someone sees a picture of yours that they like, then of course you can let them have the picture.
If they offer you money for it then you are at liberty to accept or refuse as you feel inclined.
But why accept the money? The picture has cost you the same to produce wether it hangs up on your wall or it hangs on someone else's so giving it to them for free costs you nothing. And you get that warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that someone appreciates your work.
But if they offer you money and you take it... Well, of course it doesn't make you a professional and I never said it did. What it does do is put into your mind that people are willing to give you money for your pictures and, however much you pretend otherwise, you start to hope for more.
Look at your attitude to showing your work in a gallery. You ask me if are you not to sell any. What I ask you in return is why did you show your work in the Gallery in the first place? Was it just to show your work or was it to try and sell your work?
But you have already answered that question. If it was just to show your work the idea of selling any would not have entered your head.
So the point I am making is this:
A lot of people do Photography and call it a hobby when in fact they really want to make money from it but just don't have the honesty to admit it - not even to themselves.
It's not an issue of morality but one of integrity.

And you are also getting confused between the motivations of the person taking the picture, and those of the person offering to buy the picture.
In the case of the latter to quote Barnum "there's a sucker born every minute".

 

[Hertz van Rental]

This does slightly imply that you have stopped learning, which I would say isn't the greatest professional attitude. I'm sure that's not actually the case but in my opinion a true professional should never consider themselves to be as good as they can be. There is always more to learn... and experience counts too. So a working photographer is always, in a sense, charging for thier education. But they are also providing a service that their customer wants.

Not at all.
One would expect a professional photographer to have achieved a reasonable standard of proficiency before he set himself up in business. He should be at least a fair way up the learning curve and not be down at the bottom.
This does not mean that he no longer has anything to learn but he certainly should not be making many mistakes either. And certainly not basic ones.
If you get any tradesman in to do work for you you expect them to have qualified in some way - studied or gone on courses or been trained or such.
Why should it be any different in Photography which, after all, is just another trade?
How would you honestly feel if the builder you got to repair your roof started proceedings by telling you that he could well make a mess of it because he was still learning?
Or the mechanic working on your car?
My point was that if you are going to set yourself up as a photographer then make the commitment and learn your craft before letting yourself loose on the unsuspecting public. And don't try to excuse your mistakes by pretending it's just a hobby.

 

[bigalbest]

Not at all.
One would expect a professional photographer to have achieved a reasonable standard of proficiency before he set himself up in business. He should be at least a fair way up the learning curve and not be down at the bottom.
This does not mean that he no longer has anything to learn but he certainly should not be making many mistakes either. And certainly not basic ones.
If you get any tradesman in to do work for you you expect them to have qualified in some way - studied or gone on courses or been trained or such.
Why should it be any different in Photography which, after all, is just another trade?
How would you honestly feel if the builder you got to repair your roof started proceedings by telling you that he could well make a mess of it because he was still learning?
Or the mechanic working on your car?
My point was that if you are going to set yourself up as a photographer then make the commitment and learn your craft before letting yourself loose on the unsuspecting public. And don't try to excuse your mistakes by pretending it's just a hobby.

Nicely put, I've been feeling this way for awhile and couldn't agree more. I recently joined the PPA and am going to work towards certification and possibly a degree. I really think certification is a great way to show your customers a commitment to a set of standards. Because let's face it, photography is not just an art it is also a science. And to me it is only photographers these days that can tell the difference for the most part, while customers can be a very poor judge of quality. I don't hold it against someone for being a better business person than me because that is a big part of this whole career, and I think customers will eventually become more educated on these differences anyways.

 

[Alleh Lindquist]

photography is not just an art it is also a science

This is absolutely true, people ask me all the time how I "got so good" truth is I studied the technical aspect of photography then the science, once I had those down under my belt I was free to explore my style and my art. Without that base all you are doing is pointing a camera and pushing a button.

I also consider myself a beginner. I am new to the professional world and I constantly tear my work apart because I know it can be better. I also practice all the time; I just don't do it on my paid jobs.

I strive to produce better images because I look at my inspiration like David LaChapelle or Mark Zibert and dream of creating my own images of that creativity.

Its true being a professional is one thing being an Artist is what photography is really about.

 

[DRoberts]

You are missing the point.
If you do Photography for the love of it and someone sees a picture of yours that they like, then of course you can let them have the picture.
If they offer you money for it then you are at liberty to accept or refuse as you feel inclined.
But why accept the money? The picture has cost you the same to produce wether it hangs up on your wall or it hangs on someone else's so giving it to them for free costs you nothing. And you get that warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that someone appreciates your work.
But if they offer you money and you take it... Well, of course it doesn't make you a professional and I never said it did. What it does do is put into your mind that people are willing to give you money for your pictures and, however much you pretend otherwise, you start to hope for more.
Look at your attitude to showing your work in a gallery. You ask me if are you not to sell any. What I ask you in return is why did you show your work in the Gallery in the first place? Was it just to show your work or was it to try and sell your work?
But you have already answered that question. If it was just to show your work the idea of selling any would not have entered your head.
So the point I am making is this:
A lot of people do Photography and call it a hobby when in fact they really want to make money from it but just don't have the honesty to admit it - not even to themselves.
It's not an issue of morality but one of integrity.

And you are also getting confused between the motivations of the person taking the picture, and those of the person offering to buy the picture.
In the case of the latter to quote Barnum "there's a sucker born every minute".

But what is wrong with turning a hobby into a profession? Is anyone who decides to take a step across that line a hypocrit?
What is wrong with being able to sale some of your earlier work to expand your equipment to be able to take the next step?
Yes for me it was, and for the very near future could be classified as a "hobby". But with the next set of equipment I buy, I fully intend to turn "professional".
Using the mechanic metaphor: Does someone take automechanics get their ASA certification and then go purchase $100,000s of equipment, and space, and then and only then can they take money?
No they use their Wal Mart 200 peice socket/screwdriver set, and work their way up. So are they a hypocrit as well?
I may be wrong, and please correct me if I am and I will apologize, but it seems to me you have approached this topic with a bit of hostility and defensiveness. As stated before it's hard to tell without inflection or body language. For my part there is none, I just like a good debate, and all I say is intended to bring answers to my own questions, or to express my personal opinion.

 

[Alleh Lindquist]

I think in general this population I refer to is just plain ignorant. They don't even know what truly goes into photography. I wonder if they have ever even looked at a good photograph before.

An educated amateur artist going into business is different than an amateur snap shooter doing the same.

Anyway I really don’t care I just thought it would be an interesting discussion considering I meet people all the time that call themselves photographers some even have a part time shared studio etc. but they don’t even know how to use a flash unless it’s attached to the camera in TTL mode.

It would be great if people would just respect the craft and take pride in studying it for long enough to truly be able to create art rather than just jumping in and trying to make a couple bucks. It’s just does not show any passion for creating images.

 

[Garbz]

The problem many people fail to realise is that ignorant or not, good or bad, professional or unprofessional, the new poor entry-levels have changed the industry.

Two major things have happened. One is that even through there is a large quality difference between the Pros and the Poors (named after their quality), you end up competing against them anyway because of the ignorance of the customers. Yes we all know that a $100 photographer doesn't match the quality / service of the Pros asking for 20 times the price, but it's the customers who are often nieve enough to see someone with a big camera (see thread on "your pictures are really nice you must have a good camera") and then say That pro does it for $100 why should I pay you $2000.

The other problem is that the Poors start price gouging. When they get a satisfied customer they push up the price for the next till they get to the "pro" level but retaining the same poor skills. This I came across at a friends wedding, where the "pro" photographer they hired for $4000 came in with a single 20D, ttl flash, and 1 cheap zoom lens, not even f/2.8. No backup body, no backup photographer, no professionalism (my opinion from watching him work), and when I saw the photos all I can say is no decent result as well.

Both tie in with each other. The former brings down the prices in the eye of the customer, the latter brings down the quality expectations, and together it is all undermining the true professional photographers. I am glad I don't do this for a living so don't expect any future competition from me

 

[Alleh Lindquist]

Well said Garbz

 

[Hertz van Rental]

But what is wrong with turning a hobby into a profession? Is anyone who decides to take a step across that line a hypocrit?
What is wrong with being able to sale some of your earlier work to expand your equipment to be able to take the next step?
Yes for me it was, and for the very near future could be classified as a "hobby". But with the next set of equipment I buy, I fully intend to turn "professional".
Using the mechanic metaphor: Does someone take automechanics get their ASA certification and then go purchase $100,000s of equipment, and space, and then and only then can they take money?
No they use their Wal Mart 200 peice socket/screwdriver set, and work their way up. So are they a hypocrit as well?
I may be wrong, and please correct me if I am and I will apologize, but it seems to me you have approached this topic with a bit of hostility and defensiveness. As stated before it's hard to tell without inflection or body language. For my part there is none, I just like a good debate, and all I say is intended to bring answers to my own questions, or to express my personal opinion.

You are still missing my point.
I did not say there is anything wrong starting off doing Photography as a hobby and then deciding to do Photography for a living.
What I have a problem with is people using 'it's just a hobby' as a get out of gaol free card.
To want to make money like a professional without having the responsibilities of a professional is, to me at any rate, morally questionable.
If a professional or semi-professional produces poor quality work and screws up then he can quickly find himself going out of business or even at the wrong end of a law suit.
If someone who does it for a hobby screws up they can hide behind 'hobby' even though they may have been paid.
It is this, in some respects, that is damaging the standing of Photography as a profession.
If you have no overheads and you already have a job then you can offer your 'photographic' services at prices well below that of someone who is doing it for a living. The public being what they are will tend to go for the cheapest deal but invariably discover that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.
Two things then come out of this:
People get the impression that photographers are charlatans.
People believe that all there is to being a photographer is owning a camera.
Surely anyone who truly loves Photography wants to see it get the recognition and respect it deserves. To get there the public have to be educated and this can only happen if the people who do Photography take a responsible attitude.
If you are going to move from being a hobbyist to making money then at least take the responsibility too. At the very least join one of the professional bodies and show a commitment. Don't just grab the money and then run away shouting 'it's just a hobby'.

(I spent four years at College to get a Degree in Photography and then I spent a further two years assisting photographers before I felt I was ready to make the move to being a 'pro'. And even then I was only as good as my last job.
Is it any wonder that I feel a little bit of contempt for people who think that the only thing you need to make money from Photography is some kind of camera? I think I'm justified, don't you?
But I'm not angry about it, I'm just arguing that if the public are going to change their view about Photography's position in the expressive Arts then we, as photographers, have to educate them. And that can only happen when we start behaving with integrity.)

And now I'm bored with the whole topic so let's go to the pub.

 

[Battou]

And now I'm bored with the whole topic so let's go to the pub.

Who's buyin?

 

[table1349]

And thus they mighty Photographer comes face to face with the Law of the Jungle; Survival of the Fittest.

Next week on Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom we will take a look into the underground world of the Sand Hog.