Is harder to be a pro nowadays, has photography become too easily available and cheap

[amolitor]

There's certainly a perception that we're inundated with terrible photographs, and to a good extent, it's true.

There are two points worth making here, though:

1) Terrible is a subjective notion. What you see as "terrible" is seen by the great unwashed as "pretty good" and, with all due respect, you don't get to decide what "pretty good" is for anyone but yourself. The definition of "good" is always in motion.
2) There's probably people who will truly work for free, which let us be honest, you will not. You will do some work for free, in hopes of making money later. Why do they want some pro taking photos of the kid's hockey games when there's a guy who's got some decent gear and a decent eye who's someone's dad, and shares the work in the team's Facebook page? Some dads with cameras do work that even you would find perfectly good, and they'll do it for nothing, no strings attached, because their kid is in the game.

Excellent work is being done out there in every genre for free. The fact that the entire chain from shutter-press to final product has become essentially free on a per-image basis has truly changed everything.

 

[MLeeK]

Thanks for all the great feedback

Part of my question in the OP came from talking with a fine art photographer. He said back 35 years ago he could get an appointment to see a curator in museum to show his work. Nowadays he said you can't hardly talk to a curator's secretary. And many museums refuse to even look at photos (even as gifts) unless your a big name person. (This guy was not big name, but still a decent photographer.)

Another part of the seed of my thread came from me trying to make some ink money from my photos. I found it very tough to make anything. With photography being a hobby with me, I don't care that much about the $. But still would be nice to make a couple hundred $ to feed the printer.

As in you are printing? Unless you have one hell of a commercial set up it's much cheaper and much better quality to use a good lab

 

[Ilovemycam]

Thanks for all the great feedback

Part of my question in the OP came from talking with a fine art photographer. He said back 35 years ago he could get an appointment to see a curator in museum to show his work. Nowadays he said you can't hardly talk to a curator's secretary. And many museums refuse to even look at photos (even as gifts) unless your a big name person. (This guy was not big name, but still a decent photographer.)

Another part of the seed of my thread came from me trying to make some ink money from my photos. I found it very tough to make anything. With photography being a hobby with me, I don't care that much about the $. But still would be nice to make a couple hundred $ to feed the printer.

As in you are printing? Unless you have one hell of a commercial set up it's much cheaper and much better quality to use a good lab

I just have a cheap printer. It does not cost thousands of $ to buy ink like the pro models. But it still costs about $175 for ink to refresh it. I just like making prints. Letter size and 13 x 19 pretty much.

 

[Ilovemycam]

There's certainly a perception that we're inundated with terrible photographs, and to a good extent, it's true.

There are two points worth making here, though:

1) Terrible is a subjective notion. What you see as "terrible" is seen by the great unwashed as "pretty good" and, with all due respect, you don't get to decide what "pretty good" is for anyone but yourself. The definition of "good" is always in motion.
2) There's probably people who will truly work for free, which let us be honest, you will not. You will do some work for free, in hopes of making money later. Why do they want some pro taking photos of the kid's hockey games when there's a guy who's got some decent gear and a decent eye who's someone's dad, and shares the work in the team's Facebook page? Some dads with cameras do work that even you would find perfectly good, and they'll do it for nothing, no strings attached, because their kid is in the game.

Excellent work is being done out there in every genre for free. The fact that the entire chain from shutter-press to final product has become essentially free on a per-image basis has truly changed everything.

Most of the time I'm looking to exchange photos for model time. Not looking for money at all. I did take a photo at a public garden one time and sent it in to see if they wanted it for their calendar or to buy. Done that type of thing a few times, but got nowhere. I offer to shoot people for free just to gain experience. If I had lots of "people background", would not want to shoot them for free.

 

[MLeeK]

Thanks for all the great feedback

Part of my question in the OP came from talking with a fine art photographer. He said back 35 years ago he could get an appointment to see a curator in museum to show his work. Nowadays he said you can't hardly talk to a curator's secretary. And many museums refuse to even look at photos (even as gifts) unless your a big name person. (This guy was not big name, but still a decent photographer.)

Another part of the seed of my thread came from me trying to make some ink money from my photos. I found it very tough to make anything. With photography being a hobby with me, I don't care that much about the $. But still would be nice to make a couple hundred $ to feed the printer.

As in you are printing? Unless you have one hell of a commercial set up it's much cheaper and much better quality to use a good lab

I just have a cheap printer. It does not cost thousands of $ to buy ink like the pro models. But it still costs about $175 for ink to refresh it. I just like making prints. Letter size and 13 x 19 pretty much.

When you break that down to cost per print it will work out to be a LOT more than ordering and the quality is cheap printer quality.

 

[Ballistics]

Thanks for all the great feedback

Part of my question in the OP came from talking with a fine art photographer. He said back 35 years ago he could get an appointment to see a curator in museum to show his work. Nowadays he said you can't hardly talk to a curator's secretary. And many museums refuse to even look at photos (even as gifts) unless your a big name person. (This guy was not big name, but still a decent photographer.)

Another part of the seed of my thread came from me trying to make some ink money from my photos. I found it very tough to make anything. With photography being a hobby with me, I don't care that much about the $. But still would be nice to make a couple hundred $ to feed the printer.

As in you are printing? Unless you have one hell of a commercial set up it's much cheaper and much better quality to use a good lab

I just have a cheap printer. It does not cost thousands of $ to buy ink like the pro models. But it still costs about $175 for ink to refresh it. I just like making prints. Letter size and 13 x 19 pretty much.

It is beyond cheaper to have someone else print your stuff for you, unless you are printing at a massive level.

 

[ghache]

Photography has become easily available?, true but it doesn't mean its simpler. Those who got into photography thinking it was going to be as easy to perform and create good professional grade photos as easy it was to get a cool camera at bestbuy are facing a big wall. look at kijiji and facebook. most of them are clowns to the real photography professionals. It takes time, money and passion and you have to be surrounded by talented individuals to be good, all depending on what type of photography you do.

 

[12sndsgood]

Photography has become easily available?, true but it doesn't mean its simpler. Those who got into photography thinking it was going to be as easy to perform and create good professional grade photos as easy it was to get a cool camera at bestbuy are facing a big wall. look at kijiji and facebook. most of them are clowns to the real photography professionals. It takes time, money and passion and you have to be surrounded by talented individuals to be good, all depending on what type of photography you do.

Though I agree with you about the true task of becoming great at photography, I think a good portion of the peole out there are just going, i'm good enough and just go out and shoot and charge without that desire or interest to become great. It seems were becoming a world of "good enough" oh your highlights are blown and she's got racoon eyes, oh well it's good enough. she liked it so that's all that matter.

 

[imagemaker46]

Photography has become easily available?, true but it doesn't mean its simpler. Those who got into photography thinking it was going to be as easy to perform and create good professional grade photos as easy it was to get a cool camera at bestbuy are facing a big wall. look at kijiji and facebook. most of them are clowns to the real photography professionals. It takes time, money and passion and you have to be surrounded by talented individuals to be good, all depending on what type of photography you do.

Though I agree with you about the true task of becoming great at photography, I think a good portion of the peole out there are just going, i'm good enough and just go out and shoot and charge without that desire or interest to become great. It seems were becoming a world of "good enough" oh your highlights are blown and she's got racoon eyes, oh well it's good enough. she liked it so that's all that matter.

It's really true that "good enough" has become accepted as ok. I can only imagine if there were amateur bomb disposal people that were "just good enough" In many ways it is similar, they would both blow the first big assignment they had.

 

[Majeed Badizadegan]

Market Over-Saturation

 

[texkam]

Join the club photogs. Graphic design went digital back in the '80s. Back then it was ... a Mac, the Adobe suite, Clipart Explosion 750,000 and bam, you're a graphic designer. Today with the internet it's even easier to call yourself a graphic designer. Other professions have been through the same thing. Just a sign of the times. ....and so it goes.