Custom Search
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 3.4K All Categories
- 34 Nikon Z lenses
- 77 Nikon Z cameras
- 1.4K Nikon DSLR cameras
- 11 Df
- 237 D6x0/D7x0/D8x0
- 27 D300/D300s/D500
- 29 D3x00
- 45 D3/D4/D5
- 31 D5x00
- 94 D90/D7x00
- 387 Nikon Lenses
- 9 Videos, Nikon et. al.
- 52 Nikon 1
- 18 Nikon Film Cameras
- 56 Nikon Flashes
- 25 Nikon Compact Cameras
- 48 Nikon Software
- 26 Nikon Deals
- 767 General Discussions
- 49 Gear Reviews
- 182 Other Manufacturers
- 105 Fun & Weird
- 128 Photo-a-day
In this Discussion
Who's Online (0)
Disclaimer: This site has no affiliation with Nikon Corporation or any of its subsidiary.
Disclosure: [NR] is sponsored by displaying advertising banners and links.
All trademarks and brands belong to their respective owners.
Want to advertise on NikonRumors.com? Contact [NR].
Copyright © 2008-2017 NikonRumors.com.
See our Privacy Policy.
Disclosure: [NR] is sponsored by displaying advertising banners and links.
All trademarks and brands belong to their respective owners.
Want to advertise on NikonRumors.com? Contact [NR].
Copyright © 2008-2017 NikonRumors.com.
See our Privacy Policy.
Comments
Well, my silence did last long.
Take the difference between a Studio say in a shopping mall, or a Target or similar type of walk-in retail situation. I have met photographers who have worked at these for years (Not the owners mind you, just the workers) and have a base understanding of photography, make a living at it, but I would not consider them pros just because they work there and make an ok living at it. The difference there is that they have zero "real" input of creative design of the photo since 99 times out of 100, the owner (or franchise business) sets the lights, all the settings on the camera's and basically making it a "photo factory" that produces a good quality of photos where the that quality is repeatable. (Side bar - I have met Pros who fill their time and make some extra on the side working at these types of studios. I'm not referring to them.) I have been floored on how little many of these photographers actually understand or have the capability to do. They create 100's of good portraits a year, but if you take them out of that pre-set environment, the quality falls drastically. They are in essence are a factory worker and not a professional. The professional was the one who set everything up.
What @bland is talking about is skill and knowledge. Skill and Knowledge comes from Continual Learning and Constant Practice. It is an Active Pursuit to become better, transform knowledge into reality and to transcend beyond your current ability and being able to deliver in any situation or circumstance. That is what makes a professional stand out from a crowd. That is the same across any profession or skilled trade.
I met a man that for 20 years he made these plywood cutouts of deer that people would put in their front yards for the holiday. He made a living at it for many years. He belonged to business professional organizations, wood working associations, and the like. He even made some basic furniture on the side for people. It was ok, but not refined at all. He found a niche and made money - that's it. That does not make him a "Professional wood craftsman" by any stretch of the term.
Is it correct to say "Once a pro always a pro." in terms of classification in a competition? Or at a camera club, can an individual who was a professional as above, be considered an amateur?
There are many opinions about what makes a professional in any field. One consideration is however, generally not quality as a lot of folks who make their living from shooting photos cannot shoot their way out of a paper bag IMO. Maybe we should find a description of the very best photographers other than "professional". And, at that time we can look at pro bono work from these individuals.
Oh well…. just one more opinion….LOL
To me, a professional is a person who works in a profession. (Duh) But, it is not quite as circular as it may first appear.
A profession is "a type of job that requires special education, training, or skill and has a standard of ethics that govern the performance of that job". That is paraphrased from the Bass handbook of leadership.
The definition I like for a professional isa person whose actions are "characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession".
This definition goes beyond just getting paid, or relying on the pay for ones living. It actually removes the concept of payment entirely. It is not a matter of simply getting paid, but more a matter of how one conducts oneself.
We all have examples of people getting paid but not considering them professional. That's why I like these definitions -- it removes the confusion concerning payment or whether a person can or can't earn a living.
But in any case, any discussion on what is and ain't professional requires an understanding of which definition of professional is being discussed.
Can an amature be a professional?
Well, certanly an amature can conduct themselves as a professional.
professional
1. A person who belongs to a profession
2. A person who earns his living from a specified activity
3. An expert.
Thus the word can be taken independently of the quality delivered. A typical use would still imply "of high quality", agreed.
I think you're mixing up professional with artist here.. If a photographer makes a living from his job and has mastered the craft technically, then he is a professional, that is exactly what the term means. A man who does hardwood floors for a living that you can't find any fault with is a professional too. Is flooring very creative? Does it require workshops and fairs and internet forums and publications in hardwood floor magazines to get you there? Hell no. Doesn't make him any less of a professional though.
Now, about the struggle of the so-called pros and people with cheap DSLRs infesting their claimed habitat, I think it's a fairly easy to understand, tried darwinist process. Capitalism at its purest. You might as well complain about the rain. It's the harsh reality of doing freelance work. It's preposterous to think that only since the advent of cheap digital cameras have people stopped paying top dollar for photographers. There have always been cheap cameras of any kind and people operating them.
but professional and amateur is also used to describe quality
so plenty of room for confusion
Fortunately you can get a pretty good idea of a photographers quality by looking at their web site, FB page
I know some want to believe they "could be a pro if they wanted too" because some of their work is very good, but until you are making a living wage, running a business, filing taxes each month or quarter, cold calling for work, people calling you to work with (not family or friends), quoting jobs, keeping accounting books, paying lawyers and accountants to make sure you are in line, having contracts signed, having a business tax ID, and business insurance, and all the other 100s things running a business takes, you are not a pro. There are subsets of business that hire pros. If you are a stringer for a new wire, you are a pro. If you are someone who works for a department store creating all the model images, that is a pro. If you work for an advertising agency, or any number of business where very high quality of work is REQUIRED or you are fired, that is a pro. Shooting for friends and family and getting a few bucks for it, does not make you a pro.
Now saying that probably put off some people who think their work is good enough to be a pro, but just as a pro lens won't make your images instantly better, neither does a handful of good or even great images, means you are a pro. That is not meant to take anything away from anyone's great images. Someone can be a great photographer, and they even may know more than a pro, but that does not make them a pro.
Think of it this way - If you call a professional "amateurish" that is an insult. Meaning they don't deserve the label they have attained. If you call an amateur's Work "professional quality" - That means that body of work is of high quality but not saying they deserve a new title.
I'm going to take a major exception to this. Someone who lays hardwood floors is general laborer. It is a JOB that anyone could easily master. As I said above, referring to their work as "professional" is to give a complement. Saying a "persons profession" is saying what they do for a living. It does not mean they are a professional by default.
D3 • D750 • 14-24mm f2.8 • 35mm f1.4A • PC-E 45mm f2.8 • 50mm f1.8G • AF-D 85mm f1.4 • ZF.2 100mm f2 • 200mm f2 VR2
Most pros specialize in various forms of photography but they are far from being a one trick pony. If you are making a living at it you are a pro. Everything else is just being a photographer. If someone works in a photo studio factory punching a clock and really doing nothing more (In or outside of work) than checking focus and hitting a trigger release, I do not consider that a pro.
The point and response I was making (and you probably would have seen if you bothered to read the thread above my post) was in regards to quality of work being the distinguishing attribute of a pro and how many amateurs are very good. I do not think I have ever met a pro who could not get thrown into any situation and come out with good photos. We have all seen "Uncle Bob's" wedding photos no matter how good he is at shooting landscapes.
I get a feeling you're personally offended by people selling 1-2 images a month on a stock photo website and calling themselves pros. I appreciate your bringing up the word amateurish, good point. The implied meaning of advanced quality standards is a secondary, additional sense, however. So If someone works for a living *and* does it to high standards - how can that not be a pro?
But Laborer? What does that mean? How is a photo journalist not a labourer by your definition then? Or someone who takes model pictures at a department store as you said. There's Harper's Bazaar, and then there's C&A's monthly mail box leaflet. Now is that art, or even barely creative? Are you saying hardwood floors don't require professional attitude, exactness, planning, versatility? Clever self-marketing in order to survive? Tax reports? This is a demeaning and incredibly arrogant thing to say.
Which shows an important point. It is a common trait not to recognize the skill and worth of a professional in an industry we don't work in or are familiar with. There are many industries where I think, "how hard can that be?" only to find out when I try to do it myself, there is a lot of hidden skill. Skilled amatures and professionals always make what they do look easy.
I feel the same applies to photography. People who don't work in the photography business may not think that taking photographs is especially difficult and, like many photographers, focus on the equipment. It is not surprising when non-photographers complement photographers on their equipment: " You take nice pictures, you must have a nice camera". Photographers joke about it, but it does reflect on how the non-photographic public precieves the photography industry. Unfortunately, these people who don't work in the photography business are sometimes called clients and are the ones the pros need to stay in business.
Professionals, of any industry, need to convince their client of the worth of the product/service. Despite the fact that the client may not know anything about what goes into producing the product or providing the service. All the client sees is the final product. All the client is interested in is the final product.
I don't care how hard it was, or how experienced the professional floor installer/photographer is, if the final product is substandard, they suck. Amatures may get credit for effort, but professionals are judged solely by their deliverable product/service.
So lets flip this. Imagine this scenario: A professional photographer wants to hire someone to lay hardwood floors. What can the hardwood installer do to demonstrate to the client (the pro photographer) that the client needs to pay $large buck$ for labor for installing the floor?
If the client (pro photographer) says, "I would go with the cheaper guys. I am not gonna pay a lot of money for someone to "just" install a floor"; why wouldn't a potential photography client say the same thing to the pro photographer? "I am not going to pay a professional photographer a lot of money to "just" take some pictures!".
Both professionals (photographer and flooring installer) offer "high quality" work to their clients and expect to be paid what they feel is a fair price. In both instances, each professional will have a problem demonstrating that their craft requires skills and experience (and yes, even equipment) that may not be patent to the client. Unfortunately, in both cases the client probably does not know a lot about what it takes to produce the marketable product.
How many professional photographers try to low ball when they hire other non-photographic professionals, but at the same time kevetch about clients doing the same to them?
Everyone is a customer at some point and as customers we want to get the mostest while paying the leastest we can. This why we like to buy our photographic equipment when it is on sale. The problem for the professional is convincing the customer to pay a little more than the leastest. LOL.
And that is not an easy job.
Was he a professional? Was he in the profession? By TTJ's description of a professional, he was an amateur. Come to think of it, he did to it for the love of it.The original meaning of the word amateur.