ArtisticGlamour wrote: Do you have a business license as a photographer or did you fill out a W2 as an employee photographer? Do you pay business income taxes and/or gain income from photography? Have you made a profit for at least three of the last five tax years, including the current year?
If so...then you may be a redneck professional photographer.
A Professional sells his work to make a living, he must work efficently and produce work quickly to meet client expectations. Time cost him real money.
An Amateur does what he loves for the love of doing it, he can take his time prefecting each and every image. Time costs him only the love of producing perfection.
Herman van Gestel
Posts: 1,662
Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
a professional should have constant quality (not dependent on lucky shots), efficient, have fast results and to be held accountable if he can't deliver his usual quality
The quality of your work should speak for itself. I do not support myself with my photography but I and the models With whom I work are very happy with our results.
If someone sees your work and likes it, nuff said. If they start asking questions about your profession, maybe your work does not say to them what they are looking to hear, in which case I would wonder why they are continuing to interrogate you.
They either like your work product and want you to work on their behalf or they do not. It does not have to be greyscale but rather black or white, pardon the pun.
If the question is posed so that they can undercut your rates, well... I suppose that is a question for another post...
As far as I'm concerned you're a professional photographer if the majority of your income comes from your photography. If you have a day job, but also make money from photography on the side (I mean regular income and not the odd job or two every now and then), I'd consider that person a "Semi Professional".
Marciofs
Posts: 1,565
Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
SG-4 Photography wrote:
The quality of your work should speak for itself. I do not support myself with my photography but I and the models With whom I work are very happy with our results.
If someone sees your work and likes it, nuff said. If they start asking questions about your profession, maybe your work does not say to them what they are looking to hear, in which case I would wonder why they are continuing to interrogate you.
They either like your work product and want you to work on their behalf or they do not. It does not have to be greyscale but rather black or white, pardon the pun.
If the question is posed so that they can undercut your rates, well... I suppose that is a question for another post...
People who I try to market don't ask me anything actually. Or they want or they don't. I never get feed backs from them.
I get feed back from people telling they really like my work, but those who comment are not those who would buy my photographs.
People who question me are those who I meet somehow and we start talking about different things including what we do.
You may say I should not care about people but often I hear people telling that they get their business opportunity by indication and contacts.
Well. To me is just confusing when I look at others stories that are different from advises I hear here, and different from what people I suppose understand about marketing industry. I studied business myself because everybody was telling me that photography is more about business and marketing than photo itself, but I gave up on the first Year because I really don't like it. I like art. So I guess business stuff it is not something I can be part of or become adapted to.
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,257
al-MarsÄ, Tunis, Tunisia
Technically, I believe a Photographer is a tradesman, not a professional.
I believe to be a profession, the word must have a regulating body with the power to certify or discipline it's members. Think of Dr.s or Lawyers and how they must pass certain standard exams, and they can lose their license.
It is actually against the law to call yourself a lawyer or Dr. if you are not. It is not against the law to call yourself a photographer. It is a trade.
There is a full time professional news photographer I covered stories with in the past that acts in the most unprofessional manner. They (sorry, not even giving gender) are a professional acting unprofessionally. The rest of us cringe whenever they show up.
By contrast some observers or participants at events with gear almost as good as mine behave professionally even though I'm the one assigned professionally to cover the story.
So what is a professional? Is it strictly by job title or job title and behavior? I'd say the latter. Any pro can get the shot(s). A true pro can get the shot(s) and behave in a professional manner while doing so.
Right Poes
Posts: 601
Colorado Springs, Colorado, US
For me- Pays for its own gear, programs, classes, taxes, insurance, occasional dinner out for my wife and I. Split with tithes, wife, budget and forever chasing my own tail.
This has been no small step for me even if what I have is light years beneath most of you.
Does otherwise living off my ol lady count? I would be on the street in a week on my own.
Getting to peruse life on your terms even to possibly fail is success when you have spent way to many years on a forklift.
Herman Surkis
Posts: 6,230
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
PhotoHive wrote: From what I understand, "professional" only means that you make at least 50 percent of your income from photography. But in some countries you are considered professional if you have a VAT account number.
Professional has nothing to do with the quality of your results... it's just a label that defines it as your "profession".
Herman Surkis
Posts: 6,230
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Mcary wrote:
Really make me wonder how the term "amateur" that means ""lover of" has become a derogatory term. As in oh you're an "amateur" photographer, guess that means you're not good enough to be a professional photographer.
Just because they don't like to admit that they are waitresses doesn't change the fact that THAT is what they are.
An actress who spends her entire day going to castings and workshops and practicing (makming no money at it) and then goes to her waitressing JOB at night...is a waitress whether she wants to admit it or not. Now, she can say she's an "aspiring actress" while she serves you your potato skins and that is a bit more honest.
But there is nothing sadder than asking someone what they do for a living and having them tell you they're an actress/dancer (as they're putting on their TGI Friday's apron and suspenders).
In the case of photographers, you can ACT professional (i.e. behavior and actions) but that doesn't mean you ARE a professional. To "qualify" as a professional photographer you must make the majority of your income from photography.
If you look at some of the photography organizations like PPA or ASMP they have minimum requirements based on professional status. For example, on the ASMP site:
"ASMP requires that applicants for General Membership demonstrate proof of publication for the previous 3 years and that the majority of their earned income be generated from the publication of their own photography. Substantial publication proof is usually adequate to confirm the earned income requirement. While the publication must show professional competency, aesthetics are not judged."
I don't think that telling them that you earn your money as a waiter but practice and spend a lot of time at workshops would satisfy their requirements.
. Screw that! Somebody asks what I do and I ask them, "for money?" I do lots of things, some of them I get paid for.
| 
| 
| edu