|
Forums >
General Industry >
Difference between Pro(s) and Amateur(s)?
Nov 24 18 05:58 pm Link I've always told people that I am an amateur photographer, but in order to afford my hobby I take photos to make a living. KM Nov 24 18 06:54 pm Link I refer to myself as a serious amateur photographer. Often times, not so serious. Being an amateur allows me to decide who I want to photograph and when. I've always thought being a professional meant photographing everyone that is willing to pay your fee. Nov 25 18 01:16 am Link Eros Fine Art Photo wrote: Nouns versus adjectives. Nov 25 18 01:19 am Link Nov 25 18 01:31 am Link Camera Buff wrote: *Things are a little tight here, at the moment....... Nov 25 18 02:49 am Link I mostly agree with you. A professional earns the majority of their income from that advocation. Often (but not always) this means focusing on what has the most income potential. As an amateur, I’ve sometimes made money with my photography, but I’ve never felt pressured to shoot anything I didn’t want to such as weddings because I need the income. I’m free to stop shooting for profit anytime I want and only shoot for fun. Nov 25 18 06:17 am Link IMHO being a "professional" means being able to rise to the challenge of determining what the customer wants and being able to deliver the "talent" reliably, reasonably, and regularly. Being a professional is more of an attitude and combination of skills as an artist, business person and utilizes this blend of talents with a pleasing personality. Creating an atmosphere of understanding and confidence, avoiding arrogance, and knowing what can, and can not be done. A professional knows when a MUA and other "professional" staff are needed and handles the scheduling of the models, hair and make-up in conjunction with the location/studio and its availability. A professional delivers the "product" timely and knows the value of post-processing and retouch artists. A professional can maintain a sense of humor in the "stress of the moment." As far a the business end is concerned, if you cannot, through one means or another, make enough to keep the doors open, you won't be able to take the assignment, no matter how much talent and ability you have. I have been told: "You have to charge what you are worth, or you become what you charge." I have also heard: "Those that pay the least, will complain the most.and demand more of your time." Separating the customers into those who recognize your value, and those who don't can be a real talent in its own right. Taking that $50.00 gig because you "need" the $50.00 to pay the rent/cell phone/Adobe subscription, etc. is a dangerous habit to develop It is just as dangerous to "get in over your head" and accept gig's which are outside of your ability or the equipment you have available. Professionals have reputations that generate demand for their talents. A true professional is an all around great person to spend time with who happens to have talents and abilities. Anybody can push a shutter button. Everybody is capable of taking beautiful photographs. The difference is packaging business with talent/capabilities to the extent that folks will compensate you for your "work." I've seen professionals who are difficult to stomach, not just in photography, but as doctors, lawyers, plumbers, electricians, dentists, judges, clerks, musicians, car salesmen, mechanics, politicians. I've seen folks who are more mediocre in their talents reach and sustain more success, because people genuinely like them and want to see them succeed. Professionals see the need to "recognize" change in the waves of society and to embrace the need for continuing their educations, training themselves and their staff and building human value in all they encounter. Professionals care. Professionals care about their craft. Professionals care about their equipment and tools. Professionals care about their customers/clients. Professionals care about their assistants, models, MUA's, retoucher's, clerks. There is so much more to being a professional, than merely profit. A professional may have to sustain themselves through times where there is no profit. When things get "tight, tough and thin" a professional will shine and rise like a Phoenix from the ashes and even be a better person for having had the unfortunate experience. So sorry for the long post..... I'll get off the soapbox.... Nov 25 18 06:19 am Link Bartcephus wrote: *I will agree with most of what you said, in your original statement....except for this above...!! Nov 25 18 06:41 am Link Julietsdream wrote: I didn't say NOT to take them, I just said they are dangerous habits. It is not the photographs that suffer, it is the photographer. When you do those things, you are not being as "profitable" because you either cheapened your price just to get the gig, or you end up spending more time "figuring out" how to handle the "over your head" deal and/or failed to charge sufficiently to have the right staff, equipment, location, etc. I have been there.... I know the dangers.... and I am probably going to commit the sins again, no matter how repentant I become after I "re-learn" that lesson. The professional can handle dangerous situations and many make it look so easy. I didn't mean to mislead anyone from taking a gig, or expanding their repertoire. As that is part of the learning process and "real continuing education." Just realize, it won't be as profitable, and the experience most likely has a cost. The only way to gain experience is to do it. Experience is the best teacher....but has the highest tuition. Nov 25 18 07:55 am Link Nov 25 18 08:01 am Link Camera Buff wrote: It is not any different for photography. When the wolves are at the door, about to shut off the electricity, water, or repo the car, the Professional will sometimes take on an obligation because he/she needs the money right then and that is all the customer has or is willing to pay. Not wise to lower the price tag, but if it keeps the doors open another month..... (Why do merchandisers have "sales" on the goods and wares they are retailing?) Nov 25 18 08:19 am Link Nov 25 18 09:10 am Link the only criteria that works - the professional gets paid for their living. some hobbyists have the best equipment available some hobbyists produce better images than the best professionals and spend as much or more time doing it professionals will do a job for free if they feel they like the cause and the project some jobs allow professionals full freedom to do what they want other jobs have very tight constraints the only difference is that professionals must produce the results for the client clients have different expectation, not all are the same some clients only care about price and quantity other clients want a look no matter what the price public perception of "pro" is not worth beans Nov 25 18 11:21 am Link Do you know what the difference is between a Professional Photographer and a Large Pizza? A Large Pizza can feed a family of four. Nov 25 18 04:05 pm Link Camera Buff wrote: I find the opposite to be true. Most of the PRO models I've shot have in their profile that they happily shoot with all levels of photographers. It's how they make a living. They don't expect to get images for their comp card from every shoot, they only expect to get paid. Nov 25 18 04:28 pm Link ernst tischler wrote: Priceless and oh so true. In today's world, it's harder than ever for a photographer to make a decent living at it. Everyone who buys a camera on Monday is a pro by Friday. I'm all for people trying to make a living at something they really enjoy but the lack of business knowledge, especially in areas like customer service, are a great detriment to those who understand all aspects of what it means and takes to be a professional, working photographer. All it takes for any given group to get a very undeserved reputation is for someone claiming to be a part of such a group to act inappropriately, ruining it for the rest. Nov 25 18 04:33 pm Link Nov 25 18 04:34 pm Link Eric212Grapher wrote: I see people walking up and down the beach every day selling cut up mango and pineapple on skewers. That, in my opinion, doesn't make them either professional cooks, or professional businessmen. Nov 25 18 05:58 pm Link Nov 25 18 06:06 pm Link Nov 25 18 07:30 pm Link I was trying to compare a full time working professional with a studio to a well to do amateur who can afford good equipment and can shoot at his leisure. I think that would be a fair comparison. For instance, one of my second shooters is a retired surgeon from Florida and shoots with leica, hasselblad, and sony. He doesn't need the money but works as a second shooter for me for weddings to gain experience. He shoot his own weddings for friends and is a great wedding photographer in his own right. As good as he is and well off as he is his access to brides and grooms at nice locations is limited because he shoots mostly for his network of friends. I can never afford the equipment he has but he also doesn't have the breath of equipment that I have in terms of lights, backup gear, transmitters and studio equipment simply because he doesn't shoot as many types of genres as I do. I still have a lot of respect for him for how hard he works at learning the craft. Nov 25 18 10:21 pm Link martin b wrote: Excellent points. I enjoy what I do, being able to shoot ONLY what I want. But there are times, like when I look at the fantabulous annual ESPN nude series where they must have an infinite budget and 20 helpful assistants when I get a bit envious of the higher-end pros. Nov 26 18 06:52 am Link The difference between a pro and amateur is often having P.L.I.! 😉 Nov 28 18 02:29 am Link TEB-Art Photo wrote: I feel lucky that I have worked on some nice projects but not ESPN. Yes those guys got it good. Dec 02 18 09:20 am Link you get paid for what you do. Dec 02 18 09:39 am Link Camera Buff wrote: To me it's more important to be consistent and reliable and to have good communication. Dec 02 18 09:41 am Link Camera Buff wrote: Mark Salo wrote: Are they meaningless, or is it that the differences are becoming more and more blurred? Dec 02 18 05:48 pm Link Pro: You make a full time living at it, it pays your bills, you consistently get paid to do it, etc. Amateur: You do it for fun/hobby, make no money at it, make little money at it, can't financially support yourself from your earnings. *** Amateur however does NOT mean you are of low proficiency at your craft, I don't personally think it defines your skill level. Same with professional.  Dec 02 18 06:30 pm Link Aurora Red just stated what I just wanted to say in a different way! I think that there is a misconception that "professional" means automatically "high end" quality photographers... as people think that all pro photographers have the same level of skill and vision, etc. But, that is not what "Pro" means... people seem to forget that "Pro" is a short form for PROFESSIONAL and all it says is that you are making a living with it and that there are people that value that work enough to pay for it. That's the only distinction, in my opinion that should be made! We are ALL photographers first, we take images and we create images. Funny enough... although I am technically a "pro-" photographer... I actually do not use that term, when people ask me, I always say that "I am a Full-Time photographer.", to explain that I am making a living with photography... and that's it. Calling myself "pro-photographer" in public feels weird and somewhat pretentious to me... I just remember an example for this... A few months ago... I bumped into those three people taking pictures in the subway station near my apartment. Taking photos with poses etc. I approached the photographer, because he was using a device that I was curious about (don't remember) and we started talking. So, the female model (IG: @ikick_kidz), the male model (@isetyourtrends) and their photographer (@grimeyassny) are shooting all the time all over town and creating some seriously fun and good fashion photography... They don't shoot for business... they are more like an art cabal... I would never call them "amateurs", or non-pros, because it doesn't matter... they photograph and I really enjoy their work and the spirit of creating fun shoots. I mean... just look at their IG names... fun, creative with attitude!  I have mega respect and I am a little envious, because they are free to just do it. In summary... "Pro" means profession and is no judgment call on quality! Dec 03 18 12:34 pm Link udor wrote: Agree 100% Dec 03 18 01:10 pm Link Phil_I wrote: +100 Dec 04 18 11:44 pm Link So in other words "pro" doesn't mean that the photographer won't get handsie, which is what it has become to mean here in the hobby world. Remember Harvey Weinstein is a "pro", Terry Richardson is a "pro" too. Pro means you earn you it living from it and little more. Dec 04 18 11:46 pm Link Camera Buff wrote: Usually it's a case they have a non related full time profession that funds thier photography that allows them to undercut. Or a lack of business knowhow. Not paying the taxes they should on their photography work could be another reason. I've seen all three. Dec 04 18 11:50 pm Link B R Bardun wrote: True story. You would not believe how many SAG people wanted me to work for free "and they would spread my name around"... What? And tell everyone I work for free? Jan 03 19 08:44 pm Link TEB-Art Photo wrote: This is applicable to models as well. With photography, I modeled solely for trade/test and on spec for close to two years, before I was able to start earning income and traveling as a model. I did, however, pose for classical arts groups and painters, which was consistent income for me during that time - though it was an extremely lean/little income, by comparison to what I needed to actually get by long-term. During those two years I thought of simply quitting many times. At that time, I was not even really focused on turning a profit, so it wasn't that I was discouraged, so much as I was investing a large amount of time (and basically all my income) on doing shoots. It felt very draining on a lot of levels. Eventually, this began to turn around and I am very glad I persisted, but it did take awhile. Jan 04 19 09:38 am Link My first mentor was the chief photographer at a metropolitan daily newspaper where I did a paid internship in photography at age 15, the summer before I started high school (1962). He told me that there are three differences between an amateur and a professional photographer: 1) The professional shoots more film to cover himself and give the editors a better selection of photos (and to be able to fill a larger variety of “holes” in terms of size in the paper). 2) The amateur is likely to show all 382 slides from his trip to Sacramento, while the professional shows only his best work. 3) The professional produces publication-quality results from every assignment and meets deadlines. Often, the professional will have better photos, but there are some pretty damn good amateurs, so that isn’t always the case. This was at a newspaper (that was way ahead of its time) at which the photographer was given the number of columns on the assignment sheet — and the photographer selected the best photo to fit that space. If an editor requested one (1) photo, the editor got one (1) photo, not a selection to choose from. Sometimes, after seeing the article and/or the photo, an editor would request additional photo(s). Another reason to shoot more. Or the editor might request that a photo be reprinted larger. (Back to the engraving department.) Two prints were made of each photo. Those to be engraved were printed 1/3 over size (1/3 larger than they would be in the newspaper) for better quality reproduction. Photos were rubber-cemented with other photos on “flats” (a 4x4-foot sheet of artboard), and all the photos on the same flat were shot by the engraver’s camera at one time to save time and reduce costs. The other print was sent to the editor who made the assignment. By order of the publisher, editors were forbidden to select or crop photos, because their tendency was to select or crop in a way that would take up the least space, so the editor wouldn’t have to cut copy to make everything fit on the page. An editor could request that a photo be recropped vertically (which could be done by sawing the zinc engraving, if the photo had already been engraved) without changing the column width. The photographer was under no obligation to agree to recropping the photo – and was rarely asked to. If the editor asked to see all the negatives from a shoot (which happened only occasionally), my instructions were to hide the negatives of any photos that I wouldn’t want my name on, i.e., that didn’t represent my best work. Btw, this was also the newspaper was not the largest newspaper in the state, but it ran away with most of the awards for photography (and editorials) in Associated Press and state press association competitions each year. The publisher was very visually oriented. This was long before newspapers had photo editors (most of whom started out as photographers), whose job was to select the photos and see that they were presented visually in the best way possible. Jan 14 19 01:25 pm Link It appears that the OP of this thread has left the building... Jan 21 19 07:36 pm Link This answer if not for the 10 or so magazine fashion photographers on this site who are truly the full bag of chips. And as a side note.... Wow, it's kind wierd when the OP has cleared all his posts in this thread. Hard to understand the flow of his argument. Oh well.... Pro or Non pro. Does it really make a difference? There are hundreds of mediocre to poor professional photographers shooting bad senior portraits and weddings and getting paid. Are these guys and gals any less professional because they are not particularly good? In fact MM is full of photo school graduates who shoot weddings and the odd portrait calling themselves professional when the model work they do is poor. Vivian Meyers died a rank amateur, someone who didn't even print much of her work. Yet once she died and her work had been discovered she has been lauded as a master of photography. The only thing that matters is the image not what the guy who pushes the shutter calls himself. Jan 22 19 09:23 pm Link udor wrote: Phil_I wrote: Whatever makes some of you sleep better at night. Jan 23 19 02:38 am Link |
