isaacallenimages Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 Often wondered when the transition from a hobbyist to a professional occurs. Where is that fine line that defines you as a pro. Is it the first time you sell your photographic abilities or work? Is there a criteria, checklist, culmination of things? Thoughts? Opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the moderator doesnt lik Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 In some countries you are not a professional until the state licenses you, and to get that license you have to have accredited training and education and pass a test.<p> It is that way in my state if you want a State staff photography position.<p> In the USA anyone who earns a coin or in-kind payment can call himself a professional, for better or worse.<p> If you want a certain kind of 'professional' status, you might apply to certain affiliating authority for membership - hopefully one that is selective and can drop you if/when you no longer do suitable work, or have violated ethics, something like that.<p> In darker moments I don't think one's a professional until he's had his pictures stolen and sold by someone else for profit. Another measure would be when one is required to carry business insurance to carry out his photography. But those are dark moments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 The definition is pretty simple : You become a professional photographer when you start charging money for your photography and people start relying on you to do the job you are contracted for. If you think it is a fine line you need to see an eye doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_laycock Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 "You become a professional photographer when you start charging money for your photography and people start relying on you to do the job you are contracted for" These are two very different things. How do you know when people start relying on you? Are you a professional if one person comes back for a second project? Do you need more than one person? It's a grey area and you did a lousy job describing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan2240 Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 Well, if you apply the same rules used for athletics, it would be whenever you are paid to take pictures, regardless of the amount or number of recurrences (as I understand it anyway). But I'd say realistically, it's when your primary income is from taking photographs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatley Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 I think Bill is smack on, "pro" means primary source of income imo. The "semi-pro" group is the big wide one in my view. For instance, I've sold some prints to friends of friends, and I often use my own photographs as stock in websites I or others I work with and pass the fees onto the consumer. Am I a "semi-pro"? Maybe, just barely. A pro? Very far from it, in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 <I>How do you know when people start relying on you?</I><P>That's easy: when they hire you. Hiring any professional for the firsttime is a matter of trust. As the saying goes: "you are only as good as your last picture. professional photographers get hired to deliver pictures not excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_laycock Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 But Ellis, as soon as someone agrees to give you money for taking a photo for them then they have essentially 'hired' you. This means that the one or two photo shoots that I have done in the past would qualify me to call myself a professional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickhilker Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 Characteristics of a professional in any field are adherence to a set of standards and presenting oneself as a person whose business is whatever he presents himself as doing. The term implies that he can be relied on to do a competent, workmanlike job and that he stands behind his work. "Semi-pro" seems like someone who dabbles and sometimes gets paid without maintaining a business address or belonging to any professional associations. I like being an amateur because the term suggests I make photographs for the love of it. I do sell them in galleries, but don't aspire to professional status because that would take the fun out of it. The term "hobbyist" is a turn-off for me, implyiong that it's something to simply pass the time of day rather than an artistic endeavor. Fortunately, I've found other ways to more easily make money so I can enjoy photograpy on my own terms, rather than those of a finicky customer. Over the many years I've been involved in photography, I've succumbed a few times to requests to do commercial work and regretted each and every experience. One almost drove me from the field permanently! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben conover Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 I agree with Andy. The proof is in the pudding. Here's an example or two, in Ireland the roads and drivers are so bad that crashes happen all the time. In Germany the roads are exremely good (autobahn = max. speed 200 kmph....) and the drivers are required to sit a very tough test. The same goes for German violin makers and lens makers. So, having a system of qualification for what is supossed to be a profession is a good idea. There is an enormous difference between someone who earns money with a camera and what I would call a professional. My father can sell a 'Cello (6 weeks work) in the states for $20,000 but his 'Cello's are so darn bad I feel sorry for the buyers! How does he do it? he's a bullshitter, unlike me. He has never sat any exams and has no qualifications in his chosen 'profession'. I will respect people who can call themselves 'professionals' if what they produce is of a high quality, and priced fairly. The concept of responsibilty is also part of the term professionalism, in my book. However, as far as art goes, one can make a wonderful work of art and never have a clue how to sell it....does that make you professional? HHmmmm.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben conover Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 I agree with Dick as usual. I think he made a good point about doing photography as an amatuer (I like to be a beginner) and reaping the rewards. Freedom is precious so may as well enjoy it! Also, I think there is no 'fine line' in becoming a professional photographer. Instead I believe that there is a long road to walk and much to see and learn on the way. That is fortunate, because if there were only a fine line to cross we'd all be pro's! How boring would that be? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maris_rusis Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 Professional, except in loose speech, refers to activities that amount to a profession. Medicine, law, engineering, scientific research are typical professions. The professional offers a client a valuable and necessary service. The activity is conducted by highly trained individuals exercising a conscientious dedication to the clients interest. Resourcefulness, mental agility, and a resolute attachment to strong moral and ethical values make the professions worthy of respect. I think is is unfair to impose such standards on good hardworking people who just want to make pictures for income. A failure by a photographer means a re-shoot. A failure by a surgeon may mean death. When I photograph for money I use the word commercial rather than professional. It is honest, respectable, and does not assume an unmerited status on my part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kahn Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 Well, I've made some money at "fine art" photography, but I can't say it's may main source of income, so that's out. I don't don't commerical work, so that's out. So, I guess I'll stick with "semi-retired starving artist". I'm more comfortable with that, anyway. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert x Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 "My father can sell a 'Cello (6 weeks work) in the states for $20,000 but his 'Cello's are so darn bad I feel sorry for the buyers! How does he do it? he's a bullshitter, unlike me. He has never sat any exams and has no qualifications in his chosen 'profession'." Ben - you should get your father to sell your violins for you. ;o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the moderator doesnt lik Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 The traditional definition of a Professional, or at least the previous definition before the age of revisionism, was restricted to lawyers, MDs and PhD scholars. Lawyers, fer gosh sake! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the moderator doesnt lik Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 The requisites for being a Professional Photographer are lower than those for being a hooker. And the pay is worse, too. So is the overhead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatley Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 Jac: =) Not sure when this age of revisionism you refer to began, but etymology of professional is latin and doesn't really limit it to that in the texts I've seen. Through Roman times and certainly around the Age of Reason and after I think you'd have to include dentists, school masters, engineers, architects, accountants, military officers and clergy. The line would be drawn at ship pilots/masters, surgeons (sawbones, as opposed to physicians), scriveners, stenographers and the like but career bureaucratic types (linguists/lower diplomats, etc) would have certainly been accepted as within the professional class - that is, socially above a tradesman (laborer) but not part of the gentry. But I'm no linguist or historian, just peruse some primary sources here and there. The artisian classes have always been somewhat suspended between trades and professional careers from what I see - the shining stars afforded gentry status, the starving artists somewhat below a successful tradesman......but anyhow, off topic. Professional today generally means getting paid for just about any chosen activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vrankin Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 I was a photo wholesale/retailer years back. Many came in looking for a "professional discount." I considered a professional photographer as one who made his or her primary living from photography. That included fulltime studio operators, newspaper staff photographers and freelancers who generated a steady volume of work. They bought consumables primarily in case lots, and found ways to buy camera equipment as cheaply as I could as a dealer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 Bravo Maris! You sound to me like someone who is down-to-earth and not at all hyped-up. This earns you extra points from me (not worth much I'm afraid, but if I was looking to hire a photographer then I'd want to find someone with your attitude - as long as they could also take good photos of course!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neild Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 <i>"Professional today generally means getting paid for just about any chosen activity."</i><p>That makes me one then... although I'm not a professional photographer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isaacallenimages Posted August 10, 2006 Author Share Posted August 10, 2006 Great responses all. I believe the consensus for most is that a "professional" is one who makes their primary living in the business. Thanks for your feedback! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
root Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 I think of professionalism in terms of value of time or product, range of skills, and reliability. Why should the consumer care how much time you spend, what other work skills you may have, or how you allocate them? . . . and no one has mentioned the IRS's definition (or did I miss it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve foster Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 I have heard that here in the UK you are a professional when 10% or more of your annual income is due to photography. I don't know how true this is, but I've heard it from several different people. This would make me a professional, although I do not consider myself as one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_perlis Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 I'd say that (except for legal definitions) a word like "professional" becomes free of intellectual content once it's put into play by marketing people. It then just carries an emotional loading implying "good" or "better than the usual" with the hope that the marks will buy the sizzle and not look closely at the alleged steak. From what I can tell from he photo and IT fields, the word "professional" has little to do with the ability to actually get anything done with anything approaching competence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt_needham Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 Consult your local tax officials. I'm sure they'd be glad to let you know if you are a professional or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now