Do you "admit" to being a photographer?

<p>I'm not a photographer, but some call me a <em><strong>photog</strong> </em></p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Humbleness and Humility are not particularly common qualities in North America....Respects, Robert"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I couldn't disagree more. While we have a lot of conceded and egocentric people in this continent which I call home, there are plenty of people who are also very humble. Furthermore, I don't believe that humbility and humility are reasons to attend therapy - these are quite admirable traits that frankly few have mastered in any corner of the world. If anything, I'd say that it's those who are haughty and self-assured of their abilities that need to see a therapist. Nobody has ever truely mastered a trade because mastery equals perfection. Frankly, no human being is capable of perfection in any facet of the word.</p>

<p>To answer Linda's question, I can't say if I would feel comfortable saying I'm a photographer or not... Of course, in the capacity of taking photographs, recording a still image in a film or digital format, I'd say that I am a photographer. Any person who is capable of grasping ahold of a camera, turning it on and hitting the shutter button is a photographer in that broad brushed sense. However, in the sense that I'm a photographer who carefully observes a scene, makes sure to set the camera to record the light as accurately or artistically as possible, and makes sure that the composition is right, thus combining all of these elements to carefully tell a compelling story about what exactly is being captured, I'm very much a work in progress. On a scale of 1-10, 1 being "I like to just take pictures of what catches my eye" and 10 being "I'm as close to a master as a photographer can get", I'd rate myself a 3.5. I'm well past the stage of "Ooh, a flower! I wanna take a picture of it!" and just taking snapshots. I'm learning to carefully watch the composition of the image and learn how to get the basic exposure settings (aperture and shutter speed) set right for the purpose at hand, but I'm still very underexperienced. Because of this, I'm studying a lot of books on photography and am reading a lot of articles on site such as photo.net (you all have helped me a lot). </p>

<p>Because I recognize my limitations, I am one to say this: I'm a photographer, but if you want professional results, look elsewhere.</p>

<p>For me hobby photography is the same as someone's fishing on weekends...a hobbist photographer is about the same as a hobbyist fisher...a fish is a fish and when on the plate it makes no difference who catched it...for image it is pretty much the same....after a while with some practice and sensibility an excellent image can be captured by virtually anybody with a camera...the difference with professional is intention, consistency, dedidation, assigments and serving the need of the customer...<br />But just like fish on the plate...at the end an image is an image and hobbyist can proudly see themselves as the photographer of those images just like uncle Bernie was the proud fisherman of those fishes...nothing more and nothing less for me...<br>

<br />So in reponse to Linda (very interesting thread by the way)...I would say I am the photographer of my images but I don't feel being a photographer as it would mean nothing true to me saying I am a photographer...just like uncle Bernie is not a fisherman however good he is at catching fishes...</p>

<p>I've never been asked, nor can I imagine why anybody would ask me that. If pressed for an answer I would define myself as a hobbyist. Because that is all I am.</p>

<p>Photography is probably the medium I'm most passionate about, but I also do a bit of hand lettering using dip pens, burn off steam with watercolors, bake far too many pastries, and write a mean jingle. To definitively say "I'm a photographer" seems somewhat limiting.</p>

<p>When cornered on the street -- most often when someone sees a 70-300mm lens fully extended from my K20D -- I'll say, "I just like it a lot." Otherwise, they want to know what I'm shooting, what lens I'm using, and what brand I like best. And, my favorite: "Who do you shoot for?" I'm always tempted to say, <em>"Sports Illustrated</em> <em>"</em> just to see their reaction.</p>

 

<p>I prefer to answer "I like photography." So I guess I shy away from saying "I am a photographer."</p>

<p>Dear friend <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=423056">Michael Chang</a>, I have some very nice images here on photo.net, the question why don't you call yourself a photographer ?</p>

<p>There are people here with no images at all or with some very low skill 3 or 4 images and they still call themself photographers and photographic teachers ?</p>

<p>This is the case here in my part of the world, there are the same people , they teach photography, wrong photography and people unfortunatly beleive in them where at the end f the day, those teachers do teach nothing and those learning from them never learn any thing right.</p>

<p>I been added on one our photographic forums as photographic teacher, on another forum, a gest of honers, but I am not so and tried to make those people than I am not so, I can only help with what I know no more, I always loved photography as I have seen my father practising it the whole of his life and I did have my hand on some of the world best cameras and lenses, but I never wanted to live for photography, this is my hobby, this is what fells my spare times, this is what keeps me away from other bad things in life and this is what makes me focus on the beauty of God Creations _ but I am not a photographer.</p>

<p>Dear <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=423056">Michael Chang</a>, with the quality of your images here, yes, you can call your self a photographer other wise I would call you so with great respect.</p>

<p>I do not understand, some people when they say they are photographers on this thread while having only 8 photographs of the same intenral lay out and all of them luck the compelete composition, light and so on, all of them 8 non of them have that picture with frame in side the cader, Oh, my xxxx how such aperson so easily call him self a photographer , are we into cheating others or cheating our selves, do such statment makes fool of us or we just fool ourselve ?</p>

<p>I am so sorry but I learnt here from some very high quality people to tell what I feel is right and never be scared of the income.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Rashed, I suppose in a sense we're all photographers. I don't call myself one only because it's not my professional identity; I only do it for fun.</p>

<p>It's also an interesting doorway into the psychology of others through our sharing of photos. I think our pictures tell a lot about who we are, certainly our preferences and how we see things, so what we call ourselves is not all that important to me; our pictures say it all. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>I don't think I'll ever be able to call myself a photographer. That title is just too intimidating. When people ask, I just tell them I'm a hobbyist, and that suits me just fine.</p>