Turning Pro - wedding Photographers - What is a pro

I've been shooting weddings for over 20 years now and I consider myself a pro. Once in a while I'll see someones

work that I find pretty amazing. Sort of like the Tiger Woods of weddings and they are just starting out in this

profession.

 

I don't know if this question can really be answered, so I thought maybe the responses may be entertaining from the

new pros as well as the seasoned pros.

 

Also for the advanced photographers, what do you feel you need to call yourself a pro? Maybe the seasoned pros

can help you with ideas on how to bump yourself from an advanced position to a pro.

lest I be Mr. Technicalities, the moment you get paid for your first wedding, you're a pro[fessional].

 

but we all know there's a difference between some dude with a Rebel whose nephew paid him 40 bucks to shoot his wedding, and someone who actually knows what he's doing and has invested a considerable amount of time, practice and, of course, money into his profession.

 

in my opinion, a pro is someone who gets consistantly excellent results, week in and week out. they don't have to be the Tiger Woods of photography, because there will only be a few of those. but to play in the same league as Tiger, you've got to be consistant.

 

those would be my two cents. keep the change.

Collecting payment for shooting a wedding or event does not by any means qualify anyone as a professional.

Unfortunately many people with a rebel xt and two lenes and little or no experience call attention to the fact that they

are 'pro's' (in their own minds). There is no test or degree of merit required as a measurement of one's talent and it is

for this reason the true professional looses business to rank amateurs.

 

I agree with David E. in the fact that shooting with excellent results in a consistent manner would be the first step.

I've seen some fantastic creative work here on Photo.net by photographers like Marc Williams & Christopher Hartt

who are at the level of true professional wedding photographers. IMO.

 

Someday I hope to be that good myself if I keep working at it.

Being professional and actually being professional are two separate things.

 

If a majority of your income is made by being a photographer, than you're a professional. It's as simple as that. If you're an engineer during the week or something and just shoot weddings on the weekend for a little extra spending money, you're not a professional. It's just a hobby you have to make some extra cash. I'm not trying to discredit anybody, just telling it like it is.

 

It's a matter of survival for us pros (I'm a newspaper photog and wedding/portrait photog and earn my ENTIRE income as a photographer). The work produced by professionals is, for the most part, top notch, because it has to be in such a cut-throat business like this. You need to know your craft back and forth. It's not just a matter of knowing your camera, which in the big picture is a small part of it, but knowing how to be a people person and a business person.

 

Not to discredit the semi-pros or amateurs, but most of us pros produce good work, because we started out like many of them did and did it for the love of the craft or art or whatever you want to call it. It's like being a teacher, or any other low-paying job for that matter, I don't think many of us do it for the paycheck. I do it to change lives and share in the experience in life.

 

The only problem I have is when people tell me what an easy job it is to be a wedding shooter or a news shooter, because I just laugh. It's really hard work and as I explained it to a friend the other day, especially in Monterey, Calif. where I need to work extra hard to create new, original work in a place that has been shot a million times over.

 

There are quite a few very good semi-pros and amateurs out there who do do good work, but doing a wedding for way less or for free kills us pros who can't afford to (some of that is on the brides who might be tight for money and I understand that, but it still sucks).

 

Being a professional takes a professional mentality as well. We've all seen the posts on here about "Help! WTF do I do......" and "What gear do I need? blah, blah, blah." If you're asking those questions, you're not ready yet. Work your way up by assisting a pro or taking a photo class or starting with just engagement photos for a couple for free.

 

May sound like a rant, but whatever. Just my two cents.

 

Cheers,

 

~ nic

You're pro of something when you live of that thing. Beeing a pro photographer, where ever your specialty is

would mean that the income that you generate from your photos pays the bills, the meals and event the kids'

education.

It always amazes me to see how many people would put the gears and the money spent first...

I know a few real pros wedding photogs here who still shoot with with a 20D and a slow EFS lens (yeah, only one

17-85 lens). And yeah, their booking diary is pretty much full and they all have good testimonials.

 

Being pros sometime means knowing what your customers want and not what you can do. Have a strong marketting

strategy and you'll give the value to your product.

 

Believe me, buying a Ferrari doesn't make you a Schumacher or a golden golf club won't make you another Tiger Woods.

This rule implies to having a Canon 1Ds MK 45 won't make you a master of photography either, but yeah, that helps :).

You can be the best in your art but if nobody knows you, you won't sell (that also implies that you can't pay

bills, and not to be a pro).

Here I see two aspects: _1).when you think about yourself that you are a pro _2). when you are a pro

photographer for society ...

1). Someone should consider by himself that is a pro, when he/she can manage as a pro every moment of

wedding day: knew the good or bad angle, right moment, etc. and camera, lenses, and accessories has no secret !!...

2). This will come sooner or latter : people recommend you as a pro, you already has some good place in

different photography conquests or some of your photographs are in different photo-magazines, etc.

A professional photographer is difficult to define, since it doesn technically mean someone who collects money in exchange for photos consistently. I dont think having a day job influences that fact, It just means they have more work to do and manage their time well. But we all know what the pro "feels" like. I dont think that pros MUST use old equipment to prove how busy they are and and how much their camera doesnt matter... real pros consider camera costs insignificant, and will purchase a new camera when it will help them produce a better product and make more money from it. Its a tax writeoff anyways. You know you're next to a pro by watching how work. They produce consistent results to their clients satisfaction.

Frequently the term is used too loosely by photographers that can't tell the difference between basic lighting strategies. A short-order cook at the local greasy spoon is a pro but he's not a chef.

According to wikipedia:

A 'true' professional must be proficient in all criteria for the field of work they are practising professionally in. Criteria

include following:

Academic qualifications - i.e., university college/institute

Expert and specialised knowledge in field which one is practising professionally

Excellent manual/practical & literary skills in relation to profession

High quality work in (examples): creations, products, services, presentations, consultancy, primary/other research,

administrative, marketing or other work endeavours

A high standard of professional ethics, behaviour and work activities while carrying out one's profession.

 

It makes sense to me...

"There is no test or degree of merit required as a measurement of one's talent and it is for this reason the true

professional looses business to rank amateurs. "

 

Ooh but if there were such a test or degree, it would probably put a lot of folks here into a shocking state of reality.

 

I think "Professional work" and "Professinals" are two different things altogeather and accidently get grouped

togeather with the same meaning and understanding. I've seen "Professionals" in this buisness with lousy standard

same ol same ol work. But....they are "Professionals". They condunct themselves professionally, they have all the

proper gear, backup equipment etc. In other words, they are very detail oriented with their photography and business

practices. In this sence, they are a true professional. Many truly hold claim to this term of profession but lack the

ability to produce "Professional work", regardless of how long they've been in the profession of being a "Professional".

 

In contrast, i've seen and personally know someone that time and time again produces "Professional work" but lacks

many areas of being a "Professional". This person comes to work looking like they just rolled out of bed, prepares

their gear last second, often late producing the results, and sometimes doesn't follow through with exactly what was

promised....but their work is fantastic and truly produces an end result that any eyes could see as "Professional

work".

 

Then there are the Professionals that produces Professional Work. These folks have mastered their craft in both a

business sense and the end product. This person is truly unique and stands out to all without question, or without

saying a word.

<p><em>You're pro of something when you live off that thing</em></p>

 

<p>I don't find this a very compelling argument. By that measure, someone who is untrained but who flips burgers for 40 hours a week would be a professional chef.</p>

 

<p>I would say that someone is professional when then consistently deliver against professional expectations - their own, those of their clients, and those of their peers. Nothing more and nothing less. The time they spend at work, or the percentage of their income they make from it, are not important factors. Far more important is that they have true expertise in their field.</p>

 

<p>And someone is a full-time professional when they have all of the above, coupled with the necessary ingredients of a sustainable business that they can live from. And they're a semi-professional when they have the above, coupled with the time and opportunity to explore other ventures.</p>

i know this might be a little off subject but, i've only read about 2 and a half of these posts and i am seeing. "people with a rebel and people with a canon xt. etc... first of all i thought it wasn't the camera that makes the photo its the photographer. i personaly use 2 canon xti's. i guess lucky for me noone has said. we're not hiring you, you only use a rebel.

don't get me wrong i know when living in bigger cities and having much more competition then i have here i would maybe have to step up my camera body. also don't get me wrong. i would LOVE to have a mark III. but i'm happy with my two xti's and i haven't had complaints that my camera doesn't produce beautiful work. my next purchase will be a 50d. maybe then i can consider myself half-pro?

"Chef" is an alternate word for "cook" and can also mean the kitchen manager. This isn't a particularly good example. In the commercial kitchen, the chef is who runs the kitchen and/or does the primary cooking. There are great chefs and there are lousy chefs, just like with photographers.

 

The problem with some of these definitions is that they reference a level of skill, which may or may not be connected to one's ability to earn a living doing something. Plenty of professionals in any field produce mediocre, or even lousy, work. That's the way it's always going to be - there's a range of success levels in any profession. I've seen some horrific wedding albums that came from people who were full-time professional photographers. What they were good at was making people happy, not necessarily taking great photos, and that enabled them to become professional photographers.

 

What this points out is that there is a range of skills that make someone successfully become professional, and some have more of one and less of the other. I know some terrific photographers who have failed miserably as professionals because they lack the business skills, which are especially necessary in what is very often self-employment.

on a second note. i like the fact that Bob Bernardo has posted this. because Bob is someone i like reading posts from. and for him to question being a pro after 20 years of expeirence....wow, he values his work and strides to get better all the time. IMHO Bob is asking himself this question when he says. "Also for the advanced photographers, what do you feel you need to call yourself a pro?"

<p><em>The problem with some of these definitions is that they reference a level of skill, which may or may not

be connected to one's ability to earn a living doing something.</em></p>

 

<p>That's a valid observation. I'm reminded of a successful skilled wedding photographer in the UK who also runs

a training business. The advertising premise (in loose terms) is: "Never used a camera before? Don't worry -

attend this course and you can be a professional wedding photographer in just 2 days."

There are many levels of being a pro in this business. I would say staff photographers and anyone running a legitimate

photography business is a pro. Obviously there are top photographers and less skilled. We should all strive to improve.

 

Photographers charging low fees are not a problem unless they are too good for what they charge and are cheating

themselves the most.

A pro at anything, is one who can walk onto a job and know what to do - and - deliver the expected results. If anyone has to tell you how to do it , you are not a pro. The exchange of money is secondary as that is more of a business issue rather than a skills issue.

Lots of pros go on forums to ask questions. Usually those questions are not beginner photography questions, but it depends on how they are asked. Nothing wrong with pros sharing technical knowledge or business skill knowledge. There are just so many posts on pro forums that ask very basic photography questions and some who ask them are accepting fees for shooting. The fine line is how do they represent themselves? If they call themselves a pro to clients, there is a huge gap there. If they are doing someone a favor and getting some money for their trouble - with the understanding that professional results are not expected - that is not a professional job.

 

For weddings, since that is this forum, there is a huge spectrum of experience out there that is competing for wedding business. There is a lot of talent and a lot of wannabees. Since there are no rules and regulations, it is totally buyer beware. New cameras that have amazing features give people a false sense of security and fool them into thinking a "pro" camera will give them pro results. The essence of photography has not changed ever. It is still about understanding the basics of light and how to use it in order to record images that fit the vision your eye and mind designs. Whether or not the camera makes it faster or easier does not preclude the skills necessary to know how and when to use them.

It will be interesting to see how the whole business goes over the next few years as camera technology continues to amaze us and more people think weddings are easy or a quick way to make money. My gut feeling says there will still be exceptional photographers turning out beautiful work for their discerning clients...and a whole bunch more crappy pictures and disappointed clients.

 

But then, there are a lot of people who don't know the difference anyway. Look at the bands that are on the top of the charts today and compare them with the supergroups of the past. Big difference in my opinion.

Millions of people own guitars and play them, some very well. But how many are Eric Clapton or David Gilmour? or a few more of those authentic "guitar heroes"?

 

Lou

In my opinion, professional indicates two things:

 

1. The person obtains their primary living from the activity

 

2. The person conducts themselves professionally; always respectful, reliable, trustworthy, competent, consistent. This

doesn't necessarily mean that they do great art.

 

I think it is curious when a professional complains that amateurs devalue their work by selling a service for free or for a

low price (as in microstock, amateurs doing weddings etc.) If the amateur is requested to do a job, it's because the client

can't afford a professional and thinks the amateur can do the job well enough. This is just basic supply and demand, I

thought your country thrives on the concept. If amateur wedding photographers did such a bad job, and if the couples

think wedding images are important enough, they'll spend more money on it and hire someone better. But it seems

amateurs are in constant demand by friends getting married. And love to help. If you're a professional photographer you

can do other kinds of work in addition to weddings if there is not enough demand for weddings in your price category.

E.g. event photography, photojournalism so on, or quit being an independent business and get a staff job.

 

I do agree that professional photography is an extremely demanding job. I have no envy for you guys. I am certainly not

trying to cut from your standard of living and very much doubt that people like me would have a significant effect in that

direction. I love to make photographs and want to see people benefit from my photography. Sometimes I do an insane

amount of work to please whoever I am doing the work for. That effort is paid back not in money but in gratification and

getting the feeling that it's not just a vain selfish pursuit. At times I think about doing photography part time

professionally but the problem is that doing that would actually decrease the time I can spend on photography and

dramatically reduce my free time, because of the business management and marketing effort involved. And it would be

hard to keep up the consistency comparable to those who do it full time.

Based on the answers given, this brings me to the next level. I'd love to see PHOTO.NET devide weddings into 2 groups. Weddings for beginners, which will be geared to answer questions that are always repeated, such as this is my first wedding, what should I know and what camera and lens should I buy. Can you review my first wedding? Topics like this. I'm NOT asking to get rid of weddings for beginners, because they NEED to learn this art.

 

Then there could be another wedding site for wedding people that really know their profession, that are tired, a shade bored, about reading the same beginners posts over and over. The new wedding post could deal with much more advanced subjects, topics, techniques, styles, pro camera results, whatever, as long as it is for the actual pros. Of course the beginners to the pros would still benefit from both sites.

 

Anyway just an idea. I like photo.net a lot and I go on the site 3 to 4 times a week. I thought this may be a fun way to expand photo.net and bring out the hidden talents of the gifted wedding artists.

 

Can people respond to this idea including the mediators of photo.net?

Bob, with all due respect, should almost all forums then be divided into beginner and advanced categories, since they have the same "problem"? I doubt anyone any good would then answer the beginner's questions, and in order to get some answers worth having they'd quickly be posting in the advanced forum. There are not so many posts on the wedding forum as it is. Dividing would not increase the number of posts that are "interesting" to the more experienced people. It's not like the current forum was bandwidth limited.

Ilkka, I hear you, but disagree. I'm referring to ONLY the wedding forum. Some photographers will jump back in forth all over the place, including me. For example there are many photography chat rooms. If I'm bored in one I switch around until I find a topic of interest. Then when that topic is over I may stay or move on again to another site.

 

I'm bored with "I just shot my first wedding what do you think?" Almost everyone looks like they shot there wedding. They had no business shooting it, but often the bride and groom cannot afford a pro. Let this site be for just that. Learning. Think about it, let me know if you are still against learning the fine art of wedding photography or do you want to look at beginners websites and photos of their first weddings.

 

The advanced section may attract the finer photographers loaded with creative ideas that we all can learn from. The beginners can pop in and visit as well. They will surely learn.

I read some of this and decided to turn amateur.

 

:-)

A pro charges for her services......