Who ever said Photography was easy ?

[hjoseph7]

<p>I'm amazed by people who purchase a fancy camera , take a couple of decent pictures and proclaim, "anybody can do this". It takes a lot of time and effort becoming a professional photographer and it doesn't just happen overnight.<br>

The phrase "The Devil is in the Details" rings true with a capital "T" when it comes to becoming a professional, or a working photographer. It's not just picking up a camera and taking great pictures like most people think, I mean that's part of it too, but taking great pictures is only a small part of it. There is the business side, Marketing, Promotion etc. The equipment side, where your equipment can mean the difference between you getting an assignment or not.<br>

The people side, where you have to work with all types of finicky people. The skill side, where you have to keep up the best you can, with the latest technology. This all takes allot of time, dedication and effort. I took a couple of courses in school, to get me up to speed, but I still feel I have only hit the top of the iceberg ! There is so much to know in this field. Tell you the truth, I wish I would have started much sooner, but since I'm already 1/4 of the way there, there is no sense turning back.<br>

Everybody loves taking good pictures and this is true, but when it comes to consistently taking good pictures, as if you really know what you are doing that's a whole nother story. The way I look at it is that you have to specialize, just like a doctor, or a lawyer because the way the field is now, there is no way you are going to know everything. No matter how much you try. <br>

What is even more amazing, are the people who can actually earn a decent living. When you are first starting out, sometimes it feels like you are sinking in a pile of wet cement. Do I have my tux fixed right ? Are my batteries charged, did I load the camera, do I have a spare back-up, will they call ? Little things like these can either make you or break you. Rarely do you get "The Big Chance" where somebody opens up their door and let's you in then you hit the big time, it's not like that at least not for me. You just have to keep plugging at it every day, every minute of the week every year.<br>

I'm not sure if this belongs in the philosophy of photography section ? </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm amazed by people who purchase a fancy camera , take a couple of decent pictures and proclaim, "anybody can do this".</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I see a lot more people who buy that fancy camera, take a few photos and realize they need help. The enthusiasts who are willing and anxious to learn seem to outnumber the duffers who are ready to hang out a shingle before the camera is barely warmed up.</p>

[john schroeder]

<p>Ninety percent of the people who want to upgrade their cameras think that buying a newer one will improve their photos. What is sad is that many of these people are on their third and fourth cameras buy now and still haven't learned. </p>

[tonmestrom]

<p><em>"...but I still feel I have only hit the top of the iceberg ! There is so much to know in this field"</em></p>

<p>You've got it Harry. Learning never stops.<em> </em> True of photographic skills as much as the business side of things.<br>

<em><br /> </em><br>

<em>"The enthusiasts who are willing and anxious to learn seem to outnumber the duffers who are ready to hang out a shingle before the camera is barely warmed up"</em></p>

<p>Really Lex? In my world it's exactly the other way around.</p>

[orias]

<p>I feel for the average professional photographer. It is the attitude of "anybody can do this", that lessens the value of the trade. By that I mean if "anybody can take out a brain tumor", then neurosurgeons would be paid less. I have taken a few good photos, but I haven't sold enough to support me, so I am proof that the phrase "anybody can do this" is patently false.</p>

[nogub]

<p>I'm not a proffesional, but I'm studying to become one. I agree a lot with what Lex said, there is more people who but a new, all nice camera and realize that photography isn't just about pressing a little button. This can make them think their camera is not good enough so they buy another one. It's just like children (Some times even old teenagers) that think because they can play songs in video games like Guitar Hero or Rockband, they can play a real guitar like Stevie Ray Vaughan. But I guess that if this people really enjoy photography, will study it at some point, on internet, books or an arts school.</p>

[gordonjb]

" Really Lex? In my world it's exactly the other way around. "

 

Same thing in my world, however this is not confined to photography. Any fool who can bend a nail can , and often will, announce themselves to be a carpenter-- likewise with plumbers and landscapers and loads of other " professions ". The problem and the solution in part fall back on the consumer. I've had people show me the terrific new bathroom their contractor installed and I've had to bite my lip not to burst out laughing at the horrific poor quality of the work. You can tell that the person they hired used some guy he dragged out of the bar to install the tile, the drywall is not water resistant etc. etc.

When I ran a contracting business, those ' backyard handymen ' who often made a wreck out of people's homes did me a favour by demonstrating by example, what happens when you do not hire professionals.

 

 

I see the same thing all the time with photography. On a certain level if the clientele cannot tell the difference between crap and quality it will not be difficult to sell them crap, however if they do know the difference they will take a pass on the crap and you may be in luck.

[brucecahn]

<p>Hi Harry: I was walking across Fifth Avenue. Two pretty, model types were discussing their plans for the future. One of them said "I was thinking about photography, but ANYONE can do that." I was a professional photographer at the time. This happened years ago, but I have never forgotten those words. It has helped push me to be more original, and to look inside rather than outside for inspiration.</p>

[peter_wang6]

<p>The whole concept of "professional" is a bit misleading. A professional, in the common sense of the word, is someone whose primary source of income derives from their work in that field, be it a professional physician, or ballet dancer, or photographer. Less common but also acceptable is the notion that someone who is a "professional" adheres to certain high standards of behavior and practice in their line of work.</p>

<p>"Professional" is very often used on photo.net as an antonym to "amateur," so we also have to think about what is implied by that contrast. An amateur is someone who is generally regarded as inexperienced, but in certain usages this is not necessarily the case (e.g., the Olympics is the largest and most prestigious international competition for amateur athletes). To say that someone is an amateur means that they do not rely on their efforts in a particular field to generate a significant portion of their income. That is to say, theirs is a recreational pursuit as opposed to a career pursuit.</p>

<p>The problem, then, with delineating those who are proficient or masterful photographers by whether or not they are "professional," is that proficiency and professional status are not exactly the same thing. They may be strongly correlated, but there are plenty of "professionals" who are lacking in proficiency--even with years of experience--and there are so-called "amateurs" who have never sold their work, yet take stunning photos. I've seen technically and aesthetically disappointing photos proudly displayed on various wedding photographers' websites. It shocks me that some clients actually pay for these images. And I've seen penniless art students take images that are profoundly exceptional. My point is that in this day and age, almost anybody could start up a business and take snapshots at weddings and be a professional. Yet some amateur who has absolutely zero interest in selling their work, who takes images for their own pleasure, could be insanely talented at it.</p>

<p>Yes, I know that many of you will retort that such a reversal is the exception than the norm, and I understand that to be true. But it doesn't change the fact that a lot of people refer to "professional" and "amateur" as ways to imply "good" and "bad," and the truth is, it is never so black and white.</p>

[petemillis]

<blockquote>

<p>It is the attitude of "anybody can do this", that lessens the value of the trade. By that I mean if "anybody can take out a brain tumor", then neurosurgeons would be paid less.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Everybody is capable of removing a brain tumour - just need some basic tools and some instructions downloaded from the internet. Problem is, I think one needs some sort of medical qualification and a lot of experience to reach the position of "brain surgeon" :)</p>

[don_e]

<p>"I'm amazed by people who purchase a fancy camera , take a couple of decent pictures and proclaim, "anybody can do this"."</p>

<p>Why are you amazed? You've said yourself they've taken a couple of decent images. Why shouldn't anyone else be able to?</p>

<p>And why a "fancy camera"? Most people can take a couple of decent images with an unfancy camera, too.</p>

<p> </p>

[brad_smith8]

<p>Why does it matter to anyone how other people enjoy any hobby, pastime, or profession? Or is it just about wanting to be contentious? I thought this board had rules about being intentionally insulting.</p>

[tomscott]

<blockquote>

<p>It's not just picking up a camera and taking great pictures like most people think,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't think "most people" think that at all. If they did no one would ever hire a pro photographer. They would just do it themselves or get the neighbor to do it.<br>

I take a lot of photos and spend a lot of time reading and practicing and would still not even dream of taking on a photography job for hire (or for free for that matter). I am not a professional nor do I ever plan to be. What I would like is someday to become a proficient amateur or hobbyist if you prefer. I personally have a lot of respect for (most) professional photographers.<br>

Like Brad said, "Why does it matter to anyone how other people enjoy any hobby, pastime, or profession"? Does it somehow take something away from you because some hack thinks that what you do is easy? They are not the ones that are going to hire you to do a job anyway so, why worry what they think.</p>

[jgalyon]

<p><em>Why does it matter to anyone how other people enjoy any hobby, pastime, or profession? Or is it just about wanting to be contentious? I thought this board had rules about being intentionally insulting.</em></p>

<p>Brad - I'm curious. What part of this discussion do you perceive to be intentionally insulting?</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Wow ! I thought this post was dead. Thanks for the replies. What I was getting at is that yes, anybody can take a great picture once in a while , fancy camera or not. Some of my greatest hits were snapshots, or happened when I hit the shutter button by mistake. But to consitently take great (Publishable) pictures, time after time with a degree of confidence, takes allot of skill. Oh, I forgot to mention the Legal aspect of this field. </p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Well, in some sense, anybody can do it. I'd chime in with the constant learning thing, though. Peter mentioned amateur, and I was reminded of a set of books by James Krenov. A classically trained cabinetmaker, Krenov wrote a set of influential books emphasizing the importance of amateurism in making excellent works. "The Impractical Cabinetmaker" was one of the titles. Krenov's premise was that the more inefficient decisions were often the ones that improved quality, even though they sapped speedy execution. He was trying to underscore humanistic sensitivity as being an important part of the overall work. </p>

<p>With the photo quality, sometimes it can be a matter of level of scrutiny or attitude. I was looking through some of my negative binders the other day, and had a low opinion of some of them. Meanwhile, I would have been incredibly proud of those same shots, had they been made years earlier. Sometimes beauty, or lack of it, is in the eye of the beholder. </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Regarding the assertion that a lot of novices are attempting to represent themselves as professionals after buying a camera and taking few photos, I think we get a skewed sampling group online.</p>

<p>The folks who do fit that profile - audacious newbies - are the most likely to post here on photo.net asking naive questions only after they've already set up a website advertising themselves as pros and gaining a few customers.</p>

<p>The rest, the ordinary shutterbugs who buy the best camera they can afford, don't post such outrageously naive questions. They may post naive questions, but it'll be along the lines of "Hi, I just bought a Nikon D700 as my first camera... well, other than a cam-phone, LOL! ... and I'm too lazy to read the instruction manual, so..." Naive, sure. Annoying...? eh, not really. Just ignore the questions if you've already helped your quota of newbies for the day or week. But outrageously arrogant? Nah. They're not representing themselves as a professional wedding photographer two weeks after buying an entry level dSLR.</p>

<p>Hang around the Beginner Forum and you'll get a somewhat different perspective. While we do get a few "Hi, I just bought a camera, yesterday I couldn't even spell 'Pro' and now I r one, LOL!" type posts, most of 'em are just folks wanting to learn to take better photos and improve themselves in the hobby.</p>

<p>But if you hang around the wedding, business and a few other forums, sure, you'll get the impression that every newbie who can afford a dSLR immediately wants to turn pro. Nothing new there. I've seen "You can be a pro!" DIY books and tutorials for decades. Digital may have attracted more such folk, but that's always been around.</p>

<p>As for the general trend toward novices misrepresenting their experience, I think that's more a sign of the change in the economy and working environment. There aren't many secure jobs any more so naturally the most aggressive, assertive and ambitious people will try to get jobs for which they may not be qualified.</p>

[peter_ferling]

<p>It's fine for a novice to sit in front of flower all day and shoot, chimp, adjust, shoot again, on and on... until he get's a nice shot. Then maybe he builds a portfolio of these results and shows them around until he lands a job. However, on the day of the job, he walks into the room or goes on location -having never been there or done this before, and has about five minutes or less to make it happen. At that point the realization of what it takes be a pro hits him. Oops.</p>

<p>Maybe he's smart, and right in front of the client, pulls the manual (you can hear the initial crack of the binding being opened for the first time)...</p>

<p>Maybe this same guy will lurk about these forums. He'll read and read, and like a sponge, he learns to mirror what others have said, learns the speak, builds a convincing online presence, and even gives the same advice, without real life experiences. That's because he couldn't of had twenty years behind the lens, as he was still in diapers back then.</p>

<p>I shot for seventeen years before I even considered doing this for profit. Even then, my first year (2000 I think), was an eye opener. That's when it hit me. This pro stuff is work! Today I'm still learning, it's called improving. I don't always give the best advice, just what I know by learning through example -which may have been a bad one. But at least it was real one.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>"(e.g., the Olympics is the largest and most prestigious international competition for amateur athletes)."</p>

<p>Maybe 30 years ago. Not today. Pros dominate the Olympics-- Tennis, Cycling, track/running, Basketball...</p>

<p>But for sure, amateur shooters can be much better than fulltime pros when it comes to photography. There are some Top amateur photogs out there who work at fulltime jobs in unrelated occupations.</p>

<p>However, PRO Photography is a lot easier than many sports though, so true so true.</p>

[jay_poel]

<p>It's funny, my brother in-law just asked me to shoot weddings for him on the weekends - he's a professional videographer and editor. His thinking was that I take some really good shots of family events and such and I would make a good wedding photographer. I've taken up photography as a hobby and to help record the growth of my children - I am by no means a "pro". I am though, a PROFESSIONAL automotive service technician and own a small and very busy two bay garage.<br>

I just laughed at him and said, hire a PROFESSIONAL and I'm willing to be his assistant if he would have me. He has no idea about the business side of shooting weddings and neither do I - except for the fact that a wedding is a once in a lifetime thing and there are no "do-overs" if you screw up or miss some key shots. I'm sure I could study on the internet and get a nice shot list but you have to have an eye and a great amount of knowledge when it comes to composition. I can nail the exposure, that's the easy part.</p>

[john_liberty]

<p>Well, I disagree on the meaning of the word professional. A pro is someone who achieves professional results. It reminds me of the time I was at work and talking w/ a client on the phone. When I asked them what their job title was, they answered they were a professional artist. I laughed and asked them what in the world that was? Turned out that they meant was that they worked as a commercial artist. As a painter (who worked a day job to provide myself with little luxuries like food and a roof over my head) I thought her reply was ridiculous. So, Van Gough was an amateur because he didn't have a list of clients and only sold one painting in his life? Kafka was an amateur because his work was essentially unsellable while he lived? Please.</p>

<p>Not knocking the "pro" photographers who shoot weddings and such, but when I look at a print on a gallery wall my only criteria is whether or not the image worked. If it did, it was taken by a professional. A working wedding photographer probably has other criteria to attend to. I do agree that consistently getting great images is a lot harder than I ever imagined. Hopefully, as one progresses, one sets the bar higher and higher, so that's natural.</p>

<p>A good friend that is also a good photographer asked a similar question recently. He said that w/ today's autofocus cameras that have auto exposure and very good digital sensors, shouldn't anyone be able to take great photos? I suggested that he look on the internet and show me some of these examples from newbies. They aren't there.</p>

[peter_wang6]

<blockquote>

<p>"(e.g., the Olympics is the largest and most prestigious international competition for amateur athletes)."<br>

Maybe 30 years ago. Not today. Pros dominate the Olympics-- Tennis, Cycling, track/running, Basketball...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The example I used is not meant to be a statement of fact. It is meant to illustrate the usage of the word "amateur" as not necessarily implying inexperience.</p>

[peter_wang6]

<blockquote>

 

<p>Well, I disagree on the meaning of the word professional. A pro is someone who achieves professional results.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>What is a "professional result?" Do you even realize the absurdity of your circular definition?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It reminds me of the time I was at work and talking w/ a client on the phone. When I asked them what their job title was, they answered they were a professional artist. I <strong>laughed</strong> and asked them what in the world that was?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You laugh at your clients? Well, that's rather professional of you.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Turned out that they meant was that they worked as a commercial artist. As a painter (who worked a day job to provide myself with little luxuries like food and a roof over my head) <strong>I thought her reply was ridiculous</strong> .</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So, you think that the commonly understood, dictionary definitions of words are ridiculous because you think they ought to mean something else that you chose? Interesting.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So, Van Gough was an amateur because he didn't have a list of clients and only sold one painting in his life? Kafka was an amateur because his work was essentially unsellable while he lived? Please.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A professional is often, <strong>but not always</strong> , skilled at their work. There are a lot of incompetent professionals out there, and not just in art, but all kinds of careers. You don't find it outlandish that there are incompetent doctors, do you? And yet, they have had vast amounts of training and education, years of experience. Conversely, someone who is skilled or proficient may be called a professional despite the fact that their work is not the primary source of their income, or their work may be described as professional. But the <strong>inverse</strong> statement is not necessarily true--that is, if someone does not earn their primary income from a given pursuit, it does not imply they must be amateurs at that pursuit. That is the flaw in your reasoning.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Not knocking the "pro" photographers who shoot weddings and such, but when I look at a print on a gallery wall my only criteria is whether or not the image worked. If it did, it was taken by a professional.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As I have just described above, that assessment is fair usage, if not particularly objective.</p>

<p>Pro bodies, pro lenses, pro photographers, pro this, pro that. It's a really elitist way of thinking that some people on this forum have adopted, just because they feel threatened by the fact that some people are just BETTER at it than they are, and don't have to try as hard to get it.</p>

[dried_squid]

<p>I think there are many who think it is easy.<br>

I don't think it's hard. Yet some never find their way.<br>

But I do think some reach the point where the effort is worth it.<br>

And for some, reaching the point never happens, not because it's hard, but because they decide "it's not worth it" to continue.<br>

I take film. For me the doing, up to the click of the shutter is worth it. Upon receiving the processed film, slides or B&W contact, there's always a couple that are worth it, and usually, there's a surprise.<br>

So I still do it. And sometimes it's hard. And sometimes, it's disappointing. That's ok.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>However, on the day of the job, he walks into the room or goes on location -having never been there or done this before, and has about five minutes or less to make it happen. At that point the realization of what it takes be a pro hits him.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's probably happened to most full time professionals at the start of their careers too.</p>