Labels
Posted by

Just a thought

'Professional photographer' is defined as as someone who make a living out of his/her practice of photography. But how will you define a photographer who is not making considerable amount of money from his/her work but is dedicated to his/her craft? Can he/she be called 'professional' photographer?

Comments and insights are highly appreciated.
Email Post
Labels:

Comments

ezra said…
i want to be a pro.. but no one ever buys my stuff.. but they all say i have potential..

what do u think?

www.aipye.multiply.com
November 10, 2009 at 9:35 PM
harveychua0208 said…
learn the business of photography if you want to be a pro. Talent is not enough. Turn your potential into reality by learning the business side.
November 10, 2009 at 9:59 PM
Norelyn Babiera said…
agree with ms. harvey - a PRO Photographer has an entirely different set of metrics from a Hobbyist..It is more than just one's talent.
November 10, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Henry Bateman said…
Being a professional photographer means that taking photographs has become a job. And like the "PRO" who walks the streets how much you can earn is dependent upon how well you can service your clients needs.

From time to time I get paid for my photograph which basically means that my photographs are in focus and they meet the clients needs, but I don't call myself a professional photographer or even a PRO photographer, I'm just a photographer.

From time to time I have gallery exhibitions of my photographically based artwork, but I don't call myself a professional artist, I just call myself an artist.

From time to time my writing is published and I am paid for my labors, but I don't call my self a professional writer, I just call myself a writer.

I just cant help but wonder if those who feel the need to add the professional (PRO) pejorative before their photography have an ego greater than their talent deserves.
November 11, 2009 at 1:37 AM
Unknown said…
interesting question...

i don't think it's the amount of money but the fact that money (or in kind) is paid that make a photographer a "pro"...

i guess this applies to those do this for a living, who sell their works as artworks etc...

but i am curious to know what to call those who are in it for the sheer pleasure of it, for the fun of it, and yet do not earn from it...
November 11, 2009 at 7:55 AM
buckpago said…
I* dont see the point discussing if who is the pro or not, its not the matter of how much money you collect form your photography, if that so, you must be called more as a businessman. hobyist, pro, amateur, and so on, who care? those are only title that gives you a notion that you apart from other, why? does these title would affect you skills on doing your photography, thats bullshit. titles are bullshit. in the end your photographs will define you as what your are. imo
November 11, 2009 at 7:29 PM
Buccino said…
It wouldn't / shouldn't matter anyhow, as one can easily add the 'PRO' to your name. There is no license to this 'profession'.

But what should matter is your craft; you are a photographer. Now, if you are very good at it, you might be able to be called a 'Master', like any other expert in your field.
November 12, 2009 at 2:18 AM
Post a Comment

Popular Posts