Delineation

[tomorrowstreasures]

My 2nd question of the day is this:

Create delineations between these categories:

newbie
amateur
hobbyist
serious hobbyist
semi professional
professional
hall of fame - r

[kat]

Newbie- Getting your first camera and turning on the S-mode and wondering why your image is all black. The manual is a most read!!!! And Auto is your best friend.

Amateur- Not using Auto so much. Realizing that there is more to it and starting to get it.

Hobbyist/Serious hobbyist- The difference between the two being how much you are out shooting. I think these terms apply to a Newbie and Amateur more so then the next set of names. I feel (and of course this is my thought) that once you start making a livelyhood from photography it becomes not so much a hobby as a career/even though you enjoy your career.

Semi-professional - Almost there! Got most things worked out! You feel comfortable with your work but would like to get it just a bit more "perfect". I'd like to think this is where you start considering selling photos because people are asking to buy them!

Professional - You are there! You've learnt the techniques and skills that make you absolutley confident in yourself. No second guessing..seems like it's all up there and your photos are proof of that time and time again. No problems selling photos or getting work.

Hall of famer- Just like everything in life, you have those that are bad,good,the best, and a few who just have a talent that goes beyond "the best". That would be my hall of famer.

And this is how I think of the list. I'd like to har from others..maybe my thoughts are wrong and I should be looking at it a bit different :)

[jjeling]

I have moved from a serious hobbyist into the semi-professional then. Haha. This all sounds about right. While I would like to consider myself a professional, my confidence is not completely there yet. I know my images are generally as good as anyone else's for each situation, its just that self-assurance. It has greatly improved in the past couple months but not quite there yet. I still need to generate an income from it as well. As for Hall of Famer..........I will thank several of you when I get there.

[tirediron]

Newbie: Self-explanatory.

Amateur and hobbyist: Interchangable to a degree. Someone whose skill ranges from almost nothing, to just short of Ansel Adams, and spends as much time as he or she is able behind the lens, but doesn't make any money at it.

Semi-professional and professional: Someone who either makes a little money or all their money through photography. Has NO relation to their talent or abilities.

Hall of Famer: Someone who has achieved wide recognition both within and without the photographic community. Someone whose name is likely to recognized by 'Joe Average'.

[tomorrowstreasures]

I am about to hit the submit button with a bit of trepidation here. I just finished composing my :twocents: on Professional status. Please, no throwing of old film cans at me. I am not one that is comfy with being negative but just needed to get this off of my chest.

The professional tag is the one I have the most difficulty with. There are many out there that tag them self as such. Just because you want to play in the game does not a professional make. I think it is ridiculous that one can tag them self as such with out paying the proverbial dues. I think that one should have to apply to an organization (run by professional peers) that specializes in granting professional status and then, at that time and only after that permission has been granted can you label yourself a pro. You would have to submit examples of your work, maybe and essay, maybe an exam. The market is becoming glutted with people who take decent images, but have not a clue how the image got that way, get a little encouragement from folks, then all of sudden, attach a title to their name - "professional" and then, feel the right to charge people these ridiculous fees for what they do (or in many cases what a decent dslr can do on auto or a helper mode). I think a proving ground is needed to be a true professional. In the days prior to digital, you had to know your craft inside and out to have consistent results... you paid your dues. The bar for a professional should be raised. A professional should be one of few not one of many. A professional used to have a sophistication attached to the title and now it seems that the professional is no more than someone who "decides" that they are such.

Personally speaking, I am a hobbyist. People have solicited my skills. It has gotten to the point that I no longer feel that I can give away what I do as I have a lot invested in equipment and reading materials, pp tools, time etc. I charge a very minimal fee to those that solicit me it and then get hammered from others that I am driving down the industry with my fees. I have not asked for the business, nor have I ever called myself a professional. I love to take photos. I want to know all that I can to produce the best piece that I can. I have no plan to make a career out of what I do.

I know I am standing pretty tall on a soap box here. It just frustrates me for those who really have earned the title.

[kat]

I agree with you! I really do think there are too many that think they are of that status.

I consider myself amateur. I wouldn't think to go above that.

I read somewhere, I think in a photo contest, that they considered one an amateur unless their photography makes up 90%+ of their income. But is it really about the money or skill. Or do you have that professional skill when you make that sort of money... Ha ha..I don't really know - never sold a photo.

This comes to mind :

Actors. Some better than others..but some of the best don't get paid like the others. But they never have trouble finding work or getting reconized by an award. I think your work always shows where you are at, and you can't fool anyone but yourself for that.

[Travis]

The professional tag is the one I have the most difficulty with. There are many out there that tag them self as such. Just because you want to play in the game does not a professional make. I think it is ridiculous that one can tag them self as such with out paying the proverbial dues. I think that one should have to apply to an organization (run by professional peers) that specializes in granting professional status and then, at that time and only after that permission has been granted can you label yourself a pro. You would have to submit examples of your work, maybe and essay, maybe an exam. The market is becoming glutted with people who take decent images, but have not a clue how the image got that way, get a little encouragement from folks, then all of sudden, attach a title to their name - "professional" and then, feel the right to charge people these ridiculous fees for what they do (or in many cases what a decent dslr can do on auto or a helper mode). I think a proving ground is needed to be a true professional. In the days prior to digital, you had to know your craft inside and out to have consistent results... you paid your dues. The bar for a professional should be raised. A professional should be one of few not one of many. A professional used to have a sophistication attached to the title and now it seems that the professional is no more than someone who "decides" that they are such.

Personally speaking, I am a hobbyist. People have solicited my skills. It has gotten to the point that I no longer feel that I can give away what I do as I have a lot invested in equipment and reading materials, pp tools, time etc. I charge a very minimal fee to those that solicit me it and then get hammered from others that I am driving down the industry with my fees. I have not asked for the business, nor have I ever called myself a professional. I love to take photos. I want to know all that I can to produce the best piece that I can. I have no plan to make a career out of what I do.


lol... you are whistling out of both sides of your mouth... on one side you say only acclaimed professionals should be able to charge for service and that an influx of non acclaimed pros have saturated the market... while on the other side you charge for your services which puts you in the very category you criticize...

I can't imagine submitting work to an estblishment for judgment on whether I'm "pro" or not.... photography is art..... art is subjective... the quality of the work is as perceived by the viewer... a governing body would stifle artistic flow...

look at music.. there are thousands of musicians out there making millions from their craft without any rudimentry musical theory skills.... some can only play 3 chords... some have their music written for them... but they are enjoyed by millions.... does that make them less professional? I think so but this is the reality...

IMO it's really hard to box the meaning of professional other than how Tirediron put it.... A person who exchanges images for money...

Quality of work in an entirely different subject.... In an open market it's always buyer beware and it's no different with photography...

I've seen professional mechanics take people to the cleaners... professional airline pilots drunk at the wheel... professional investment brokers thieve assets... professional home builders cut corners.... all of these people licensed by a regulatory body.... buyer beware...

just arguing for the sake

[jjeling]

With all that being said, I agree with TT. There are too many people out there calling themselves professionals. The last photo contest I entered was for amateurs only. With the contest laid out by a Professional(Art Weber), the point at which you become a professional photographer is when more than 50% of your income is derived from photography. If less than 50% of your income is through photography, you are considered an amateur, or hobbyist. Unfortunately, it does not seem like they checked the background of the 200 some applicants. Some of the work submitted was definitly professional work. These rules came from the National Center for Nature Photography Photo Contest if anyone wants to look it up(here in the USA).
From a personal standpoint, I would like to considered myself a serious hobbyist. It is even listed as that in my profile when I registered for this forum. As time has passed over the years, I have tried expanding my creativity and knowledge in photography. With the knowledge I have gained, it seems to me that I have done much more than the average photographer and find it frustrating that people do call themselves photographers once they purchase a $1500 dollar camera. Dues must be paid as TT has mentioned, but this will show over time because those that have will consistently put out the best work and will have the largest following. Since the economy has turned sour here, I have taken it upon myself to strive to be a professional photographer by the rules of the contest mentioned. Before I do so, it is more important for me to try and develop my skills in all areas of photography so that I can settle into one industry that I can earn a decent income through, and then be creative in my freetime in the others.
There is one issue that many people have problems with and thats the pricing. TT has touched on this by saying that others are bothered because she pushed the industry prices down. Yes and no. If they were truly confident in themselves and their knowledge, it would be the last of their worries. When you enter a trade, skill, or developed art, you begin to get paid on your knowledge and not your work. Anyone can take a good or decent picture, but when you take a great picture, you really have no done any more work. It is the knowledge you possess that allows you to take such a great picture that also allows you to charge a higher rate, or sometimes a flat fee. With that being said, many people are considered professional photographers. The difference is the ones that have built their business through referrals and quality work that stand out from the rest. It comes from learning, teaching, experience, knowledge, and proven results.
This is just my take on the 'professional' subject. feel free to disagree with me if you like, it would be nice to hear your opinions as well.

[jjeling]

I agree with Travis as well. Putting a governing body or trying to win a art contest is kind of a joke. Nearly everything about the art of photography is subjective. When entering into a contest, it ruins the subjective nature of the art. Unfortunately, for you to really become a well known professional or to make it into the 'Hall of Fame' as a photographer, you must win contests. The numbers are stacked against you usually. Having been in two contests myself, I have placed in 2nd and 3rd in one, and an honorable mention in another. The only two I have been in. The images that one, were not necessarily better, and in one case were quite terrible. It was the presentation that won the contest since I did it on a short notice(within 24hours). Contests definitly ruin the artistic nature of photography IMO.

[kat]

Ive entered into four contests. One ending well and the other three - still waiting on. I don't expect to get anywhere with two of those.

Now the one I think I'll get something, or at least hope to, is a local contest put on by the town. The only problem I found with this contest is that it's hard to put anything artistic up because they just want photos that represent my town for the website and promotional things.

The funny thing is, I've heard one person complaining I put in photos to this contest because I have a nice camera..... Because of my equipment - they thought I was professional. (Which..if they had a clue they'd know it's far from it :D)

I don't know..sorry for the rant. I was gonna go somewhere with this but forgot what it was now.. oh yah..maybe professional photographers is all about the money and not the skill..maybe that is a better way to think of it.

[tomorrowstreasures]

Travis,
I quote myself here:
attach a title to their name - "professional" and then, feel the right to charge people these ridiculous fees

A- I do not attach a title to my name and
B- I charge a minimal amount.

I have accepted payment from very few people - and struggle doing it. I have come to the point where I am being taken advantage of with my equipment and skills and have decided that I need to be accepting some sort of compensation for those things.

The problem lies in the fact that naive people are being taken advantage of by titles and a bit of luck. It is no different than power of suggestion.
I still maintain a governing body needs to be in place so that there is a source for people to turn to that are turning over thousands of dollars for their special events to be captured. And more importantly to protect the pros.

[Ben H]

Time to post a linkee on this topic...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

;)

[kat]

Time to post a linkee on this topic...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

;)

ha ha

[tomorrowstreasures]

Time to post a linkee on this topic...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

;)

I posted my reply- had to run out of the room came back and saw how big the font was - so, i fixed it. sorry about that !!! but-in a way it is good that that happened b/c Ben here probably thought I was shouting - which I was not trying to do, only emphasize, which lead to his adorable reaction with this link.
Very good, Ben. :)

[Travis]

Travis,
I quote myself here:
attach a title to their name - "professional" and then, feel the right to charge people these ridiculous fees

A- I do not attach a title to my name and
B- I charge a minimal amount.

I have accepted payment from very few people - and struggle doing it. I have come to the point where I am being taken advantage of with my equipment and skills and have decided that I need to be accepting some sort of compensation for those things.

The problem lies in the fact that naive people are being taken advantage of by titles and a bit of luck. It is no different than power of suggestion.
I still maintain a governing body needs to be in place so that there is a source for people to turn to that are turning over thousands of dollars for their special events to be captured. And more importantly to protect the pros.

A little bit pregnant??

Pertaining to governing bodies there are tons of the out there.... National Associations, Provincial Associations, Wedding Associations etc.. All are designed with your sentiments in mind. Qualifying members of the PPOC have to be recommended by other PPOC members and must have business taxation numbers among other things. They must submit work for accredation in a specific field.

However, none of this will ever protect the naive people you speak of.... because naive people don't do things that other people do to protect themselves... namely...

-Call references of the professional they hire
-Observe several other weddings in the professionals folio
-Protect themselves by way of a sound, fair contract
-Interview other photographers to get a summation of quality and price etc.



Out of curiousity.... what is a ridiculous fee to you?

[tomorrowstreasures]

A little bit pregnant??

Pertaining to governing bodies there are tons of the out there.... National Associations, Provincial Associations, Wedding Associations etc.. All are designed with your sentiments in mind. Qualifying members of the PPOC have to be recommended by other PPOC members and must have business taxation numbers among other things. They must submit work for accredation in a specific field.

However, none of this will ever protect the naive people you speak of.... because naive people don't do things that other people do to protect themselves... namely...

-Call references of the professional they hire
-Observe several other weddings in the professionals folio
-Protect themselves by way of a sound, fair contract
-Interview other photographers to get a summation of quality and price etc.



Out of curiousity.... what is a ridiculous fee to you?

If I would take my nose out of a book, I would have learned by now that there are already such organizations in place, and this is good news to me!!! thanks so much for sharing that.
As far as ridiculous fees (for a wedding) - if a photog is not accredited to my standards, anything above a $100-200 fee for time and use of equipment is robbery.
How about you?

[Barefoot]

If I would take my nose out of a book, I would have learned by now that there are already such organizations in place, and this is good news to me!!! thanks so much for sharing that.
As far as ridiculous fees (for a wedding) - if a photog is not accredited to my standards, anything above a $100-200 fee for time and use of equipment is robbery.
How about you?

If I spend 6hrs shooting a wedding and the reception and another 4hrs in PP with the 800-1000 images, anything less than $400 is a wonderful wedding present I’ve given the couple.

[Travis]

If I would take my nose out of a book, I would have learned by now that there are already such organizations in place, and this is good news to me!!! thanks so much for sharing that.
As far as ridiculous fees (for a wedding) - if a photog is not accredited to my standards, anything above a $100-200 fee for time and use of equipment is robbery.
How about you?

I charged $400 for my first family portraiture session (5 people) and about 3 hours on site. This fee included 8 8x10 ($25.00) and 125 high rez images with a personal use limitation. I'll never do it so cheaply again.

Now it's $500 with no prints, plus travel time after 15 minutes. I don't do this for a living.

I'm not even sure how people make a living off of this business.

Considering the learning curve, cost and upkeep of equipment, post processing time, and administrative time there is not much of anything left over when paid.

I need to do 24 $500 family portraits just to get the cost of my equipment back never mind all the time.

IMO a good wedding photographer should be making an average of $5000 - $7000 a wedding. A qualified amateur up to $2500. A hack with little knowledge and a D40 $600.00 plus.

[kat]

Wow..I am feeling sort of hackish with my D40... :(

[dlk]

This is a great discussion and I agree with many thoughts posted. This is a slippery slope, isn't it? Having read what you all have said so far, and in response to TT, I conferred with an old acquaintance, Merriam-Webster. Here is some of what said about a professional: engaged in one of the learned professions (hmmm. . . who gets to decide what a learned profession is?); participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs; one that engages in a pursuit or activity professionally.

[Travis]

Wow..I am feeling sort of hackish with my D40... :(

lol... sorry... i didn't mean for the statement to be sweeping....

I'm talking about people with little grasp the rudiments, entry level pp skills, entry level organizational and business skills, and a lack of back up equipment..

[Barefoot]

lol... sorry... i didn't mean for the statement to be sweeping....

I'm talking about people with little grasp the rudiments, entry level pp skills, entry level organizational and business skills, and a lack of back up equipment..

Back-up equipment? ;)

[jjeling]

Travis, since you seem like you have a strong opinion and background knowledge on this I had a couple questions for you. I have been looking for a job since graduating college for a while now. I would like to say that I am a little more advanced than the novice photography, but really have no background to support this(no formal education, business or client base). The only support I really have is the fact that Ive placed fairly well in the only two photography contests Ive entered. Since I dont have a job, Ive been thinking about getting into wedding and portrait photography for an income. It still has not happened because I have been rather adament on avoiding them in order to keep my creativity alive. Unfortunately, the economy here sucks, and jobs are inexistant unless you wish to work for minimum wage. Now, you have mentioned that a "hack" with a D40 could charge $600 and an qualified amateur a little more. What exactly do you mean by "hack" and "qualified amateur?" It seems to be a great alternative for individuals such as myself who refuse to put a camera down, and then in the "off" time can pursue their creative side. Without really looking at the camera's as an "expense" since the were purchased as I grew into the need for them, there really isnt any kind of overhead. With several people asking me for services, I have thought about it but have turned many down. I understand your frustrations with people thinking they are the worlds best, but in reality improvement is through confidence knowing you can get better. To be honest, it seems that really, any type of photography can be still be done with the early dSLR's. They really are nothing more than the original 35mm's in a digital format. Even 6mp cameras can print out quality 24x36 prints if the image is good enough(I have several). I can promise you that my 'dinosaur' K110d (have a alpha 100 as well) can take pictures as well as any other camera as an 8x10 print(8x12 as full print w/o crop), so what really even the need for a d40? It just seems the D40 is for those who feel the need to purchase the latest and greatest to give them the confidence they need to get better. It really is not totally necessary, but hey, to each his own.
Sorry about the rant, back to the original question, what exactly is a "hack with a D40" and a "qualified amateur?"

[Travis]

It still has not happened because I have been rather adament on avoiding them in order to keep my creativity alive.

I wouldn't worry about that.... there is a ton of creative room in wedding/portraiture... and when your not working you can shoot what you want



Now, you have mentioned that a "hack" with a D40 could charge $600 and an qualified amateur a little more. What exactly do you mean by "hack" and "qualified amateur?"

Well.. I kinda explained it in a post above... a person with an entry level dslr who has a touch more knowledge than a person who leaves their slr in auto mode. This person will most likely not know proper use of fill flash, bounce flash, or how to drag the shutter. Variable lighting conditions will fool their white balance. Their compositional eye won't be fine tuned..... plenty of cut off limbs and the like. In the formal session, it's likely that people won't be arranged properly and the bride will be out in full sun at 1:00 with squinting eyes. They'll miss more exposures than they'll hit and this will have them running around in post to make things right. They won't be able to save the shots with massive clipping and the underexposures will show a lot of noise when they bring up the shadows. They will most likely be using a kit lens which will limit shallow dof shots and the lack of wide aperture will force them to crank their iso (which their camera can't handle) or improperly use their flash. Post processing?... sure.. they know how to adjust the sharpening slider... but they don`t know what haloing is... and they don`t dodge and burn... Contracts? forget about it.... Back up equipment? No way... something breaks and no wedding pictures for you.

A qualified amateur/entry level professional -

-Solid fundamentals
-Good to excellent use of flash, existing light, reflectors
-Nails exposure on 8 out of 10
-Back up flashes, lenses and bodies
-Shoots two bodies for quick focal variations
-Good to excellent compositional skills
-Good communication skills to help the client relax and have fun during shooting
-Their ingrained skills allow them not to mess up camera settings in high pressure/rushed environments
-Good to excellent creative skills that will provide the client with some unique unexpected shots
-Most likely a contract
-Tasteful post processing, cropping, and nicely finished images
-Either high rez images for client or a print package (or both)
-Images completed no later than 2 weeks after they get back from the honeymoon

High Calibre Pro

-Unswayed by any obstacle
-Nails everything
-2nd shooter for candids
-Couple of assistants
-One creative shot after another, extracting the impossible from seemingly dull environments to forge brilliance
-Has make up kits, combs, sewing kits, ladders and other anomalies to keep things on track
-Charming and charismatic ability allows people to relax and enjoy being photographed
-Outstanding PP skills
-Iron clad reputation
-Fair contract but high price
-Print packages sure but also leather bound scrap books, DVD slide shows, coffee mugs, key chains and other swag that you'll end up buying because they are such a good salesperson





I understand your frustrations with people thinking they are the worlds best, but in reality improvement is through confidence knowing you can get better.

Not sure where you are getting this from..... I'm not frustrated... Maybe you were thinking about the OP?



Even 6mp cameras can print out quality 24x36 prints if the image is good enough(I have several). I can promise you that my 'dinosaur' K110d (have a alpha 100 as well) can take pictures as well as any other camera as an 8x10 print(8x12 as full print w/o crop), so what really even the need for a d40? It just seems the D40 is for those who feel the need to purchase the latest and greatest to give them the confidence they need to get better. It really is not totally necessary, but hey, to each his own.
Sorry about the rant, back to the original question, what exactly is a "hack with a D40" and a "qualified amateur?"

This is confusing me... the D40 (a wonderful DSLR) is far from the latest and greatest. It's a 6 meg entry level Nikon. While I agree it is capable of making wonderful images, it's a bit of a misnomer to call it the tool of choice for wedding photography. 6 meg is great at 6 meg but every wedding shot is cropped to one degree or another. You generally shoot a step back from your framed composition to allow for variable cropping based on you client needs. After trimming you are down to 4 meg or less. This is limiting when you take the image into post processing. Posterization, halo's, banding, artifacts will all reveal themselves quicker due to the small size.

The lack of two thumb wheels will have you chasing around for your settings on the fly. Want to change ISO on the fly?? Sorry... into the menus you go. No top display means you have call up the LCD to check your settings. What about those churches with a no flash policy... you don't have the ISO capabilities to properly get good quality clean shots. No on board commander to trigger a strobe. Only three focus points with a slow focusing servo that will hesitate (or sometimes grind to halt) in low light. Back into the menus if you want to change metering on the fly.

These are crucial issues for someone who is shooting in a fast paced and light challenged environment for money. Not so crucial if you are taking your time setting up a landscape on a beautiful morning.


Personally, I think all of the above types of shooters are required and in demand. Some people don't have the money to spend $5000 (or $1000) on a photographer. Some people don't care that much about stellar photography. Some people just want affordable pictures with quality just a touch higher than grandma's point and shoot. I've seen some people leave a couple of disposable cameras on each table telling guests to fill em up. Works great. This is why I don't think you should need a photographers license to sell images. There are different levels of buyers and matching levels of sellers.

[jjeling]

Thanks a lot for the input. Pretty much what I was looking for. haha. Didnt know that the D40 was only a 6meg camera. Pretty much avoid Nikon and Canon which explains the reason for that. You made some good points that Im glad to listen and think about. I have been to several weddings where cameras were left on the tables. Not a bad idea, but I would be curious about the cost of the cameras and then the cost of getting all the pictures developed. The last wedding I was at had two photographers, one for the 'good' images and the other for candids. Never really gave that one much thought. Thanks for sharing all that, there are always things you dont think about until its too late or until you ask someone with more experience than you.

[Ben H]

Didnt know that the D40 was only a 6meg camera.

The last wedding I was at had two photographers, one for the 'good' images and the other for candids. Never really gave that one much thought.

There are always things you dont think about until its too late or until you ask someone with more experience than you.

It's these things which really illustrate case in point. A lot of new photographers get their first dSLR, can just about work the "auto" button, make very average pictures, don't really know how or why they could improve, and don't know much about, and haven't put any thought into exactly what it takes to be a wedding shooter.

The "I've just got my first dSLR now I can shoot weddings" thing is where photographers who know better raise their eyes to the ceiling.

Shooting weddings is hard, it's a high pressure situation, and it's a unique important event and you have to get it right. You have to have a thorough practical mastery of flash, low-light and event shooting, and need to be able to produce great to excellent shots.

What Travis said is bang on.

I'm not knocking anyone who wants to do it (do you *really* *want* to do it, or is it just a case of "oh, there's a way of getting some revenue out of shooting) - and some who take the bull by the horns do great.

But don't underestimate what it takes - low-light event shooting is hard unless you have great gear (fast cameras, fast lenses) and have developed those event shooting skills - add hundreds of people, and make the requirement that 98% of your shots be keepers, without much leeway to do it again if you mess up, and it really does add up to be challenging.

And certainly too big a deal to go into without much thought - as a lot of newbies often do...

For me, I wouldn't even think about it until I had a good few years of event shooting under my belt - any event shooting I'm doing currently I usually treat as a great opportunity to learn and excercise things I've learnt in the meantime. But my percentage of "great shots" at these events is still way too low. When this rises, and I'm much more comfortable with what needs to be done and how to shoot, I'll be much better prepared for these things.

It's also a good idea to assist on wedding shoots a long time before you become the single shooter - this will give you a good training ground with a bit more leeway to mess up without too much consequence...

[tomorrowstreasures]

I just got half way through Travis' reply (post#24) and wanted to say this is exactly what I was looking for with the original thread starter! You spelled out perfectly a delineation between a "hack" (your word, not mine), an ami -pro and a hi cal pro! thanks so much for taking the time to do that! (It would have taken me a month to type all of that!) (hunt>peck>backspace>rehunt>repeck)

any one game for the other categories?

[tomorrowstreasures]

Ben's reply (#26) Is EXACTLY what I was trying to say when I called out the ridiculous prices people are charging that do not meet the criteria set forth by Travis. How can any one in their right mind feel good about charging people the fees that they do with out that expertise? See- you guys are on my side, you just say it in a FAR better way. Protect the PRO!!!! They earned it, they deserve financial reimbursement. Protect the CLIENT!!! When the client hires the "pro" they are trusting that they know what they are doing - no different than going to a lawyer or doctor - you trust that they did not graduate from the University of Little Known and Non Accredited with their law and MD credentials. I realize that there are differing price points in play and buyer beware - i just feel that ethically, those of us lacking the pro standards should back off - either allow the pros to do their job or price very modestly and call a spade a spade.

And, after sleeping on it, I concur with Travis and Ben and Kat and JJ - the non perfect world we live in and all the realities that go along with it. thanks so much for sharing your POV and I think I am not alone in thinking that some Very good POV are being presented here.

ok, i am done with talking about my rant about what the pro deserves, about what a client deserves...... :D onward!

[kat]

I'm with you guys here.

My thinking is that a "hack" can be using any camera. I've seen people with the lastest model and can't do a thing with it but are "pro" in their eyes.

I agree that camera's get better up the line..heck..if anything I want auto-bracketing (oh..do I want that) but you use what you have.

A hack is a hack.

[kat]

I'm just wondering...how everyone would handle this situation at the level of experience they are at.

This is just a scenario

I have a woman who wants shots taken. When she smiles, she has gums that you can't miss and a smile that never looks genuine, even when it is. When she isn't full teeth smile, she has that smile/or serious looks that resemblesses she's faking it, that she is pissy and snobby. She doesn't like her triple chin. But she wants poses that would protray it. She doesn't want a good view of her nose. And nothing is to be shot from the shoulders down because she thinks she is too fat for it. She just isn't happy with herself...

Would you take this client on knowing that most likely you wont find a shot to please her? That nothing pleases her. Or would you try for it just to see if you can..a challenge.

Is there a way to make one realize that we aren't models and to flaunt what we have and accept it..ha ha..in an 1 hour shoot!

I have my theory but want to see what others think.

[tirediron]

Would you take this client on knowing that most likely you wont find a shot to please her? That nothing pleases her. Or would you try for it just to see if you can..a challenge.


Interesting - the way I would approach this would be to do a series of a half-dozen or so poses the way she wants and then ask her to pose for a half-dozen the way you want. Then, the load the images into your field laptop, and show them to her. Then if she still wants to do it her way, go ahead and do it her way, after all, it's her dollar.

[Iguanasan]

I personally wouldn't take it on as I am not confident enough in myself to think I could make her happy with the shots. I can hit the proper exposure most of the time and my composition skills are getting better but portrait photography is more a skill in communication and "people reading" and I haven't had enough practice.

[Travis]

I'm just wondering...how everyone would handle this situation at the level of experience they are at.

This is just a scenario

I have a woman who wants shots taken. When she smiles, she has gums that you can't miss and a smile that never looks genuine, even when it is. When she isn't full teeth smile, she has that smile/or serious looks that resemblesses she's faking it, that she is pissy and snobby. She doesn't like her triple chin. But she wants poses that would protray it. She doesn't want a good view of her nose. And nothing is to be shot from the shoulders down because she thinks she is too fat for it. She just isn't happy with herself...

Would you take this client on knowing that most likely you wont find a shot to please her? That nothing pleases her. Or would you try for it just to see if you can..a challenge.

Is there a way to make one realize that we aren't models and to flaunt what we have and accept it..ha ha..in an 1 hour shoot!

I have my theory but want to see what others think.

Well.. they are hiring your for your skills and artistic vision... it should be you directing posing to best flatter the subject but the easiest thing to do is both. Take shots using poses you think would best flatter the client, and take some with posing they want. Then present both when showing the contact sheet.

I had a similar event with a family that was insistent on their shoot location being their newly built Muskoka room (sortofa indoor/outdoor room). The problem was the room was too small and littered with distractions. I obliged but only the condition we also shoot in the much larger living room. Worked out great. Balance is good to please the customer.

I think the most important thing is to never let the session die without you having some/most things done your way. Bottom line it's your work and you should be pleased with the bulk of what you submit as finished work.

[jjeling]

I am still a little reserved about the subject of this thread. In the terms we have layed out for a professional I am not one of them by any means. If you look at the different needs for the individuals who are using their camera's, then sometimes the first dslr is all they will need. It seems unlikely that someone can go out and shoot events with an entry level dslr for a career. On the flip side though, for people like myself, who never planned on getting into event photography, the first dslr I bought, was really all Ive needed. Ive always looked at photography as an art. In the meantime, people have fallen in love with my work and ask me to take pictures for them. Having moved from standard 35mm slr, into the k110 dslr, and recently got an alpha 100. To me it has never been about making any money, its all just for personal gratification. For some, the first dslr is all that is necessary. If you find a shot you like, then there is usually time to adjust your settings for the necessary image you want. Not sure how the rest of you feel, but with a smaller meg camera, the margin of error is much less, and the importance of getting the shot right the first time will force you to take better pictures when you move up into another camera. Even after having the combination of both cameras for over 6 months, I still use the original more than the new one. It is more comfortable, and button placement is better. Although the Sony is technically a "better" camera, there really is no difference between any camera if your not taking pictures at sporting events, weddings or anything else. No offense meant to anyone in this statement, but I think its funny how some people get mad about those who feel they can do anything with their first dslr. Then there are others, after experiencing other cameras, still prefer to use the first dslr, who are then generalized as "over-confident beginners" or "hacks." It is a shame when people get their first dslr and have the "I can do anything now" mentality, but its also a shame when people spend $1500 on one thinking they will get better shots than another they could have spent $400 on.
There are an unlimited amount of opportunities available for photography, as long as your creative about your thinking and the way you want to take your shots, the best camera money can buy, will take the same pictures the cheapest dslr costs. Its when you start getting into the type of photography your shooting that will have a large affect on your camera selection/purchase.


The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE.
Ernst Haas

[tomorrowstreasures]

I am still a little reserved about the subject of this thread. In the terms we have layed out for a professional I am not one of them by any means. If you look at the different needs for the individuals who are using their camera's, then sometimes the first dslr is all they will need. It seems unlikely that someone can go out and shoot events with an entry level dslr for a career. On the flip side though, for people like myself, who never planned on getting into event photography, the first dslr I bought, was really all Ive needed. Ive always looked at photography as an art. In the meantime, people have fallen in love with my work and ask me to take pictures for them. Having moved from standard 35mm slr, into the k110 dslr, and recently got an alpha 100. To me it has never been about making any money, its all just for personal gratification. For some, the first dslr is all that is necessary. If you find a shot you like, then there is usually time to adjust your settings for the necessary image you want. Not sure how the rest of you feel, but with a smaller meg camera, the margin of error is much less, and the importance of getting the shot right the first time will force you to take better pictures when you move up into another camera. Even after having the combination of both cameras for over 6 months, I still use the original more than the new one. It is more comfortable, and button placement is better. Although the Sony is technically a "better" camera, there really is no difference between any camera if your not taking pictures at sporting events, weddings or anything else. No offense meant to anyone in this statement, but I think its funny how some people get mad about those who feel they can do anything with their first dslr. Then there are others, after experiencing other cameras, still prefer to use the first dslr, who are then generalized as "over-confident beginners" or "hacks." It is a shame when people get their first dslr and have the "I can do anything now" mentality, but its also a shame when people spend $1500 on one thinking they will get better shots than another they could have spent $400 on.
There are an unlimited amount of opportunities available for photography, as long as your creative about your thinking and the way you want to take your shots, the best camera money can buy, will take the same pictures the cheapest dslr costs. Its when you start getting into the type of photography your shooting that will have a large affect on your camera selection/purchase.


The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE.
Ernst Haas

bang on - to use Marko's term... I think vision is critical as is skill - be it with any sort of gear. if you don't know it inside and out, it is difficult to achieve consistent good results. show someone with skill and vision an average snap, and they can, with their vision and skill make it into something that the owner would gladly frame.
BUT in stressful, fast paced situations such as wedding photography, it you have the more advanced gear and know it inside and out it can be of GREAT advantage as Travis was saying.