What is a 'Pro' Photographer, really?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Dennis
Forum ProPosts: 13,239
Like?
Re: What is a 'Pro' Photographer, really?
In reply to fredphotog, 5 months ago

fredphotog wrote:

We discuss it here, we see people say 'I am no Pro..', but these folks take darned good photos.

Irrelevant.

It used to be if you made 50% or more of your income from a 'hobby' then you were considered a 'Pro'.

Why would that change ?

Some folks think if you are published then you are a 'Pro'.

Maybe a part time or one time pro. I've freelanced for our local weekly small town paper twice in the last few years. And have submitted unsolicited work that's been printed over a dozen times. I'm no pro.

I see people with $20,000 in equipment call themselves a 'Pro' but create crappy work.

If they make money, they're pros.

So TODAY, what makes a 'Pro'?

Same thing as always.

To me, I think if you put thought into your exact equipment, you plan your shot(s), you take care in framing, exposure, color, background, and you spend time in PP coming up with a good photograph, then you are a 'Pro', after all, normal people just take a P-A-S and 'go click' without regard to anything about the camera or subject matter.

That's a fabricated definition that eliminates the meaningful distinction made by the actual definition.

Thoughts?

Pros can do good work or bad. Amateurs can do good work or bad. Amateurs can occasionally do better work than pros (though they aren't doing it on a clients schedule and don't have income at stake if they fail).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
Re:New
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow