Start a PRO FX forum and get rid of the amateur format FX nikon users

[FTHathal]

So since the newer FX Nikons are now equipped with what used to be known as the amateur interface, should we now classify the D800 D810 and D4 D3 as Pro cameras? much the same as the D200, D300 in DX were called pro? Should the D600, D610, and D750 really be called "Pro" with their scene modes, and U1 U2 knobs? And what about the DF what the heck is that?

So should there then be a PRO FX forum and an amateur FX

Assuming the best intentions: I find 'parts' of his thread reasonable. But I think what he means is why a D300 gets its own forum even though it is a DX and there is already a DX forum, when Nikon now is making more than (let me count....wait should I count D600? or only D610...ok got it..Oh wait! should I count D800/D800E ok...u got it?) FX cameras. Having more sub-forum does help organization. So not exactly saying something wrong with D300 having its own section, but to the contrary is asking for more subsections (again assuming his best intentions).

But to say that one for pro and the other for amateur is.......something I can't cover by my "best intention" assumption. Sry carlvalle, you're on your own with that!

--
My best regards,
Faisal

 

[chuxter]

OTOH, do you think that creating an FX Pro forum next to an FX Amateur would prevent "amateurs" to post in the "pro" forum ?

This is a very much snobbish point of view !

This is much the same as having 3-4 levels of ski slopes [red, black, blue, green]. Things work out best when you keep the expert skiers away from the novices. It's not that an intermediate skier can't survive a black slope: The problem is that he gets in the way of the experts who want to ski at a higher [more dangerous] level.

 

[MisterHairy]

So since the newer FX Nikons are now equipped with what used to be known as the amateur interface, should we now classify the D800 D810 and D4 D3 as Pro cameras? much the same as the D200, D300 in DX were called pro? Should the D600, D610, and D750 really be called "Pro" with their scene modes, and U1 U2 knobs? And what about the DF what the heck is that?

So should there then be a PRO FX forum and an amateur FX

"Pro" and "Amateur" are human attributes ... . Cameras are simply tools or toys in the hands of people. What people DO with the tools or toys result in "pro" or "amateur" results. Hey an "amateur" can produce "pro" results too! A "pro" can make money with an iPhone.

One does not "have" to make money at it as "professional" does carry with it the following definition as well (and this encompasses many on this site): " following a line of conduct as though it were a profession" .

So ... keep all FF Nikons here, in my opinion! Cheers and Best wishes on a spectacular Thanksgiving weekend here in Toronto.

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

So, a gardener works without knowledge of other gardens, without discretion, or without the need to ever explain anything he or she does? A boiler installer works without an understanding of how boilers have been installed in the past, or without the ability or need to explain anything to subordinates or clients?

Your silly and arbitrary distinction might pull college professors into your bizarro "tradesman" category because many of them earn money for the exchange of books they've created, not for whispered abstractions that disappear on the wind, or whatever it is you think constitutes "professing."

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

No professional qualifications exist or are required for one to make a living as a photographer and no regulatory body exists either.

As for the rest of your rather incoherent rant, I really have no idea what you are on about. Why should a gardener not know about other gardens?

Boiler installer was a bit of a trick example because it both requires qualifications and (in many territories) has a governing body but the qualifications are not of a professional level (sub first degree) so it currently remains a trade.

 

[Mr Physics]

..it's titled "Pro Digital Talk". This forum is aimed at those who want to talk about a narrow range of light writing machines.

Best regards,

Tony

 

[Grig]

Everyone has his own opinion on equipment and as well as what "Pro" means...

I am a so called full time "Pro", and never used those original Nikon straps for 2 reasons - first because they are not as comfortable as Op-Tech cheap neoprene detachable straps, and second because they are not quickly detachable...

Well, most of the time I don't use straps at all... Cameras are ether on monopod or Thinktank Pro Belt with Spyder Holsters or dual R-Strap, but when I need just a strap - I quickly hook my old and very trusted Op-Tech straps up to those very durable plastic ears with provided Op-Tech carbines...

Some other "Pros" may use Original straps as well, but it is a personal preference, like your car seat... Some prefer bare seats and some extra padding on them... LOL...

--
Real photography - it's just the ability to see what was already created by God!
www.grigphoto.com

 

[MiraShootsNikon]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" If citing some random directive from something, somewhere, is all it takes to build globally accepted definitions of anything, then clearly the UN is missing out. War, sovereignty, human rights, resource ownership--fuhgeddabouit! Just drop a Directive on Recognition of [x] on that bad boy and we're all suddenly singing in perfect har-mo-ny. Buy that world a Coke!

Well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

 

[MisterHairy]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" Yeah, well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

Your acceptance or denial of the definition of a profession makes no difference to its existence. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat.

 

[MiraShootsNikon]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" Yeah, well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

Your acceptance or denial of the definition of a profession makes no difference to its existence. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat.

Argue? I don't need to argue anything. I can get "Global Acceptance" for whatever I want by just citing a Directive on the Recognition of [whatever it is], subparagraph C, clause 2 10/2005 revision. Clap the hands, problem solved. It's a useful technique you've introduced!

 

[MisterHairy]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" Yeah, well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

Your acceptance or denial of the definition of a profession makes no difference to its existence. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat.

Argue? I don't need to argue anything. I can get "Global Acceptance" for whatever I want by just citing a Directive on the Recognition of [whatever it is], subparagraph C, clause 2 10/2005 revision. Clap the hands, problem solved. It's a useful technique you've introduced!

Try claiming to be a civil engineer without the appropriate accredited qualifications and then interview for a job as such and let us know how it goes. A lot different from claiming to be a photographer, I think you'll find.

Engineer, Doctor, chartered account: all professions. Photographer, not.

Like I suggested, read up on it and you'll see.

 

[Rexgig0]

She as been shooting "amateur" images for the M.E! Oh, the horror!

--
I wear a badge and pistol, and make evidentiary images at night, which incorporates elements of portrait, macro, still life, landscape, architecture, and PJ. I enjoy using both Canons and Nikons.

 

[Digetydog]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" Yeah, well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

Your acceptance or denial of the definition of a profession makes no difference to its existence. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat.

Argue? I don't need to argue anything. I can get "Global Acceptance" for whatever I want by just citing a Directive on the Recognition of [whatever it is], subparagraph C, clause 2 10/2005 revision. Clap the hands, problem solved. It's a useful technique you've introduced!

Try claiming to be a civil engineer without the appropriate accredited qualifications and then interview for a job as such and let us know how it goes. A lot different from claiming to be a photographer, I think you'll find.

Engineer, Doctor, chartered account: all professions. Photographer, not.

Like I suggested, read up on it and you'll see.

Photography is a profession (for some). But like artists and musicians, a certificate/degree/designation is just about worthless. Talent and success defines professional expertise- not a licensing board.

 

[MisterHairy]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" Yeah, well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

Your acceptance or denial of the definition of a profession makes no difference to its existence. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat.

Argue? I don't need to argue anything. I can get "Global Acceptance" for whatever I want by just citing a Directive on the Recognition of [whatever it is], subparagraph C, clause 2 10/2005 revision. Clap the hands, problem solved. It's a useful technique you've introduced!

Try claiming to be a civil engineer without the appropriate accredited qualifications and then interview for a job as such and let us know how it goes. A lot different from claiming to be a photographer, I think you'll find.

Engineer, Doctor, chartered account: all professions. Photographer, not.

Like I suggested, read up on it and you'll see.

Photography is a profession (for some). But like artists and musicians, a certificate/degree/designation is just about worthless. Talent and success defines professional expertise- not a licensing board.

Not the way it works I am afraid. "Profession" is not an indication of working for remuneration.

 

[ed kelly]

Virtual Photon, post: 54549974, member: 308238"]
We were in Sedona having lunch and I started chuckling cause this guy in line had a D4 with a 24-70. Nice camera. Nice lens. Pricey equipment right. When my wife asked me why I was laughing I said that the only reason I noticed was because his yellow and black strap said "Nikon D4" and the only reason anyone would put that strap on was to let EVERYONE know he'd just dropped 7K on camera equipment. I mean the guy can't afford a 40 buck comfortable strap? The pros I know roll their eyes when I tell them that story

My point is, the equipment sure don't make you a pro (and neither does the strap). I have some very good equipment and I sure wouldn't consider myself a pro.

That's odd. I haven't changed my D800 strap because I find it comfortable! And, frankly, I don't give a damn what people think of my choice of camera and strap.

When I see rolling eyes I assumed it was because they're on something, but I'll know if future that they professional photographers.

 

[j_photo]

We were in Sedona having lunch and I started chuckling cause this guy in line had a D4 with a 24-70. Nice camera. Nice lens. Pricey equipment right. When my wife asked me why I was laughing I said that the only reason I noticed was because his yellow and black strap said "Nikon D4" and the only reason anyone would put that strap on was to let EVERYONE know he'd just dropped 7K on camera equipment. I mean the guy can't afford a 40 buck comfortable strap? The pros I know roll their eyes when I tell them that story

My point is, the equipment sure don't make you a pro (and neither does the strap). I have some very good equipment and I sure wouldn't consider myself a pro.

This is bizarre and reeks of reverse snobbery. I use the original straps. I don't care what they say. I certainly don't see them as a way to let others know how much I spend on gear. And for sure I don't spend my vacations checking out others' camera straps and then chuckling smugly about it with my "pro" buddies.

 

[Simple man]

They do have a pro forum.

Its here. http://www.dpreview.com/forums/1032

Just saying.

 

[rhlpetrus]

Images with lens cap on, long exposures only.

 

[inasir1971]

n/t

 

[gregbartgis]

WTF??????!!!!!!

 

[MiraShootsNikon]

It is "tradesman" and "amateur". There is no such thing as a "pro" photographer since it is a trade and not a profession. Much like a gardener or a boiler installer. All three can do wonderful work, but none is a profession.

Good photographers work with a deep awareness of photography's aesthetic history, if not of visual arts as a whole. They're also versed in graphic design principles and history and, if they photograph people, in rhetoric and various practical written and spoken communication arts. A photographer whose discretion alludes to this broad, deep socio-cultural awareness--as the finest professional photography always must--"professes" many things, indeed.

You reek of Rockwell, Mister Hairy, and it smells mighty fishy. Take a bath!

Not my definition, my friend, just the globally accepted definition of a profession. Look it up if you doubt me. If I may politely assist your research: "professions are, according to the Directive on Recognition of Professional Qualifications (2005/36/EC) “those practised on the basis of relevant professional qualifications in a personal, responsible and professionally independent capacity by those providing intellectual and conceptual services in the interest of the client and the public... Typically, individuals are required by law to be qualified by a local professional body before they are permitted to practice in that profession."

You write like you're selling Herbalife or Amway. "Our product has Global Accreditation by a sub-paragraph section of something-or-other no one's ever heard of . . . but trust me, just citing the impressive title (with numbers and dates!) gives it all the GLOBAL meaning it needs."

The "globally accepted definition?" Yeah, well: I am on the globe, I don't accept it, and I am hardly the only one who doesn't. I would bet a cookie that millions and millions and millions of people out there would think your snake-oil salesman's citation smells as badly as I think it does. Ergo, not a "globally accepted definition." Sorry.

Your acceptance or denial of the definition of a profession makes no difference to its existence. You might as well argue that the Earth is flat.

Argue? I don't need to argue anything. I can get "Global Acceptance" for whatever I want by just citing a Directive on the Recognition of [whatever it is], subparagraph C, clause 2 10/2005 revision. Clap the hands, problem solved. It's a useful technique you've introduced!

Try claiming to be a civil engineer without the appropriate accredited qualifications and then interview for a job as such and let us know how it goes. A lot different from claiming to be a photographer, I think you'll find.

Engineer, Doctor, chartered account: all professions. Photographer, not.

Like I suggested, read up on it and you'll see.

Photography is a profession (for some). But like artists and musicians, a certificate/degree/designation is just about worthless. Talent and success defines professional expertise- not a licensing board.

Not the way it works I am afraid. "Profession" is not an indication of working for remuneration.

. . . said the professional who thought he deserved more remuneration than others. Or perhaps it's what the professional said when he realized that he couldn't otherwise compete with those more talented or more skilled than himself.

Either way, your "Globally Accepted Directive" seems like a moderately useful tool with which to set up an arbitrary brand ("According-to-Hoyle Professional!") to sell something, rather than rely on actual work product or talent (a portfolio, client recommendations, tear sheets, exhibitions). Like I said, it works for Herbalife, Amway, etc., mostly because they have nothing real to offer.

But in terms of "the way it works," there are plenty of successful photographers out there who'd show you citations of their work in "globally accepted" media as "professional."

I'm sure marketers would "globally accept" the basic strategy you (and Ken Rockwell) push here, Mister Hairy; though I suspect you'd get accusations of using a particularly ham-fisted approach with your "Directive" citation.

Good grief.

 

[JP Scherrer]

OTOH, do you think that creating an FX Pro forum next to an FX Amateur would prevent "amateurs" to post in the "pro" forum ?

This is a very much snobbish point of view !

This is much the same as having 3-4 levels of ski slopes [red, black, blue, green]. Things work out best when you keep the expert skiers away from the novices.

How do you think the "novices" will learn if they must stay in their own group ? On learn from mixing with people having more knowledge !

It's not that an intermediate skier can't survive a black slope: The problem is that he gets in the way of the experts who want to ski at a higher [more dangerous] level.

DPReview is not a competition forum, hence nobody showing bad imsges or asking basic question will interfere with "expert" photographers !

OTOH, who decides who is an expert or a novice or anythibg in between !

Apparently you are just as snob as the OP !



J-P.