I've been a pro photog for 50 thousand years

[Karl Johnston]

Often I read this on a profile or website belonging to a photographer...the following cliche quote
"I have been a pro photographer for 20-40-60-99-100 thousand million years"
Granted there are a lot of people with that much experience in photography..but I have to wonder where I would be in 20 years of practicing pro photography. I've only been practicing photography for nearly 2 years come December and already I've come so far..so to imagine someone with 10x my experience in pro photography I would think they'd be have 10x the knowledge, 10x the experience and 10x the skill.

But not so, a lot of the time their portfolios and businesses aren't very well developed, inconsistent, lacking development of a style, no real vision...I start to wonder, sometimes, if "being a photographer for 20 years" means from the time you first pick up a kodak underwater disposable camera to present day.

A lot have horrible business models, complain of losing money and losing business...I just don't get it. I live in perhaps the most obscure places to do business as a pro photographer and despite that I compete with -25- other semi-full time pro photographers..and I still get work, granted not 6 figures but still do support myself while in college..

Conversely;

On the flip side, there are people with 20-30 years of pro photo experience (even 5-10) that I greatly wonder if I'll ever be beyond their level or at their level in 5-10 years or will I learn faster than that, grow wealthier in knowledge and in experience..makes me wonder. I wonder if technology will change the rate at which we learn..and our capabilities, of course.

Thoughts? Where do you all see yourselves in 5-25-99-100 billion years as a photographer/pro photographer/business/artist?

[alabama1980]

I never give much thought when people say they have "however many" years of experience. The truth is in the work. If a 20yr photo vet plateaued after 5 yrs behind the lens, it will be reflected in the work presented.

Experience is overrated in some instances. Some people travel farther and absorb more in a short time. It sounds nice to hear that someone has been at something for 10, 15, 20 years, but if the work can't back it up it's a moot point.

[harroz]

if you want to be exceptional at something, spend 10,000 perfecting your craft- Steve Martin.

experience counts beyond measure.

BUT- that's not to say that talent will not also get you somewhere, you just have to spend 10,000 hrs learning your craft. This is where the answer lies. When you think you've hit the jackpot and you don't have to learn anymore, don't have to market anymore, don't have to sell anymore. Thats when somone with more talent and hunger will step in and take your place. I think over the years seasoned photographers will change what they shoot, they'll get bored and want to push their limits in another direction. It works well, but in the end you have all of these different images of your niches, problem is that digital has arrived in the meantime and we've also evolved creatively, so what was a great photo 15-20 years ago isn't so much anymore as no post processing was done on them. But, those old images have probably been printed in magazines or books, so to the aged photographer they have a certain amount of emotional attachment, hence why they're on show on the site.


maybe;)

[Lizzy7]

if you want to be exceptional at something, spend 10,000 perfecting your craft- Steve Martin.

experience counts beyond measure.

BUT- that's not to say that talent will not also get you somewhere, you just have to spend 10,000 hrs learning your craft. This is where the answer lies. When you think you've hit the jackpot and you don't have to learn anymore, don't have to market anymore, don't have to sell anymore. Thats when somone with more talent and hunger will step in and take your place. I think over the years seasoned photographers will change what they shoot, they'll get bored and want to push their limits in another direction. It works well, but in the end you have all of these different images of your niches, problem is that digital has arrived in the meantime and we've also evolved creatively, so what was a great photo 15-20 years ago isn't so much anymore as no post processing was done on them. But, those old images have probably been printed in magazines or books, so to the aged photographer they have a certain amount of emotional attachment, hence why they're on show on the site.


maybe;)


Oh I so know I shouldn't get involved in threads like this but I couldn't let this go. There is so much wrong with that sentence I don't know where to start. So I won't. I'm just going to take my aged bum up to my darkroom and print a few fabulous (hopefully) portraits and then go and sort out my equally fabulous (hopefully) digital portraits.

I just like beautiful photography, I don't care if someone's been shooting film or digital, 2years or 50years.

To the OP, not a clue what I'll be doing in all those years but I will be doing it with a camera ;)

Lizzy

[Moppie]

so what was a great photo 15-20 years ago isn't so much anymore as no post processing was done on them.

maybe;)


I'll take it the maybe applies to everything :p

A friend has a great series of books produced in the end of the 1970s.
There is 3 books, covering all sorts of photography, including tips and how to's, and some quite detailed technical advice.
Amongst the film based talk however are some absolutly incrediable images, and one book deals almost intierly with darkroom manipulations.
There is the odd photo that looks dated, but 90% of the photos are simply stunning, and transcend any kind of medium.





I get where you coming from Karl.
When I first wrote my about page, I noted how many years I have been shooting.
Then I looked at it, thought it looked contrived and fake, so I removed it.
It doesn't, nor should it matter. At the end of the day, we are only as good as the last photo we took.
Now if people want to promote thier photography using images they took 20 years ago, then good on them.
I would like to think that in 20 years I'm doing work far beyond what I'm doing now, and I would rather show that off.

[cdifoto]

I hope to be really kicking ass in 20 years. Assuming I don't have 100 photogs working for peanuts under me while I sit on a beach in Cozumel sipping Muay Thais.

[JeffreyG]

A guy who has shot a limited type of situations for 20+ years may be less prepared for things than a guy who has shot a diverse topic range for 5+.

Some things that I think are make it or break it in business these days have little to do with having long experience in photography. Things like having a good website and knowing how to market yourself today.

On the other hand that 20+ year guy probably has a huge network of clients and associates which goes a long way.

[snyderman]

Hi Karl:

A perspective on experience. And there are two kinds of experience. Some guys have 1 year of experience 20 times over. They learned their gear and how to shoot in a year. And they've been doing it for 20 years.

Others truly have 20 years of experience where learning and improvement has continued over time. THAT is what you call 20 years experience.

If you keep your eyes open, it's really easy to spot the guy who has 1 year of experience 20 times over.

And glad to hear you're doing well as a shooter.

dave

[neilwood32]

I think its not only about talent and time spent.

There are two other elements often missing when thinking about how good people are - the willingness to learn and the openness to accept change.

You can be as talented as you like or shoot for years but if you aren't willing to learn - you will only progress so far.

Similarly, if you aren't open to change - you will get stuck using old equipment, techniques and styles.

[breal101]

Hi Karl:

A perspective on experience. And there are two kinds of experience. Some guys have 1 year of experience 20 times over. They learned their gear and how to shoot in a year. And they've been doing it for 20 years.

Others truly have 20 years of experience where learning and improvement has continued over time. THAT is what you call 20 years experience.

If you keep your eyes open, it's really easy to spot the guy who has 1 year of experience 20 times over.

And glad to hear you're doing well as a shooter.

dave

I think this says it very well, I like to think that I fit into the second category. I've been around the business long enough to know photographers in each of the categories mentioned and some in between.

[Karl Johnston]

Hi Karl:

A perspective on experience. And there are two kinds of experience. Some guys have 1 year of experience 20 times over. They learned their gear and how to shoot in a year. And they've been doing it for 20 years.

Others truly have 20 years of experience where learning and improvement has continued over time. THAT is what you call 20 years experience.

If you keep your eyes open, it's really easy to spot the guy who has 1 year of experience 20 times over.

And glad to hear you're doing well as a shooter.

dave
Never thought of it that way! I really like that

[Karl Johnston]

I think its not only about talent and time spent.

There are two other elements often missing when thinking about how good people are - the willingness to learn and the openness to accept change.

You can be as talented as you like or shoot for years but if you aren't willing to learn - you will only progress so far.

Similarly, if you aren't open to change - you will get stuck using old equipment, techniques and styles.
I think this is also really good

[birdfromboat]

omitted by poster

[mikekelley]

Snyderman nailed it: There's a difference between 20 years of experience and one year repeated 20 times.

That will sum up what you are seeing.

A lot of these people dont experiment or try new things, which results in a stale portfolio that doesn't evolve.

Bo-ring.

[SnapLocally.com]

I've been semi-pro for 3 years. If I didn't have competition to start with I might have fallen into the same pattern. I'm always trying to better myself, and only make equipment upgrades when I'm absolutely sure I've hit the ceiling with what I've got. I think a lot of people mistake better equipment for better skills.

[20droger]

Often I read this on a profile or website belonging to a photographer...the following cliche quote"I have been a pro photographer for 20-40-60-99-100 thousand million years"
If I've told you once, I've told you a million times, don't exaggerate!

Besides, if someone has been shooting that long, I want to see his pictures of the Big Bang.

[matonanjin]

I have been shooting since the late 70's, starting to earn $$ from it in the early 80's (with a decade or so out for another interest). My numbers are meaningless. I have friends that started w/ digital a couple years ago that are constantly teaching me new techniques, and hopefully vice versa.

The expression that I like is "It isn't the length of your experience but the depth".

[yogestee]

Started shooting with an SLR in 1973,, got a job as a photographer's assistant in 1978, became department head in 1981.. Four years self employment then 17 years with a newspaper.. I also taught photography at a community college for 18 months in the mid '80s.. Made a good living out of photography.. Retired from pro photography in July 2007..

I know this sounds like a CV but at times I still shoot s**t!!

[samueli]

Similarly, if you aren't open to change - you will get stuck using old equipment, techniques and styles.

Everything in this thread is insightful, except the above line. My wallet is growing very tired of the equipment race, but it seems that the latest and greatest in equipment can be a serious enabler to better photography.

[airfrogusmc]

Well if you don't think that a SUCCESSFUL photographer that has been doing it and has remained successful for 20 years hasn't had to keep up with the times you are seriously kidding yourself. To be successful for that many years being able to fed the family, pay the mortgage and send the kids to college it takes a great deal of skill and being able to CONSISTENTLY deliver high quality images to your clients over the course of decades and is no easy task. Talk to me after just 10 years doing it full time. Most won't make it two years let alone 10.

[Tixeon]

Well if you don't think that a SUCCESSFUL photographer that has been doing it and has remained successful for 20 years hasn't had to keep up with the times you are seriously kidding yourself. To be successful for that many years being able to fed the family, pay the mortgage and send the kids to college it takes a great deal of skill and being able to CONSISTENTLY deliver high quality images to your clients over the course of decades and is no easy task. Talk to me after just 10 years doing it full time. Most won't make it two years let alone 10.

bw!

I was about to say the same thing.

[harroz]

hehe, I almost took that line out, and then almost added to it to soften it, but then the phone rang so I hit the submit button:)
No it wasn't meant like that, ofcourse there are amazing art and images from years and years ago, the list of amazing worldwide photographers is huge! But, in mainstream it seemed that quite a few were kinda over it when it changed and closed shop. Without thinking I know of 2 within my vicinity who were very very good and had good businesses. And i meant, as a whole, the world as a collective is becoming more creatively attune. Just yesterday I was in contact with a grandmother who was talking about 'skin texture', I asked her what her history was as it isn't a mainstream term(or wasn't) she told me she's "a vampish mother of three and grandmother who cannot escape the appearance trap".;)

I fully agree with airfrogusmc, it really isn't easy to last the distance. I remember when digital came out, I'd just got to the point of have an eos1v & Eos3 w h/g, I'd paid full price for them, the 3 I hardly used, it was my 'perfect' camera whereas the 1v was the workhorse. I can't remember what I ended up selling them for, but it wasn't really worth selling them by the time I did. And now it is change over of atleast one body a year, that tends to eat into the holiday fund quite substantially:( And thats not to mention the organization and keeping your creativilty clean and fresh all the time.




Oh I so know I shouldn't get involved in threads like this but I couldn't let this go. There is so much wrong with that sentence I don't know where to start. So I won't. I'm just going to take my aged bum up to my darkroom and print a few fabulous (hopefully) portraits and then go and sort out my equally fabulous (hopefully) digital portraits.

I just like beautiful photography, I don't care if someone's been shooting film or digital, 2years or 50years.

To the OP, not a clue what I'll be doing in all those years but I will be doing it with a camera ;)

Lizzy

I'll take it the maybe applies to everything :p

A friend has a great series of books produced in the end of the 1970s.
There is 3 books, covering all sorts of photography, including tips and how to's, and some quite detailed technical advice.
Amongst the film based talk however are some absolutly incrediable images, and one book deals almost intierly with darkroom manipulations.
There is the odd photo that looks dated, but 90% of the photos are simply stunning, and transcend any kind of medium.





I get where you coming from Karl.
When I first wrote my about page, I noted how many years I have been shooting.
Then I looked at it, thought it looked contrived and fake, so I removed it.
It doesn't, nor should it matter. At the end of the day, we are only as good as the last photo we took.
Now if people want to promote thier photography using images they took 20 years ago, then good on them.
I would like to think that in 20 years I'm doing work far beyond what I'm doing now, and I would rather show that off.

[Karl Johnston]

Well if you don't think that a SUCCESSFUL photographer that has been doing it and has remained successful for 20 years hasn't had to keep up with the times you are seriously kidding yourself. To be successful for that many years being able to fed the family, pay the mortgage and send the kids to college it takes a great deal of skill and being able to CONSISTENTLY deliver high quality images to your clients over the course of decades and is no easy task. Talk to me after just 10 years doing it full time. Most won't make it two years let alone 10.
Why are you two always some of the ones to point out the really good perspectives and points with really cool perspectives? bw!

No it wasn't meant like that, ofcourse there are amazing art and images from years and years ago, the list of amazing worldwide photographers is huge! But, in mainstream it seemed that quite a few were kinda over it when it changed and closed shop. Without thinking I know of 2 within my vicinity who were very very good and had good businesses. And i meant, as a whole, the world as a collective is becoming more creatively attune. Just yesterday I was in contact with a grandmother who was talking about 'skin texture', I asked her what her history was as it isn't a mainstream term(or wasn't) she told me she's "a vampish mother of three and grandmother who cannot escape the appearance trap".

I fully agree with airfrogusmc, it really isn't easy to last the distance. I remember when digital came out, I'd just got to the point of have an eos1v & Eos3 w h/g, I'd paid full price for them, the 3 I hardly used, it was my 'perfect' camera whereas the 1v was the workhorse. I can't remember what I ended up selling them for, but it wasn't really worth selling them by the time I did. And now it is change over of atleast one body a year, that tends to eat into the holiday fund quite substantially And thats not to mention the organization and keeping your creativilty clean and fresh all the time.

[nicksan]

People who are truly talented let their work to the talking...

[DStanic]

I've been GWC with G.A.S. since the dawn of digital!

;)

[Moppie]

Why are you two always some of the ones to point out the really good perspectives and points with really cool perspectives? bw!

Because they are two of a very small number of photographers who are not only very talented and creative photographers, but also very succesful businessmen. And, they don't have an ego to share, just good advice. :cool:

[Jon Foster]

If I could retire tomorrow I'd do it. I've worked far too long... But I have a big family so I'll never be able to retire. One thing I've noticed over time regardless of my business ventures is, I get burned out on everything after a few years.

Jon.

[Tbirder]

There are two other elements often missing when thinking about how good people are - the willingness to learn and the openness to accept change.

I'm not a pro and I'm not good, but I have been photographing cars weekly for 20 years as part of my job. Started with a Minolta film camera, used print and transparency, seven years ago got a D60. Apart from family, I continued to shoot cars and car events. Last year I started thinking about upgrading the D60, and discovered this forum while reseaching cameras. A month ago I could afford a 50D and some nice glass; inspired by the images posted here and my new camera, I've started photographing landscapes, night scenery, birds, anything that catches my eye. There's a wharf by a river that's 200metres off the road I travel every day, and as shameful as it is I've never been there to take photos. Now I drive down there morning and night and have a few minutes worth of fun shooting whatever. I have this newfound enthusiasm for photography and I think my car images have improved as a result. I have benefited a lot from this forum but have a huge way to go, I guess what I'm trying to say is that my 20 years of experience doesn't mean squat, but I'm learning.

[butugly]

Great thread and some nice ideas but as with a lot of pastimes you can spend a fortune on the best equip and still be rubbish,You have to have an "eye" for photography its a natural grasp,you can be taught how to take good photos but you cant be taught how to take great photos that comes with time and experience.And as you gain experience your technique starts to develop,still learning :D

[neilwood32]

Everything in this thread is insightful, except the above line. My wallet is growing very tired of the equipment race, but it seems that the latest and greatest in equipment can be a serious enabler to better photography.

The latest and greatest are merely tools - if the person behind the camera doesnt have a clue then these will still take poor images. I should have placed more emphasis on the technique and style as opposed to the equipment.

I'm not a pro and I'm not good, but I have been photographing cars weekly for 20 years as part of my job. Started with a Minolta film camera, used print and transparency, seven years ago got a D60. Apart from family, I continued to shoot cars and car events. Last year I started thinking about upgrading the D60, and discovered this forum while reseaching cameras. A month ago I could afford a 50D and some nice glass; inspired by the images posted here and my new camera, I've started photographing landscapes, night scenery, birds, anything that catches my eye. There's a wharf by a river that's 200metres off the road I travel every day, and as shameful as it is I've never been there to take photos. Now I drive down there morning and night and have a few minutes worth of fun shooting whatever. I have this newfound enthusiasm for photography and I think my car images have improved as a result. I have benefited a lot from this forum but have a huge way to go, I guess what I'm trying to say is that my 20 years of experience doesn't mean squat, but I'm learning.

Perfect example of what im trying to get at - you developed a willingness to learn and try things and you feel you have improved due to it. Despite the 20 years before it.

[samueli]

If I could retire tomorrow I'd do it. I've worked far too long... But I have a big family so I'll never be able to retire. One thing I've noticed over time regardless of my business ventures is, I get burned out on everything after a few years.

Jon.

I'm glad I'm not the only one. I spend too much time trying things, and before something reaches it's full potential, I'm off to work on something different.

[Thomas Cole]

Experience does count. I did part time pro work for more than 30 years and my first 100 weddings probably took 4 years and still didn't expose me to every possible combination of wedding photography challenges. When you've completed 3-400 maybe, just maybe, then you can say "I've seen it all". Different religions, races, outdoors at night/day, beach side (both sunset & high noon), sunrise, huge/small churches, one brides' maid & groomsman to another with 12 bridesmaids, 12 groomsmen, 4 flower girls, 4 ring bearers and a bratty Jr. bride....not to mention 2 monthers-in-law at each one....presents challenges that only experience will prepare you to do. Plus, many of us photograph what the customer wants which may cramp creativity...."we want sharp pictures with everyone standing tall, facing the camera and smiling"....snap, you got it folks. To give them angled pictures, blurry (we call it soft) focused photos, groomsmen jumping in the air, just would not sell to these type customers. Listen to you customers and give them what they want...do those weird photos for fun and forums.

[oaktree]

10,000 hours! Let's see, easily 10,000 hours: walking, talking, driving, reading, my job, gardening. Guitar>>close, but probably not. Photography>>close but probably not. Interesting. For those things I have "studied" for over 10,000 hours, I'm very good at.

Guitar and photography? I've played the guitar and taken photos for about the same amount of years (55), but I'm a way better photographer than a guitarist. And both interests have had periods of great activity interrupted by longer periods of inactivity. Must be that becoming a good guitarist takes 40,000 hours.

Or, maybe it's a matter of drive, concentration, purpose, and a "self-full filling-prophecy". Deep in my soul no...matter how hard I try, I "know" I can't become even an average guitarist, but there's a chance I can become an above average photographer.

Why can't I be a combination of Eric Clapton and Ansel Adams? :(

BTW: Malcolm Gladwell has sold many books writing about those 10,000 hours.

[canonnoob]

Well I have been a pro for 1096 days.... :p

[DStanic]

Guitar and photography? I've played the guitar and taken photos for about the same amount of years (55), but I'm a way better photographer than a guitarist. And both interests have had periods of great activity interrupted by longer periods of inactivity. Must be that becoming a good guitarist takes 40,000 hours.


I also "play" guitar (ok they are under my bed, haven't touched them in 2 years..) but I've "owned" guitars for 13yrs. I find that it's easy to forget how to play after a short amount of time. Music requires ALOT of practise. With photography, I can be relatively inactive over the winter but not really forget anything.

[oaktree]

I also "play" guitar (ok they are under my bed, haven't touched them in 2 years..) but I've "owned" guitars for 13yrs. I find that it's easy to forget how to play after a short amount of time. Music requires ALOT of practise. With photography, I can be relatively inactive over the winter but not really forget anything.

I think it's because playing a guitar takes much more precise manual dexterity than taking photos. If I don't keep at with the guitar, I can't change chords as fast and can't hit the base string every time. That brain-muscle connect gets weak without practice. Photography doesn't require as much brain-muscle connection.

But...(hopefully without offending fellow guitarists)...it takes much more brains to be a good photographer. My brain works much harder when I'm taking pictures compared to when I'm playing the guitar. (Please, I hope Eric Clapton is not reading this!!) Of course, not using my brains enough may be the reason I'll never be an average guitarist :(

[DStanic]

I think it's because playing a guitar takes much more precise manual dexterity than taking photos. If I don't keep at with the guitar, I can't change chords as fast and can't hit the base string every time. That brain-muscle connect gets weak without practice. Photography doesn't require as much brain-muscle connection.

But...(hopefully without offending fellow guitarists)...it takes much more brains to be a good photographer. My brain works much harder when I'm taking pictures compared to when I'm playing the guitar. (Please, I hope Eric Clapton is not reading this!!) Of course, not using my brains enough may be the reason I'll never be an average guitarist :(

I'd have to say that guitar uses a different part of your brand then does photography, at least that's how i feel anyways. I still look at the strings more then I should, so I obviously haven't reached a point where it feels as natural as it does to Eric Clapton. :lol: I wonder if knowing how to play guitar well is at all like knowing how to type on a keyboard? (which I know how to do fairly well, obviously).

[airfrogusmc]

Learning to play a musical instrument is a lot like learning to master photography equipment. If you are still learning technique and fumbling around with technique you are hampering your creativity and vision. Just like playing an instrument once you get past the fumbling and get to the point of not having to even think about it you can truly fully express what you're seeing. Actually Steichen once said it take YEARS to get to a point where you are not thinking about technique and you are just reacting to what you are photographing. Its not easy to get to the point where the technique is just second nature. It take years.