At what point do you consider yourself a "Professional" photographer?

cosworth wrote in post #5237121
Now if I go work for Wal-Mart to help pay my mortgage does that invalidate my talent?

Yes, to me it does. If you or Annie go to work for Walmart I would be disappointed.

opus13 wrote in post #5235626
Being a professional in any field is simple: If you can justifiably charge for a service or product, and the customer finds equitable value for said item or service. Percentages don't matter.

Essentially: If you get paid to do something because someone wants you to do it.

The only correct answer if you adhere to the definition of "professional".

Yes, the person taking your picture at WalMart is a pro if they are being paid to take that picture.

Every other connotation, stipulation and moral judgment placed on the "pro" title is done by those wishing to distinguish themselves from what they seem to consider the lower end of the profession. This is all well and good, but choose a different term for what it is you offer vs. what the photographers at WalMart (to use the given example) offer, because at the end of the day you're all professionals of one caliber or another.

It's like saying McDonald's shouldn't call itself a business because the quality of the product they provide doesn't approach that of, say, Morten's. Both provide a product/service that satisfies the need of a particular consumer, and while there is certainly a distinction between "chef" and "fry guy" the folks that work at either of those companies are professionals in their field regardless.

Professional as in your profession = I make my living from this.

Other professionalism stuff is subjective. Are you a jerk when you photograph people/things, or do you show some respect?

RTMiller wrote in post #5237099
I think we erroneously equate the "professional" tag with "excellence". That may not always be the case.

I agree with this. The word has taken on a second, colloquial meaning for "really good". Though, more correctly it seems that the short form "Pro" is used for this more often than "Professional". "He's pro".

I choose to stick with a more literal meaning of the word (not the older religious meaning though). If you're professional, it has to be your profession. I've perused several dictionary entries on the word, and almost all make a reference to Occupation, Vocation or Employment. I leave it at that. People may come up to and say how professional your pictures are, but in my experience those people tend not to be actual photographers.

chs4 wrote in post #5237161
The only correct answer if you adhere to the definition of "professional".

Yes, the person taking your picture at WalMart is a pro if they are being paid to take that picture.

Every other connotation, stipulation and moral judgment placed on the "pro" title is done by those wishing to distinguish themselves from what they seem to consider the lower end of the profession. This is all well and good, but choose a different term for what it is you offer vs. what the photographers at WalMart (to use the given example) offer, because at the end of the day you're all professionals of one caliber or another.

It's like saying McDonald's shouldn't call itself a business because the quality of the product they provide doesn't approach that of, say, Morten's. Both provide a product/service that satisfies the need of a particular consumer, and while there is certainly a distinction between "chef" and "fry guy" the folks that work at either of those companies are professionals in their field regardless.

I agree...

I guess if you have to ask, you probably aren't.

You are correct ,

I find it interesting that in the early years of photography, in the 19th Century, it was generally considered that amateurs were likely to produce much higher quality work, and on a consistent basis, than those that were simply paid to do a job of work using a camera. But back then there was a much broader differentiation of what constituted amature and professional across the board. In sport for example you would be banned from amature events if you worked in any sort of manual labouring job. Even today in many amature sports the limits for prize money is still set at less than 10% of total income.

Alan

Multiple definitions of 'pro' photographer, of which the second one you yourself do not consider to be among your own criteria to qualify as one, although it is indeed a very valid definition

1. When you promote yourself as one
   
2. When you are paid to take photos
   
3. When is the main source of your income
   
4. When you have mastered some discipline with the very wide genre of 'photography' so as to be able to readily solve a wide range of challenges to your knowledge/skills/or artistic rendering within that discipline, within that more narrow subcategory.
   

There are those that say if you make any money at all you are a pro. In the old days of CPS they would consider you a pro if more than 50% of your income came from photography. To me and in my opinion it is if you fully support your family with it.

Wilt wrote in post #18318195

When you have mastered some discipline with the very wide genre of 'photography' so as to be able to readily solve a wide range of challenges to your knowledge/skills/or artistic rendering within that discipline, within than more narrow subcategory.

A friend who has been a photographer for 60+ years still wont refer to himself as a "Pro" and he teaches the art of photography at two local colleges(still). #4 has my vote .............

I considered myself a pro when I had a portfolio to show for in order to sell my services to clients. I think that once you are able to market yourself and can demonstrate that you can provide results for a price, you are a pro.

Interesting re-ignition of old thread which came alive by the single post, registered on fools day we are not sure yet member.

Sure, where are those with portfolio and price list. Practicing cliche posing and framing, focus is sharp and faces evenly exposed. Guaranteed! Yes, where are clients who needs it. Nice to look at and simple to digest photography. One of your daughters is criticizing us as parents because we never went for photography studio. You know, dress nice, haircut, makeup, sit still, smile and ... look like it is not who you are. But who knows, maybe another Mike Disfarmer is somewhere nearby...

I have book of Viktor Kolář. He was after school, young exhale in Canada. Worked in the mine to be able to afford his own Leica. Moved on from Vancouver (BC) to Toronto (ON) to be able to photograph Canadians as they are every day after working as technician in photo lab. Rest of his coworkers were drinking beer, he was with camera until sun was down every day. He was able to find right people, who helped him to get very small grant and move on to Montreal to take pictures of everyday life.
He was not labeled as pro photographer, then. He moved back to homeland from Canada and continued to take pictures of everyday life and working else were. Like stage worker in the theater.
Only later he became professor. But to me he was already professional photographer at his young age in Canada. I'm happy to have this book. It is book where photos are on professional level. He was doing it as we job. Investing time and money and main thing. Called as the talent.
And we are OK with our family pictures taken by our family....

When someone looks at my pictures and asks me if I'm a professional, I say no. I go by the common photography contest rule: you're a pro if you make more than 50% of your income from photography, which I don't. It's not perfect, but it's clear cut. There are many gifted hobbyists who do better work than some who call themselves professionals. There's also the newbie who buys an SLR and then declares him/herself to be a professional because of owning a "professional" camera. A profession is one's career. There are good and bad in every profession.

Everybody who takes pictures is a photographer. What adjective you use with that is descriptive. I think being called an award-winning, acclaimed, admired, or skilled photographer holds more water than being described as professional.

.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #18318197
To me and in my opinion it is if you fully support your family with it.

So, if someone has no family, can they ever be a pro, in your opinion?

.