Everyone's a pro nowadays.

I can pee farther than you can pee!

Well then look up semi-pro or did we forget that one. Don't use the dictionary as a shield.

We've had this discussion over and over and over and over again. If I was a mod I'd close everyone of these threads that open 'cause they all end the same. Best way to describe us is amateur, one who makes no money from being a photographer. Simply does it for fun. Advance amateur is someone who goes beyond the hobby and spends more than most and turns it into a lifestyle but still doesn't make money. Semi-pro is someone who makes money but not a living and pro...one who makes a living.

Case closed, thread closed, this is old...

mikekelley wrote in post #10091298
I can pee farther than you can pee!

You have mastery over pee trajectory.

_aravena wrote in post #10091321
Well then look up semi-pro or did we forget that one. Don't use the dictionary as a shield.

We've had this discussion over and over and over and over again. If I was a mod I'd close everyone of these threads that open 'cause they all end the same. Best way to describe us is amateur, one who makes no money from being a photographer. Simply does it for fun. Advance amateur is someone who goes beyond the hobby and spends more than most and turns it into a lifestyle but still doesn't make money. Semi-pro is someone who makes money but not a living and pro...one who makes a living.

Case closed, thread closed, this is old...

Exactly...

Make money at it? You're a pro.
Does it mean you are any good at photography? Nope.

I couldn't begin to count the number of crappy pro wedding photographers in my area alone.

MichaelBernard wrote in post #10091436

The garbage man in your reference, is a garbage man by career. It's his source of income and thus his lively hood. Unless someone is subsisting on photography, they aren't doing photography professionally...they have occasional jobs, not a career.

The point is, generally speaking, you're not going to get the kind of jobs needed to subsist in the real world with photography as your main source of income if you suck...you just aren't. You aren't going to get the kind of jobs/work needed to support yourself without recommendations/word of mouth. You don't get recommendations and word of mouth at that level if your work is sub par. You just don't..

Could someone charging $500 for a wedding make a living banging out a few el cheapo weddings a month? I suppose, but then again it's subjective to where they live.

The answer is yes,,, According to both the IRS and Webster's dictionary, that person would be considered a professional photographer.

One only has to fit one of the definitions, not all of them: See definition 2C, "c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return."

Please close this thread it seems to have become very trivial.

I get so much great information from this site it pains me to see it wasted in such a way.

All of this energy could be spent on helping everyone become better photgraphers

Sorry if this offends you

tekin112000 wrote in post #10096402
Please close this thread it seems to have become very trivial. I get so much great information from this site it pains me to see it wasted in such a way. All of this energy could be spent on helping everyone become better photgraphers Sorry if this offends you

Harden up...it's just a bit of fun aye. You don't have to click if you don't want to read it. I've found it very interesting to get different opinions.

I didn't even read the whole thread but the 2nd post has it spot on. I see people making a lot of money selling sub-par work. Making money at this stuff is 90% about the business aspect IMO. I lack the "balls" to go out there and demand money for my work which I don't think is pro quality. There are people out there with less talent and experience than myself who do have the balls (my brother's wedding photographer for example) to charge for substandard products.

None of that has anything to do with the definition of pro which this forum will NEVER agree on.

imahawki wrote in post #10096504
I didn't even read the whole thread but the 2nd post has it spot on. I see people making a lot of money selling sub-par work. Making money at this stuff is 90% about the business aspect IMO. I lack the "balls" to go out there and demand money for my work which I don't think is pro quality. There are people out there with less talent and experience than myself who do have the balls (my brother's wedding photographer for example) to charge for substandard products.

None of that has anything to do with the definition of pro which this forum will NEVER agree on.

Ansel Adams and Ken Rockwell are both Pros... (because they got paid)

But only one was a Master.

That was my point.

I used to run a business where I offered several services that were fairly demanding skill and where craftsmanship and expertise made the difference between top-notch quality and, well, pretty shabby results. I had put in the effort over time to become pretty much tops in the field in my area and made a comfortable living with a lot of liberty. I could work half a day up in a scenic mountain community then take the rest of the day roaming around the mountains, forests, rivers and lakes, but I digress.

I used to get a chuckle seeing the efforts made by my competitors, charging cheap prices to bargain-hunting customers for results that were noticeably shoddy. Sure, they were competitors, and potentially taking business from me, but somehow that didn't bother me when I saw the work they did -- in fact, I had plenty of people resort to me after being, well, "serviced" by second-rate or worse "craftsmen"...

And, I had numerous commercial clients to whom I was the "go to guy" -- clients that I had sold my work to and nurtered over time, and who then referred people to me who wanted the best and didn't mind paying for it, which meant that I spent some pleasant times amidst some of the areas priveledged folks, collecting money for my services. More pleasant afternoons off wandering the less-accessible places of the area, but again I digress.

One thing, though, that I learned and kept being reminded of is that you can't take your flow of business for granted. No matter how good you may be at what you were doing, sales is still a key of keeping it going and growing. Stop selling in in time your business will slump. So, I always had a sales kit at hand, was always ready to go find more customers in the commercial zone, and whenever I put the effort out it paid off.

So, my advice is to chuckle at those low-flying "competitors" and go for the clientele that want the best and are willing to pay for it, assuming you have the skills/craftsmanship to handle it. I wouldn't over-sell your abilities to prospective clients -- I've seen messy stuff happen when corporate/commercial clients get screwed -- but if you have the confidence in your skills to promote yourself as a top-notch photographer and can get your work out there to those who want/need quality work, you will hopefully find yourself in a niche that the "amateurs" (that is the less-than-well-skilled, not amateurs as in us hobbiests) will either not reach or will be quickly shaken out of.

imahawki wrote in post #10096504
I didn't even read the whole thread but the 2nd post has it spot on. I see people making a lot of money selling sub-par work. Making money at this stuff is 90% about the business aspect IMO. I lack the "balls" to go out there and demand money for my work which I don't think is pro quality. There are people out there with less talent and experience than myself who do have the balls (my brother's wedding photographer for example) to charge for substandard products.

None of that has anything to do with the definition of pro which this forum will NEVER agree on.

Actually it does. The problem is language and how uneducated people are in proper definitions and use to using one word for the same thing. Pro has nothing to do with level of mastery. People associate it that mainly because of football which if you're int he NFL you're a pro which means you're probably good, which you may be. Still, pro is short for professional which has nothing to do with being skilled. Saying someone looks like a professional when in a suit or overalls and a workbelt is spot on since a professional is a description, an ADJECTIVE! It describes a persons look.

It's even messed up when talking about professional hits or robberies. Yes there are amateurs they suck and fail but other people that may get away with it but aren't as clean cut as THE BEST would be...a pro.

Anyhow, professional is not a term that should be used in this manner anyhow. Master, Amateur, Expert, Novice, Beginner, Advanced, or Lvl 68 Wizard are terms to be used.

Websters Dictionary defines Professional as both Adjective and Noun...

MichaelBernard wrote in post #10091436

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE....

I'm hoping to take my Private Pilot Checkride this Summer and I'm afraid this is what's going to happen on it...

(*runs off screaming*)

In my humble opinion it’s a matter of talent and motivation. I also think it is important to define the difference between an artist and a pro. My take, is that a “pro” is an artist who uses the photography craft as a way to make a living or subsidize his income. While an “artist” is an individual who enjoys photography for the sake of creating art.

The difference between an amateur and a pro/ artist, is that when you take a controlled scenario; the amateur will consistently produce lower quality work. It is also important to note that varying degrees of talent will provide distinct separations within both amateurs and pros groups.

My two cents …