Author Topic: 20 myths about going pro (Read 2021 times)

lisandra · « **on:** August 02, 2011, 04:20:10 PM »

http://improvephotography.com/1521/20-tips-for-starting-a-portrait-photography-business/

Weell worth the read, 92% of aspiring "pro" photographers these days suffer severely from number 3 and 19. At one point I admit suffering from #18 and then later on I learned #4 the hard way. Facebook is FULL of #12.

lisandra · « **Reply #1 on:** August 02, 2011, 04:37:01 PM »

not that theres anything wrong with making mistakes, as long as you learn from them

voyager · « **Reply #2 on:** August 03, 2011, 03:17:46 AM »

Where's the one about your camera automatically making you a pro if you buy the most expensive one?

count_zero · « **Reply #3 on:** August 03, 2011, 01:37:19 PM »

What about the one where you watch all of the learn shows on AdoramaTV to become pro. Oh wait, that one is probably true.

Centauri27 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 09, 2011, 12:35:37 PM »

Good article--thanks for posting it, lisandra. Yes, photography takes on a whole different meaning once it becomes a business and not just a hobby. Everything's like that I suppose.

count_zero · « **Reply #5 on:** August 09, 2011, 03:52:30 PM »

Quote

I think the big ones not on the list are: "with todays cameras anyone can do it", and that "its not like real work". These two widely held assumptions along with the virtual venues like facebook, vimeo and youtube have made things exceptionally difficult for professionals that want to get fair compensation for their work (yes it is work).

I think this is good for the art world. The difference now between pro photog and just another shooter with fancy gear is the artistic merit of the photo.

It's funny watching your conventional sports "pro" photog complain that other photogs are poaching their territory. Especially when they want to setup fancy strobe systems around the arena. They whine like little kids. My response is always, it's a buyers market, if you had talent you wouldn't need $10K in a strobe setup to differentiate over the other shooters. I really want to see simple super zoom bridge cameras develop pristine high ISO images so mom and pop can take all the photos they need and make nice big prints. If your "pro" photograph is so much better, mom and pop will still want to buy it.

lisandra · « **Reply #6 on:** August 09, 2011, 05:42:58 PM »

Quote

Where's the one about your camera automatically making you a pro if you buy the most expensive one?

Quote

with todays cameras anyone can do it", and that "its not like real work".

This has actually been beneficial to me, "Pros" posting mediocre, uncorrected, straight out the camera work makes mine (ours, I belong to a group now) stand out.
Like I said months ago, fixing other peoples work is like 60% of my photography income. Whether this is immoral or not is a question of personal opinion but its legal (most companies own your work). Assuming your photo looks fantastic because it came out of a mamiya rz67 is stupid. The camera doesnt know what you want despite its best efforts, and even if you get what you want your work will always benefit from post.
Shooting for fun is great, but if youre getting paid you should do everything possible to make youre work pristine

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #7 on:** August 09, 2011, 06:07:43 PM »

Quote from: count_zero on August 09, 2011, 03:52:30 PM

Quote
I think the big ones not on the list are: "with todays cameras anyone can do it", and that "its not like real work". These two widely held assumptions along with the virtual venues like facebook, vimeo and youtube have made things exceptionally difficult for professionals that want to get fair compensation for their work (yes it is work).

I think this is good for the art world. The difference now between pro photog and just another shooter with fancy gear is the artistic merit of the photo.

It's funny watching your conventional sports "pro" photog complain that other photogs are poaching their territory. Especially when they want to setup fancy strobe systems around the arena. They whine like little kids. My response is always, it's a buyers market, if you had talent you wouldn't need $10K in a strobe setup to differentiate over the other shooters. I really want to see simple super zoom bridge cameras develop pristine high ISO images so mom and pop can take all the photos they need and make nice big prints. If your "pro" photograph is so much better, mom and pop will still want to buy it.

While many Pro's (short for "Professional) have a good eye... which is important... What makes you a PRO (Paid Photographer=your main living income),....Is that you get Paid for your work, and can sustain a lifestyle with it...(A Professional gets Paid, it is their job). n2rr is a Pro as far as I am concerned, as is Lisandra... One, shoots landscapes (almost as a hobby), and sells at art fair's, the other shoots more conventionally: Weddings, Events, Portraits etc...

Many of us, as members, take fantastic photo's, many at "Pro" level end results.. but, without the Money angle.... we are Advanced Amateurs, Photography Enthusiasts.. but not "Professional" in the sense that we "Earn our Livelihood" with Photography.

It is a distinction that should be kept and used correctly. IMO

Meridian Webster Def:

Definition of PROFESSIONAL

1
a : of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession b : engaged in one of the learned professions c (1) : characterized by or conforming to the
technical or ethical standards of a profession (2) : exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the workplace

2
a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer>
b : having a particular profession as a permanent career <a professional soldier>
c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return <professional football>[/b]

3
: following a line of conduct as though it were a profession <a professional patriot>

Now, #1 is a very generic def... where #2 is the Def I am referring to...

As many Professions, Many will have amateurs that also participate, but as a hobby... and some are very good as an amateur... no question..

lisandra · « **Reply #8 on:** August 15, 2011, 10:53:26 PM »

The island's most famous and acclaimed photographer just admitted using an E3/E5 for 90% of his work in an interview a couple of weeks ago. Not a 5D, not a 1D not a D3 not an A900. An olympus, half frame, E5. This is the only person on the entire island that makes more than 100K a year on photography.
Tell me that doesn't fit here perfectly. You should see the incredible amount of hate posts on his facebook page

Centauri27 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 16, 2011, 12:15:28 PM »

Quote from: lisandra on August 15, 2011, 10:53:26 PM

Tell me that doesn't fit here perfectly. You should see the incredible amount of hate posts on his facebook page

What are people hating him for? The fact that he uses a half frame E3??? Or that he disses the other DSLRs?

lisandra · « **Reply #10 on:** August 16, 2011, 05:47:11 PM »

Quote from: Centauri27 on August 16, 2011, 12:15:28 PM

Quote from: lisandra on August 15, 2011, 10:53:26 PM
Tell me that doesn't fit here perfectly. You should see the incredible amount of hate posts on his facebook page

What are people hating him for? The fact that he uses a half frame E3??? Or that he disses the other DSLRs?

Thats the thing, he doest diss any camera maker, he thinks its the less important of things. Up until now his choice of gear was a huge secret, he went so far as to have all of his gear stripped of all brand names. People always assumed the guy used a 1D. The hate comments hes getting range from the
Theres no way he told the truth
to [i]I had a contract with him for november, Im gonna cancel it now!![/i]
to I DID notice the dip in quality over the past years
and of course I just lost all the respect I had for this photographer

Its a sad thing but he is being reeeeeeally cool about it, answering everybody in the most respectful of ways...

count_zero · « **Reply #11 on:** August 16, 2011, 06:25:37 PM »

That's really bizarre. It makes me want to try an experiment and post some photos on flickr taken with the E-P3, but say it was taken using a Phase One with leaf shutter lens just to read the comments.

Centauri27 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 17, 2011, 10:24:36 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on August 16, 2011, 05:47:11 PM

Thats the thing, he doest diss any camera maker, he thinks its the less important of things. Up until now his choice of gear was a huge secret, he went so far as to have all of his gear stripped of all brand names. People always assumed the guy used a 1D. The hate comments hes getting range from the
Theres no way he told the truth
to [i]I had a contract with him for november, Im gonna cancel it now!![/i]
to I DID notice the dip in quality over the past years
and of course I just lost all the respect I had for this photographer

Its a sad thing but he is being reeeeeeally cool about it, answering everybody in the most respectful of ways...

That's bizarre. So is this indicative of the kind of flak that a pro photographer must endure? Unless he's really messed up, I'd say he has a bad streak of shooting for people with no civility.

adash · « **Reply #13 on:** August 17, 2011, 10:51:40 AM »

Let me get it straight - people who believe that they have at least some knowledge of photography, are bashing that proven professional because of his choice of gear?!!?!?! That's sort of not only lame, but insanely pathetic too.....Yet another proof that homo sapiens is inherently stupid!

lisandra · « **Reply #14 on:** August 17, 2011, 04:37:47 PM »

Now people are saying olympus is paying/sponsoring him. He Made a post about how he has canon, nikon and mamiya gear also, he explains that different gear are used for different stuff but that he values olympus pro glass for its quality and the crisp images they produce. He even goes as far as to say that if he could adpat the oly glass to the mamiya he would. he said:
I was asked a simple question, what gear do you use? I was clear in saying I own gear from almost all makers. Then I was asked what gear sees the most work? The truth of the matter is that the E5 is seeing the vast majority of the field work BECAUSE the majority of the work Im doing now is on the field. The results Im getting from it meet or exceed my standards. Ill continue using it until I think something else looks better. In the iberoamerican games the 1D saw a lot of action. Never in my life would I have thought that such ignorance would arise from a single statement from people that I considered to be high grade photographers... I dare ANY of the posters here to tell me which image was shot with what just by looking at them on my gallery. if your fanaticism towards a specific maker blinds you that fiercely, simply un-fan my page and get on with your life.

The amount of posts on his page have gone from ridiculous to really ridiculous.

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #15 on:** August 17, 2011, 04:38:44 PM »

Quote from: adash on August 17, 2011, 10:51:40 AM

Let me get it straight - people who believe that they have at least some knowledge of photography, are bashing that proven professional because of his choice of gear?!!?!?! That's sort of not only lame, but insanely pathetic too.....Yet another proof that [Some] homo sapiens is inherently stupid!

RED ^^^^
Some, not all.... but enough to effect his business apparently...Some people will always be "X-Brand Fan Boys" and make stupid decisions based on Brand, not Final Image Quality. Their loss IMO

lisandra · « **Reply #16 on:** August 17, 2011, 04:48:24 PM »

Quote

but enough to effect his business apparently

no man, this guy is booked solid for the next 7 months. If you want him at your wedding you have to book him a year in advance. He's one of the few that does wedding, commercial and product work.

count_zero · « **Reply #17 on:** August 17, 2011, 07:24:41 PM »

No one complains that Canon is official sponsors of the NFL, which is why all NFL photogs use Canon.

lisandra · « **Reply #18 on:** August 19, 2011, 05:16:56 PM »

I reeeally dont get it...I dont care if he shoots my wedding/event with a 10$ instant camera, as long as the end result looks as good as his does, why should it matter?

Em5 Pete · « **Reply #19 on:** August 19, 2011, 05:48:25 PM »

Just tape over the brand... they all look alike to me from a distance anyway...
We all know "It is the person behind the camera, not the camera"

I thought I read that he lost a few clients with the debacle. But, if he is THAT booked, nothing lost...really.....

cosinaphile · « **Reply #20 on:** August 20, 2011, 07:26:14 AM »

wow that really a sad commentary on the species ,

only a fool would be so fanboyish and luddite unuf to engage in this sort of hate sport,

what morons

adash · « **Reply #21 on:** August 23, 2011, 12:31:14 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on August 19, 2011, 05:16:56 PM

I reeeally dont get it...I dont care if he shoots my wedding/event with a 10$ instant camera, as long as the end result looks as good as his does, why should it matter?

Talk to me:

http://www.davidburnett.com/fmsetgallery.html?loopTrack=3&folio=my%20Formats&gallery=Holga%20Eye

Psynema · « **Reply #22 on:** August 23, 2011, 01:38:13 AM »

Quote from: lisandra on August 17, 2011, 04:48:24 PM

Quote
but enough to effect his business apparently
no man, this guy is booked solid for the next 7 months. If you want him at your wedding you have to book him a year in advance. He's one of the few that does wedding, commercial and product work.

Who is this guy? Link to site? I'm curious

Author Topic: 20 myths about going pro (Read 2021 times)

Related Topics

Recent Topics

Recent Gallery