As I said. His viability as a professional photographer is questionable in a commercial sense.

well, working a "normal" job I would have thought not that unusual. I would have thought that there are plenty of very good photographers who work a M-F, 9-5 outside of the industry ?

Do you have to be FT to be a pro or good enough to be a pro ? I don't think so

When should you start charging anyhow ? For anything, prints, workshops whatever, what's your view

Well i think if you Ask Will to confirm this..

To be a full member of the AIPP, you have to work full time as a photographer... so if I believe to be a professional photographer, its your full time occupation or in my case in previous years..my main job, (i've worked weekends doing other stuff in earlier years)

I think if you work for a company doing XYZ, 40 hours a week, and you do photos on the side.. your not a professional... you might produce professional images... you may have a professional attitude to work, but in any field, a professional works in that field as a full time or majority of their time!

I agree with that Russell.

What about the people that are at the standard of professional photographer but its a weekend gig rather than a full time thing, what would they be called? I'm not being funny here, A guy I know recently changed his occupation (on linkedin) from the IT industry to Professional Photographer but I wasn't aware he was doing it full time (I will have to check).

cheers

Russ

My view: (and I'm entitled to it so please don't slag me down....)

Yes it's obviously frustrating for professionals with many years of experience when any amateur can pick up the tool and have a go - and turn a profit doing so. Some might say all this does is lower the benchmark for the industry.

This practise isn't just isolated to photography and graphic design. Hell no.... One of my other pursuits is car detailing and there are plenty of cowboy warriors out there who do more harm than good when it comes to car's paintwork.

It comes down to clever and effective marketing, reaching your target audience and quality of work. Sooner or later bad work technique and ethic will catch up with you. Never underestimate the power and scope of word of mouth (or online forums in many cases).

A true professional survives and does well in their chosen field because they're just that. Something to think about.

"sooner or later bad work technique and ethic will catch up with you"

It seems not a lot of the time though does it ?

No member should ever be run down for voicing any opinion by the way. People can vigorously debate your opinion, but anything personal will be whacked.

I agree with nearly everything that you say but I am curious to hear your reasoning behind not using the histogram as a guide to exposure.

I understand where you are coming from Russel but what are your thoughts about learning photographers? Obviously in the early days of learning a photographer wont nail it in camera, but they may be good at photoshop to fix these issues. I think as long as they strive towards bettering their technique every time and learning more about the profession as they go then surely theres no harm in making a few dollars at a select level to match their skills.

Russell, firstly I agree with you that a light meter is an absolute must with studio lighting... get the lights doing what you want not what roughly fits your idea. (I use one every time the lights come out... actually, more than just when the lights come out)

Having said that... I regularly assist many respected photographers around BNE and even though a few of them don't use a light meter I still admire and can't fault their work.

My disclaimer here though.... all the ones who now don't use a LM... did, for many, many years and know how to read their camera's (display, histogram etc...) and know light.

Why do you think I roll my eyes every time someone posts shooting data about a speedlite and says... 'it was set at 1/4 power, camera right and above head height

Oh, and have you seen any of the results??... would be interesting to see what the final product looks like

I must agree too.. that i know my camera and i know my studio lights well.. and i can guess pretty well what the lighting might be.. but I still metre.. i dont cut corners!

And yes those that dont use LM's these days have been doing it for donkey years.. and they again KNOW THE BASICS..

this is what i'm trying to get through to most people, theres nothing wrong with learning the basics and learning the camera and the science of photography without the need for photoshop...

if you are a very competent photographer and you understand photography and histograms very well, then you can go without..


GUYS... ITS AS SIMPLE AS THIS... LEARN THE BASICS, AND MAKE YOUR LIFE EASY!

stop fooling yourself and others if you think that bad exposure is acceptable.. cause again.. the worse the exposure, the less information in the file, the worse it will be when you photoshop the hell out of it!

oh and yea... when someone say... its was set at 1/4 power...

yeah 1/4 of what.. what is the guide number of the flash

what is the reading at the subject, as the distance between the subject and the flash is different.... oh.. hang on ... but some people will just use TTL, and well thats not really controlling much!

and yes i did use TTL on my outdoor lighting workshop. but i did adjust the flash by 3rds of stops, and i knew to relate that back to the Fstops i used.. therefore i had a better understanding of what i was doing...

personally Russell - while I agree the ability to get a good picture in camera is becoming a forgotten one, there are MANY MANY people who don't know the back end of an f-stop or light meter making extroadinary images.

I think saying "you MUST know this" is drawing a big generalisation over the industry now. Even back in film days, there were many technically bad shooters who could print their work into genius - so I don't think it's a digital thing. Different people, different methods. Be confident in your own work and methods, and you will survive.

Just going back to this question I think there are quite a few people who work 9-5 in some other capacity who dabble in photography as a hobby. At some stage for some of these people, if they are good enough, or if their family/friends/whoever like their images then at some stage they may be asked to photograph an event/sport/wedding/portrait shoot/whatever. At this point some may choose to charge and some may not. For me, I have had a few queries to take some portraits for people. I have done this but have done it free of charge as I don't feel I had the expertise or experience to charge for my photography. If they wanted prints then I would organise them and obviously charge as I incur a cost for that and I'm not a charity. The first couple of people who I got prints done for I told I would charge them cost price but they gave me extra anyway without asking! I was very thankful for this as were they for their image(s).

Recently a friend asked if they could pay me to do a shoot to which I quoted a low price as I still feel I have much to learn but knowing they were happy to pay I quoted a price for them. This is viewed by some professional photographers as undercutting the market which I must admit I am guilty of in this instance. This has happened in many industries though. Take the pharmaceutical industry (in which I work). Five to ten years ago community pharmacies were doing really well and could mark up whatever they wanted as they all knew they were doing it. Then Chemist Warehouse and Discount Drug Stores etc came in with a different business model where they would provide cheaper medicines with 'high turn-over'. They had to sacrifice something for this and that is customer service. They had to put their stores in cheap areas and they have that many customers they don't know the names of all of their customers unlike a local community pharmacy (who might charge a bit more for the service). When these 'hack' photographers (as some have nick-named them) do this they are doing similar to what these discounting pharmacies have done - they are offering what the client wants but are cutting the corners slightly in order to please the client in terms of costing but possibly under-delivering on image quality. The client can choose which they want - the cheap 'hack' or the seasoned professional. I know plenty of customers who visit a local pharmacy as they are happy with the service, the friendship they have developed with the pharmacist and will pay the price. The same is with really great photographers. Some will sacrifice money for quality. I do also think that some people do not appreciate the cost of quality photography.

I don't think people should offer a service they are not qualified to offer. I commend the guys on here who offer up free advice, and tutorials for free! I think you contribute immensely to this community and I am sure to others. Some people are a bit short sighted and just see the $ signs in their eyes.

I think there are people who talk up their photography when it isn't that good. I am one who is always putting down my photography and don't believe there is that much which is of a really good standard, but i am learning and enjoy improving and seeing what shots I can take as well as enjoying comments from others. I think sometimes we need to take a step back and be a little humble before we go and think we are good enough to teach or good enough to put people in their place. I am neither of these.

Edit: Back to the question about post processing - I think its acceptable to do as much post processing as you like. However, if I were photographing I'd rather get it correct in the camera then I would spend less time doing processing and therefore (if I were charging) would be more cost effective for me. I agree though Russell - you need to know the basics.

I will say this..


If your next door neighbour said.. "hi Mr photographer man... can I offer you 50 dollars to take photos of my daugther in my back yard" and you think.. well im not a pro.. but if she wants to offer, then yes I can do it for her........ I think thats fine.. thats not undercutting


Undercutting is saying "hello world.. im mr photographer.com and i offer photographic services... i do family sitting including all the images on CD for 75.00"

That is undercutting!!!!

R

This is a great topic, and a debate I have with a lot of photographers.

My theory is that Photoshop is there to enhance good photos - it is not there to fix bad photos. Correctly capture the image in the camera first, and 90% of your work is done.

I use the old fashioned setting on my camera called “M”. Manual everything, so if anything does go wrong, it is my fault, not the camera, not the aperture priority, not the shutter priority, not the auto-exposure metering, it’s all under my control. Too many photographers are running around with expensive digital SLR’s and running them on “point and shoot auto”. They are using the theory that the more expensive the camera, the better it is. Sorry, I don’t think so.

I don't use light meters, but I do use the flashing highlights on the back of the camera to tell me when there is no "information" in the whites (apologies if I am using the wrong terminology). I find this the easiest way for me to meter an exposure, but that is after I’ve chosen my white balance, my ISO, and my preference of shutter or aperture, and then matching the flashes to the aperture. Again, it comes back to using manual settings.