« Twitter and the lack of groups | Main | Greendeavor: Incentive to Shop Green »
Professional something
Pietel is writing on photography, and professionalism.
And how amateurs become professionals.
I believe not so much has changed between before and now.
In photography it is worth to check how many professional photographers actually did the studies of photography.
Not too many.
And of those who did photography, I wonder how many learned their knowledge in school.
Photography never was a job that needed a diploma.
Not one newspaper would ask for it on solicitation. You needed to show pictures, and if they ware good, they might buy them. If not, well, go home and learn a little more, try harder.
Today it is still the same story. Amateurs will look how become a professional photographer if they feel it. If it runs in their blood.
They'll make a living from it. Ask for a VAT number and be able to invoice their jobs.
Others will just stay what they are: good amateurs.
Basically in photography, there has always been this filtering of different fields of interest:
professional photographers still make a whole lot of money on weddings, while other people just want their best friend/good amateur to picture the wedding, because they don't want to spend the money.
Nothing has changed on that matter today. Not the arrival of digital photography.
Because in the end it is still the photographer who pictures, not the camera.
In press and printing things have changed dramatically.
As said in a previous article, the amateur send in his messages for free. And that's where press photography becomes different.
Why is it possible? Because news photography is not about a good frame. It is about point and shoot, and the fact you were there, and you were first.
The quality of the images of the London tube attack weren't important, the fact that they were there, fast and direct were.
This evolution is all created by CNN and other live news channels
We want the news and we want it on the very right moment. This is why news photography will change, and why journalist photographers in a way will need to adapt. Find other solutions.
Plus stock photography changed the world. For the worse in my opinion (I made a thesis on that subject already years ago)
Actually it was Corbis who undermined stockphotography, if you would ask professionals.
But of course, that was just a matter of time. Today it is Flickr who'll undermine Corbis. And sofort.
Allowing you and businesses and newspapers to find a cheap solution for general images, has also ensured the market of these images got scattered.
Today instead of a few people that made a lot of money on stock, a lot of people earn a little money on it.
Then again, as said before. As the prices lowered, more people will actually buy pictures in stead of making the effort of hiring a photographer to m 1. ake the image. Thus resulting in higher sales.
To me, as said on nsights, the biggest change lies in the fact that photography 1. doesn't cost any money anymore. You buy the camera and the card and that's it. Which makes sure we have an awful lot of pictures these days ;) 2 All can be published online. Resulting in a overdose of images.
And the challenge will be 'to find a good filter'
But that's the same with everything: music, video content online, images, text,... There is too much available and too much junk.
Why would a person/company hire a professional photographer?
-Because really, a lot of time gets spend in finding exactly that image for that article/design/whatever. (I remember TheseDays wrote on their blog they sent an artdirector to Turkey to picture Istanbul, coz they couldn't find the right pic in stock.)
-Because they can write an invoice :)
-Because they have a portfolio of work, allowing the client to feoresee which results they might get.
-Because they need to deliver work according to their professionalism, and if they don't they will never be hired again. I can assure that is a good motivator :)
-Because in any way they'll do their very best to be professional, in creating, adapting and delivering the images.
I am aware that a handful of very good amateurs fit the profile above. And I know quite a few of them (and several bloggers I read fit the profile)
And they are the ones that are able to become one day that professional photographer, just like many others did before.
But there are an awful lot of amateurs who are not able to make that shift, and probably never had that intention.
Because really, photography is more than point and shoot, and actually, I love to read that evolution when reading blogs and see hobbyists evolve in really really good photographers while experimenting.
Mmmm, I love this shifting of the world.
Change is difficult, but change is good.
Posted on May 7, 2007
in Limit of my knowledge, Projects - Photography
Digg this | 
Add to Delicious | Technorati reactions | Permalink | 
Comments (2)
Comments
My main point is that amateurs are competing in the photography market with professionals.
About the wedding photography: I do this as a pro, but I do not have to find my incomes in this branche, because I have a main job elsewhere.
For this reason I can challenge pro prices and services. For example: I give customers all high res images and ask no fee for prints of pictures. Wedding pro's still think old fashion about this: control!
Digital photography is important for people to learn about photography. It has taken away barriers. It's not a matter of quality indeed.
Nice quote!
"Today instead of a few people that made a lot of money on stock, a lot of people earn a little money on it."
Posted by Pietel | May 7, 2007 1:45 PMWhereas my comment is: in the past the same competitors were there, all the way. In wedding photography and elsewhere.
The main shift can be found in news photography and stock, where people take advantage of the large quantities of amateur stock available online.
I am pretty convinced a wedding photographer will have no huge income on prints anymore. But then again, a wedding photographer doesn't have huge costs on film and development anymore either. The main problem these photographers (and any photographer) faces is: post production that eats a lot of time nobody is aware of because before all of this was handled by lab machines. And the fact that this photographer has to spend a lot of time in learning that process: Photoshop, Aperture, printing books online etc. Again, before they used to send their film to the lab and the work was as good as finished. Today the work only starts at post-processing. I thank Adobe and Apple on my bare knees for inventing Lightroom and Aperture to make all of this a whole lot faster. My workflow at least tripled since I started out with digital photography, and indeed, it made me love photography again. Because since long it is again about taking the pictures instead of post production. Post production is some clicks away and one upload button to Flickr. And that is what it supposed to be. (Okok fully aware that for certain things post production still is a lot more intense.)
Posted by ine | May 7, 2007 1:59 PM