# At What Point Did You Feel Comfortable Calling Yourself A Pro?



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

So, I was out with some friends last night, and one of them introduced me to a girl and said "This is my friend Franklin, he's a pro photographer" and I immediately felt uncomfortable being called that.  So I was talking to the girl, who is a photography hobbyist and at some point I said something like "well, I don't really know that I'm a professional or anything, but..." and she responded with "well, of course you are, you work at a studio, you do paid real estate work and you've had bands pay you to use your shots for their promotions, what part of all that is not 'professional'?"  

I guess, objectively she's right.  I guess because I don't consider myself a particularly great photographer, I have a hard time thinking of myself as a professional.  I've gotten to the point with my real estate work that I feel confident in the work I do with that, but I also only do that for like 4-5 hours per week max.  The studio stuff, I feel like a total beginner, though the studio has seemed to be very happy with my work in the very short time I've been there.

Anyway, I guess I was just wondering at what point did that feeling of "no way, I'm not a pro, I'm just a n00b that somehow is getting people to pay for his hobby" go away?  At what point did "hi, my name is _______, and I'm a pro photographer" become comfortable for you guys and gals?


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

Kind of confusing, isn't it? There are so many definitions and thoughts on what makes person a pro... most of the them are very subjective. If that is your sole source of income.. then you are definitely doing it professionally! 

Whether your images are up to your standards of what a "Pro" should produce... is up to you! If you like the title, use it! You probably deserve it more than many people out there who use it, you at least had the motivation to pursue some employment in Photography! You seem to want to learn.. and continue learning... which is really what it is all about, as that will improve your images more than anything else! 

So post some of your very best... let us see it!


----------



## sm4him (Jul 27, 2012)

I can't answer your question, but I can certainly identify with it.

I love photography, and I think I've finally gotten serious enough about it, after many, many years of just taking snapshots.  I've certainly *improved* in the last year, due primarily to the purchase of a DSLR, macro lens & flash AND due to the tremendous assistance of a few specific individuals on this forum, BUT:
Underlying it all is this vague fear that I am just terminally mediocre. That being a "pro" is not in my future, because--_*to me*_--being a PRO isn't just about earning money, it's about producing a higher-quality result than the average YWAC (Yahoo With A Camera  ), and I fear that I will never get there.  The REAL problem is: I'm a perfectionist with self-esteem issues. :lmao:  So, I will likely NEVER see myself as "good enough" to "go pro."

But on the other hand, I *have* sold a few prints, without even trying to. And technically, I am "employed," at least in part, as a photographer. I've even had some photos published, albeit in various public transit trade print publications.  So, would that make me a "pro" in someone else's eyes? I have no idea.  But I know I'm not a pro in my OWN eyes, and truly can't foresee EVER thinking of myself that way.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

sm4him said:


> I can't answer your question, but I can certainly identify with it.
> 
> I love photography, and I think I've finally gotten serious enough about it, after many, many years of just taking snapshots.  I've certainly *improved* in the last year, due primarily to the purchase of a DSLR, macro lens & flash AND due to the tremendous assistance of a few specific individuals on this forum, BUT:
> Underlying it all is this vague fear that I am just terminally mediocre. That being a "pro" is not in my future, because--_*to me*_--being a PRO isn't just about earning money, it's about producing a higher-quality result than the average YWAC (Yahoo With A Camera  ), and I fear that I will never get there.  The REAL problem is: I'm a perfectionist with self-esteem issues. :lmao:  So, I will likely NEVER see myself as "good enough" to "go pro."
> ...



Hey.. I REALLY like your recent Macro work... it looks really, really good!


----------



## sm4him (Jul 27, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> sm4him said:
> 
> 
> > I can't answer your question, but I can certainly identify with it.
> ...



:heart::blushing:  Thanks, Charlie! That is just about the highest praise I can imagine!  I know I'm doing *something* right if you approve of the results!! 
Now, if I can just recover from that tire purchase and get back on track with getting my flash bracket, etc...soon, VERY soon!  I *did*  get a tripod for my birthday though! I'll need to get a better head for it, but it's a start!


----------



## TheFantasticG (Jul 27, 2012)

You don't have to be a great photographer to professional photographer.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Kind of confusing, isn't it? There are so many definitions and thoughts on what makes person a pro... most of the them are very subjective. If that is your sole source of income.. then you are definitely doing it professionally!
> 
> Whether your images are up to your standards of what a "Pro" should produce... is up to you! If you like the title, use it! You probably deserve it more than many people out there who use it, you at least had the motivation to pursue some employment in Photography! You seem to want to learn.. and continue learning... which is really what it is all about, as that will improve your images more than anything else!
> 
> So post some of your very best... let us see it!



Thanks for the kind words!  I get about half my personal income from photography at this point.  I also teach test prep courses and adjunct for a local university teaching logic.  Basically after leaving the legal world I made a promise to myself of only doing things I love to do and if that barely pays the bills, so be it, haha.  Luckily recently I've been doing slightly more than paying the bills, but I am truly happy when I come home from work, and the days at work fly by.  I'm usually actually genuinely surprised that my work day is over, and part of me is sometimes sad to leave work.  Before when I didn't leave work it was because I was stressed out of my mind, now it's out of genuinely liking what I do, both teaching and with photography. 

Unfortunately all of my pro stuff I actually can't post.  The real estate work I can retain some rights for portfolio only, and the studio work I do, because a lot of is high school kids and the parents more or less want complete security of those images (despite what their kids then post to facebook, lol) I actually have no rights to.  

So I get to post my hobby photos here, lol.  I've been posting a lot of the side project I've been doing of Atlanta cityscapes fairly recently.  When I get that a little bit more fleshed out, I'll post a collection of about 10.  Ultimately I think that project will end up being about 25 representative photos of the atlanta city scape.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

sm4him said:


> I can't answer your question, but I can certainly identify with it.
> 
> I love photography, and I think I've finally gotten serious enough about it, after many, many years of just taking snapshots.  I've certainly *improved* in the last year, due primarily to the purchase of a DSLR, macro lens & flash AND due to the tremendous assistance of a few specific individuals on this forum, BUT:
> Underlying it all is this vague fear that I am just terminally mediocre. That being a "pro" is not in my future, because--_*to me*_--being a PRO isn't just about earning money, it's about producing a higher-quality result than the average YWAC (Yahoo With A Camera  ), and I fear that I will never get there.  The REAL problem is: I'm a perfectionist with self-esteem issues. :lmao:  So, I will likely NEVER see myself as "good enough" to "go pro."
> ...



yeah, sounds like we're in similar positions.  On the one hand whenever I hear myself say "yes, I'm a photographer" I sort of want to roll my eyes at myself and say "not another one of 'those' people who think they're a photographer."  On the other hand, if I don't people just think Im being weird.  I work in a photography studio.  Over half of what I make is via photography right now.  Saying I'm not a pro photographer seems to other people like I'm just being difficult, even if I'm not comfortable with the term.  

When I think pro photographer, I think Zack Arias and Joe McNally.  To even suggest I'm vaguely part of the same fraternity as those guys just seems ludicrous to me, haha.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

TheFantasticG said:


> You don't have to be a great photographer to professional photographer.



This is VERY true.. and proven every day!


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Jul 27, 2012)

For me, it wasn't when people started asking me to shoot paid jobs for them. We all know people who've taken clients, and frankly their work is mediocre at best and just plain bad at wort. The mental shift for me happened this winter when I was on vacation with family, and spent some "me time" out in the woods, shooting some landscape just for fun and thinking about life.

I decided that there's no reason not to think of myself as a pro, just because there are a lot of people that are A LOT better than me. I've developed a formal business plan, I have a business and tax license, I've invested almost $20,000 in equipment for my hobby turned business, I have an umbrella policy for my equipment and general liability for the business, and I've spent a few thousand hours studying the fundamentals and creative elements of photography along with a couple hundred sessions in the field.

If that's not pro, I don't know what is. Anyone who wants to argue that either has a stick up their butt, or just wants to think they're better by tearing others down.

That's my $0.02


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Kind of confusing, isn't it? There are so many definitions and thoughts on what makes person a pro... most of the them are very subjective. If that is your sole source of income.. then you are definitely doing it professionally!
> ...



So do some of the PRO style portrait work at home... (assuming you have the gear... it doesn't take much!) Find a model (A friend, wife, whatever) .. go to the park on a nice cloudy day, or in the golden hour.. use a cheap reflector.. whatever OC flash you have... show us some pretty portrait work!   (I love seeing pretty girls  )


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > cgipson1 said:
> ...



Oh, yeah I have some of that.  I posted some a few days ago, though they were mostly on what I thought were the good, but can't quite figure out how to make them better shots, haha.  I'll see if I can find the thread, and I'll add a couple more too, haha.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



Found it.. posted!


----------



## Derrel (Jul 27, 2012)

When I went to work at the studio every morning, and clients came in and I was in charge of posing them and lighting them, and when that work garnered me a paycheck every week.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 27, 2012)

The moment "pros" aren't jackasses.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jul 27, 2012)

If your not fond of the PRO tag just yet don't use it. your probalby more pro then a lot of people on the site if half your income is made from photography.  I never called myself a pro fire protection designer, so just call yourself whatever you feel comfortable with.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> If your not fond of the PRO tag just yet don't use it. your probalby more pro then a lot of people on the site if half your income is made from photography.  I never called myself a pro fire protection designer, so just call yourself whatever you feel comfortable with.



Ha, for some reason it never seems that easy.  This has happened at least 3-4 times when I've been out in the last few weeks:

Me: "hey, can I buy you a drink?"
Girl: "yeah, sure!  I'm ______!"
Me: "I'm franklin, nice to meet you!"
Girl: "so, what do you do?"
Me: "well I teach and take photographs, what about you?"
Girl: "Oh, that's so awesome!  I've, like done a little bit of modeling!  so you're like a pro photographer or like you just do that for fun?"
Me: "well, see, I do work for a studio and I do do some contract based real estate work, but I feel like I'm just sort of starting off, and I somewhat feel uncomfortable with the term pro photographer, because I view that as reserved for a level of photographer well above what I am, and I have always sort of sneered at fauxtographers who take every opportunity to call themselves a pro, and I'm sort of worried that I'm turning into that..."

*looks over 5 minutes later, realizes girl is gone, talking to some other guy who doesn't have needless hangups about job titles*


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > If your not fond of the PRO tag just yet don't use it. your probalby more pro then a lot of people on the site if half your income is made from photography.  I never called myself a pro fire protection designer, so just call yourself whatever you feel comfortable with.
> ...


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jul 27, 2012)

well  okay, saying pro would be way easier and shorter then saying what you said lol.    when they ask you if your pro, just say i get paid to do it.  I think i had some hangups on not wanting to get lumped into the fauxtographer pile. But now I think I just got to the point where i'm just concentrating on me and not worrying about what other people view me as.


----------



## sm4him (Jul 27, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > If your not fond of the PRO tag just yet don't use it. your probalby more pro then a lot of people on the site if half your income is made from photography.  I never called myself a pro fire protection designer, so just call yourself whatever you feel comfortable with.
> ...




Ah, now THAT I can help you with...

Correct answer #1: Does being a pro photographer impress you? If so, then YES, by all means I'm a Pro. 
Correct answer #2: Well, I make some money at it. But tell me more about your modeling; you've certainly got the looks for it.

Answer #2 is preferable, because it allows her to talk about HERSELF and that's what she really wants to do, not hear some endless jibber jabber from the guy!


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

sm4him said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > 12sndsgood said:
> ...



ha, yeah.  I mean it's usually a little better than that.  This was just edited down to the pertinent parts about my retarded 'job label' hangups.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

sm4him said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > 12sndsgood said:
> ...



Honesty? And tips about the female psyche? I am Impressed!  lol!   (good lines too...  wow!)


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you need at least 1,500 posts and 500 "likes" in TPF before you can formally call yourself a "pro."


----------



## sm4him (Jul 27, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you need at least 1,500 posts and 500 "likes" in TPF before you can formally call yourself a "pro."



Hey, I'm closer to Pro status than I thought...I just need 55 more "likes" and I'm in!!


----------



## sm4him (Jul 27, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> sm4him said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



I was feeling generous. But any more than that, it'll cost you!


----------



## gsgary (Jul 27, 2012)

You are only pro if photography is more than 50% of your income


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

sm4him said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you need at least 1,500 posts and 500 "likes" in TPF before you can formally call yourself a "pro."
> ...




54!


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

gsgary said:


> You are only pro if photography is more than 50% of your income



Well then, starting this week, I guess I'm pro then.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Jul 27, 2012)

gsgary said:


> You are only pro if photography is more than 50% of your income



See, it's stupid statements like this that make me not even want to have this conversation. 

Being a professional Tog is about SO much more than just $$$.


----------



## ceejtank (Jul 27, 2012)

If you're paid to do it, then its a professional, albeit perhaps a small one.


----------



## MSnowy (Jul 27, 2012)

I would suggest you just go with photographer. I don't meet many people who call themselves professional accountants or professional firefighters, even though that is what their profession are.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

But there are a lot of non-professional photographers... and a lot of professionals also. There is a distinction to be made... that doesn't exist in the professions you mentioned! They are professional by definition.. you never hear anyone saying they are amateur accountants either! Or Amateur Firefighters.. (except maybe Photoguy!)


----------



## sm4him (Jul 27, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> But there are a lot of non-professional photographers... and a lot of professionals also. There is a distinction to be made... that doesn't exist in the professions you mentioned! They are professional by definition.. you never hear anyone saying they are amateur accountants either! Or Amateur Firefighters.. (except maybe Photoguy!)



Even HE didn't claim to be an amateur firefighter...He was an Official unofficial volunteer amateur fire department photographer. :lmao:


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Jul 27, 2012)

Right about the time I walked out of Best Buy


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jul 27, 2012)

FB page, huge watermark, nice bestbuy cam........  one has become a PRO 

And suggestion:  don't shoot on the "Orange" paper like i did. I was told the orange appears very unproffesional (and concur with the FB photog that explained it to me, actually the whole pic sux hah)


----------



## Ernicus (Jul 27, 2012)

I don't have the answer either. 

I believe there are people who can produce professional quality work who are not pros.  And there are people who think they are pros who need to be shot.

I too had that uncomfortable feeling when my boss introduced me to some people as a photographer, not a photog in training.  She told me tonight she was proud of my progress and very surprised at how fast I was learning and picking things up.

While that made me feel good...my ego is in check...I am not a pro.

I think when a person carries themselves professional, provides a good service to their customers, produces quality work, and makes a living off of it.  That considers them a "pro" in my book.  Am I right?  I have no idea.  It's just what I think a pro is.


----------



## MSnowy (Jul 27, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> But there are a lot of non-professional photographers... and a lot of professionals also. There is a distinction to be made... that doesn't exist in the professions you mentioned! They are professional by definition.. you never hear anyone saying they are amateur accountants either! Or Amateur Firefighters.. (except maybe Photoguy!)



Totally disagree. If you asked a person what they do for living and they answered photographer. Would you even consider that they might be a non-professional photographer?


----------



## unpopular (Jul 27, 2012)

Who cares? This "pro worship" is so ridiculous, and seems almost unique to photography. You don't see in any other hobby. You don't pick up computer programming magazines and get articles on "what the pros use".

The title "professional photographer" doesn't mean anything of substance. It's an idiotic appeal to authority, promoted by idiotic photographers.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

MSnowy said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > But there are a lot of non-professional photographers... and a lot of professionals also. There is a distinction to be made... that doesn't exist in the professions you mentioned! They are professional by definition.. you never hear anyone saying they are amateur accountants either! Or Amateur Firefighters.. (except maybe Photoguy!)
> ...



I can absolutely tell you I've told people that I'm a photographer, and then the very next question is "so like a pro or like a hobby?"  Got that question both when I was just a pure hobbyist and recently when I'm some sort of ambiguous middle ground.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Who cares? This "pro worship" is so ridiculous, and seems almost unique to photography. You don't see in any other hobby. You don't pick up computer programming magazines and get articles on "what the pros use".
> 
> The title "professional photographer" doesn't mean anything of substance. It's an idiotic appeal to authority, promoted by idiotic photographers.



I don't care in a 'sense of authority' type way.  If anything it's quite the reverse.  I sort of feel uncomfortable saying I'm a pro photographer, because to me that brings connotations of quality that i feel I'm short of.  Problem is, people seem to be get confused if you work in a studio and get paid for a lot of your work, but you don't like calling yourself a pro.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 27, 2012)

LOL. For me "pro" connotates a quality I hope I never attain.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> LOL. For me "pro" connotates a quality I hope I never attain.



eh, when I think pro I think Zack Arias, who is one of the coolest guys I've ever had the pleasure of meeting, and an insanely talented photographer to boot.  Or I think Joe McNally, who the very brief time I met him seemed like a genuinely nice guy, who both knows he is objectively very good at what he does, but down to earth as well.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 27, 2012)

I don't think you'll get where you want to be by looking at what others are doing. These celebrity photographers reach that level not through emulation, their collection of gear, or even their professional status. They get to where they are through vision dedication and self discovery.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Jul 27, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Right about the time I walked out of Best Buy



^ said seemingly EVERY "pro" in my part of Texas. Seriously, those idiots seem to multiply faster than rabbits.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 27, 2012)

unpopular said:


> I don't think you'll get where you want to be by looking at what others are doing. These celebrity photographers reach that level not through emulation, their collection of gear, or even their professional status. They get to where they are through vision dedication and self discovery.



I'm not really trying to emulate either of those guys.  I mean I dont really even shoot all that many portraits for my own personal photography (what McNally mostly shoots) and I dont do street very much either.  They're both insanely good at lighting, so I try to figure out how they do some of that stuff.  

You seem to have a very, very negative view of the field of photography as a service as well.  Like that is in some sort of mortal battle with the idea of photography as pure art.  I don't view it that way at all.  It's partly service industry and partly art.  I don't see where that has to be some sort of battle.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 27, 2012)

MSnowy said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > But there are a lot of non-professional photographers... and a lot of professionals also. There is a distinction to be made... that doesn't exist in the professions you mentioned! They are professional by definition.. you never hear anyone saying they are amateur accountants either! Or Amateur Firefighters.. (except maybe Photoguy!)
> ...



YES! Like all the Facebook PROS.. and all the MWAC PROS? Definitely!


----------



## unpopular (Jul 28, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think you'll get where you want to be by looking at what others are doing. These celebrity photographers reach that level not through emulation, their collection of gear, or even their professional status. They get to where they are through vision dedication and self discovery.
> ...



I don't see it that way at all, not in the least. But, there are two different kinds of photographers out there, and it all relies on vision, and in my opinion, it doesn't much matter if you're a "professional" or not. Most professionals are really just run-of-the-mill amateurs, the kind you see in the beginners forum, the difference is that they spend all this time and money perfecting the technique, they spend a lot of time getting "insanely good at lighting", they go for the "wow factor". I'd almost say that the two examples you have are an extreme example of this, McNally certainly less so. Typically you can spot this level of photography a mile off, the images seem self-centered, they're more about the photographers skills and abilities than the subject. Lighting and composition isn't a subtle context, but a blazingly loud and obnoxious. In the end, I get the feeling the photograph is more about the photographer than anything else.

Mattion and Enna Grazier (grazierphotography.com) are excellent examples of truly excellent commercial photographers, their work consistently represents the subjects which they document while still maintaining a very strong style, without the use of gimmicky and overt lighting or composition.

Now I don't want to say that I am some kind of ultra-photographer, or that I even possess the skills which many of these professionals have succeeded. But the vast majority of "professionals" out there are really looking for that "wham bam" appeal, which I really have not even a little bit of interest in. In my opinion, art is about synthesis of the subject, and light is the medium used to carry out that synthesis. I'm sure if i really dedicated myself to it, I could learn all the quasirenascence-style and tricks to lighting (and thats what they are, tricks - this is why so often studio portraits look so very similar); but I'm not really convinced that this is what makes a great photograph. IMO, if you notice the lighting, chances are it's a poor photograph; that is unless the photograph is strictly about light.


----------



## Steve5D (Jul 28, 2012)

I don't refer to myself as a pro, simply because my camera's not paying my mortgage. However, I also believe that being a "pro" is more than earning money. One should also conduct himself professionally.

I got comfortable with the title "pro" once _other _people started referring to me as one...


----------



## charlie76 (Jul 28, 2012)

I am a pro...wood photographer?  um...yup...LOL.   I bet I've thought more about wood composition than all you gurus combined...


----------



## Ernicus (Jul 28, 2012)

He has a very negative view of the world, that's why we love him.


----------



## fjrabon (Jul 28, 2012)

unpopular said:


> which I really have not even a little bit of interest in. In my opinion,



See, this is the key.  You got it right there, but at most other points you talk about it like it's some sort of objectively terrible quality, that you can recognize, but a lot of the rest of us are confused about or something, and that we're falling for bad art, because we 'don't get it' or something.  

Whereas you like a certain style and feel, and others like a different style and feel.

Additionally, what I meant by 'insanely good at lighting' is that they can see or imagine just about any way to light something, and immediately know exactly how to get that lighting, be it 'gimmicky' or very subtle.  Even if you don't like the lighting they chose to employ, you have to recognize that talent.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 28, 2012)

Steve5D said:
			
		

> I don't refer to myself as a pro, simply because my camera's not paying my mortgage. However, I also believe that being a "pro" is more than earning money. One should also conduct himself professionally.
> 
> I got comfortable with the title "pro" once other people started referring to me as one...



HDRs pay your mortgage? I wouldn't have thought...


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 28, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> YES! Like all the Facebook PROS.. and all the MWAC PROS? Definitely!



I am a Facebook fauxtographer.


----------



## Ernicus (Jul 28, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I want to be one when I grow up.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 28, 2012)

Ernicus said:
			
		

> I want to be one when I grow up.



With luck, apparent lack of skill, and apathy, you too can become a glorious Facebook fauxtographer.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 28, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hello .. so am I now! Arrgghh! Need to work on that apathy, and color blindness though....


----------



## unpopular (Jul 28, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> Even if you don't like the lighting they chose to employ, you have to recognize that talent.



I do _appreciate_ their technical ability, I just don't really value it. I think anyone can learn technique, it's a matter of perseverance and practice. Apply technique in a meaningful way takes artistic talent and vision.



> You got it right there, but at most other points you talk about it like it's some sort of objectively terrible quality, that you can recognize, but a lot of the rest of us are confused about or something, and that we're falling for bad art, because we 'don't get it' or something.





> Whereas you like a certain style and feel, and others like a different style and feel.



This I think is where you're confused. I'm not talking about "quality" or "style" I am talking about what an image communicates, often, I think that "the pros" are limited to pretty one dimensional ideas, and quite frequently I feel that those one dimensional ideas are more about the photographer than the subject. This last part is key. What do I know about the subject?



> Additionally, what I meant by 'insanely good at lighting' is that they can see or imagine just about any way to light something, and immediately know exactly how to get that lighting, be it 'gimmicky' or very subtle.



To recap, what I am saying is that all the technique in the world doesn't do any good if it cannot be related to the subject. I may have been a little overzealous (ok I was overzealous) when placing your examples into this category, but nonetheless, the overwhelming number of self-proclaimed "pros" do fit in there.

But ultimately what I am saying here is that no matter if you "master" light, you won't be a prominent photographer. You must also have a consistent ability to paraphrase the subject in a visual vocabulary - this is true regardless of type or purpose, no matter if the subject is a clothing line represented by a model, the aspirations and dreams of potential home buyers, or a senior cheerleader at the end of the year.


----------



## Steve5D (Jul 28, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> Steve5D said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Um, that didn't make any sense...


----------



## orljustin (Jul 29, 2012)

unpopular said:


> Who cares? This "pro worship" is so ridiculous, and seems almost unique to photography. You don't see in any other hobby. You don't pick up computer programming magazines and get articles on "what the pros use".
> 
> The title "professional photographer" doesn't mean anything of substance. It's an idiotic appeal to authority, promoted by idiotic photographers.



Exactly.  Instead of worrying about getting a shiny 'pro' card to pin on their chest, just worry about producing consistent quality results and making money from satisfied clients .


----------



## orljustin (Jul 29, 2012)

To the OP, can you take that huge ad out if your sig?  My scroll button is wearing out.


----------



## sm4him (Jul 29, 2012)

orljustin said:


> To the OP, can you take that huge ad out if your sig?  My scroll button is wearing out.



:scratch: ???
You must be seeing things I don't see--the OP doesn't HAVE an ad, or even a link of any sort, in their sig.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 29, 2012)

orljustin said:


> To the OP, can you take that huge ad out if your sig?  My scroll button is wearing out.



Yeah, there's no ad in the OP's sig dude.


----------



## orljustin (Jul 29, 2012)

Sorry, not the OP.  'ernicus' with the ad for printing.


----------

