So, what makes a Pro?

K_user

PCPhoto wrote: »

Have to strongly disagree there .... press photography is not a big earner....and definately not a regular earner.....freelance press photography is about getting out there and getting pictures, getting an image and getting it into the papers... it costs money to be a freelance press photographer.....but the best part of it .....its fun ! (most of the time)

I understand that. And I was using "earning potential" as the benchmark of my argument, simply because being a professional is a business, and being in business is about earning money.

Freelance and Press photography is as cut throat as any business. The only problem is that you have to get out there and find the image, as opposed to studio work where someone comes to you - (and before anyone says it, I'm only simplifying things again for the sake of the example, I understand the complexities of marketing and advertising a studio business too! )

But as a freelance, even getting the image isn't a guarantee that you will get paid. Competition and demand are always at odds.

Going back to my original post, I could have been more specific and gone into the "demand" and "earn" potential of the various categories, but I'm lazy and it would have taken up another 5 paragraphs!

Suffice to say, that "press, freelance, weddings, family studio and paps" can earn money anywhere. But a pap will earn f**k all in Galway compared to London. A wedding photographer can potentially earn a decent living anywhere, but if there are too many others at the same thing, then profits will suffer. The same can be said of studio and freelance work etc. In that sense a photography business is the same as any other business, be it Taxi or Plumbing.

Yet being a freelance is/can be far more profitable than being a landscaper. (Again taking the local examples and not the likes of David Norton) Therefore as a business it has a much bigger earning potential. Which is what my original post was about...

Anyone can pick a photography category and devote all their time on it. They can promote it and show it to as many people as possible. Some might earn off it. But when push comes to shove, the most consistent earners and therefore full timers, therefore "professionals", are press, freelance, weddings, family studio and the paps.

(Bored yet? :P )

In the end being a professional, in anything, is about making money. But how much you are earning isn't always a reflection on how good/professional you are. But more about the choices you make and the location that you are in. And being a part time photographer doesn't make you less "professional", it just means that you are supplementing your income. Now there are many that would disagree with that idea. To be a professional means that you are just working at one thing. But you can't keep everyone happy. And most people would prefer a steady income of money, we all have mortgages/rent and mouths to feed.

And I reiterate when I say that being a professional in something like photography is more about how you view yourself. Is it a job, or is it a hobby that earns a little cash on the side.