I'd like to know what defines "Amateur"
:P


I'm going to start considering myself a professional amateur photographer.

Why not apply the actual definition to the term 'photographer'.

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 workplace2 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>3: following a line of conduct as though it were a profession <a professional patriot>

As you can see being a professional is not as clear cut as many make it seem.

Defintion a professional as a noun (as in someone who is a professional): (Websters)

"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>"

Definition of a professional as an adjective (as in someone who conducts themselves as a professional): (Websters)

(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 (3): following a line of conduct as though it were a profession"


A professional photographer would therfor most likely be defined as someone who makes most of their living with their camera, and would enter "photographer" when answering the question "what is your career?". The gear would not matter, nor how they conduct themselves.

An amateur would most likely be someone who makes their living primarily by another profession, but derives some of their income from photography. Again, gear and conduct would not matter.

I define myself as a "hobbiest", even though my images are sometimes used in brochures, catalogs and a website. I earn no money with my gear.

My great aunt ran a bordello near Colorado Springs in the early 1900s that was literally burnt to the ground by torch-wielding townsfolk. My cousin has one of the few remaining relics, a sign that was damaged but not destroyed. It's long and looks like it probably hung over a doorway. The hand-painted lettering reads (and I'm editing for those with more delicate sensibilities):

An amateur will (have sex with) you for free
A whore will (do it to) you for money
A professional will make you feel like it was money well spent!

There's a fourth line, gone forever, that's the subject of much speculation in my family. Only the tops of two letters are visible, a B, R, or P, and an E. Anyway, that's what always springs to my mind when I think about the difference between an amateur and professional (and that ugly middle ground no one likes to admit to, but we all fall into on occasion).

Wait, the first line is actually An amateur will (have sex with you) for love. I had to call my cousin to check.

This is an easy one..... You get paid!

According to some, "professionals" are those of us who actually use tripods. To others, it's the size of your equipment that matters (take that one where you will). With all due respect, I think these definitions are at least as poor as "you get paid for it."

Should we require entrance exam scores? Multiple degrees and certificates? Periodic reviews of your body of work to retain your "professional" title? I think most people would insert an expletive before the word "no" when they respond.

Although I've wondered about the definition before (some places don't want "professional photographers" to shoot; other places or services require you to be a "professional photographer"), I've come to the conclusion that in this case, you can be everything that you want to be simply by declaration. That's one of the beauties (and at the same time, one of the pitfalls) of art, is it not?


Cheers!

Canon describes a Professional photographer as someone who derives 50% of his/her income from photography, and someone who can join CPS....go figure

...the black plastic version is the Pro version...

...no, wait, the silver colored plastic version says Pro on it...

...no, wait, the matte dark gray plastic version says Professional on it and costs more...

...no, wait....

Once advertising, PR and the media have taken over a word, it becomes simply a meaningless perversion that nobody trusts anymore.

I'm not an amateur photographer, I'm an unprofessional photographer

to the OP i say other. their work stands as testimony in and of itself of their professionalism. when one has acquired the skills of a master photographer you have earned the right IMHO to be called a professional photographer.

I'd rather call them a master photographer. Professional often implies less mastery but more business sense. It's the same way in the music word. The finest artists are not professional and many of the professionals are not artists.

John Power wrote:
What defines "Canon Gear Forum"?

"Canon Gear Forum: noun; 1. a bulletin board for the discussion of camera
equipment manufactured by or for the Canon camera system; 2. an online community
in search of boxes for the Canon EF 50 f/1.0L lens."

Robert got it right.

Profess - to claim
"He professes to be a liberal, but everything he does is up-tight conservative."

Professor - one who professes
"My professor lectured us on the Amazon basin today, but quite frankly I don't think he has ever been outside of Hoboken."

Professional - the product of what someone has professed
"I thought I was paying for professional work, but all I've got here is a hack job."

...at least you know that a photographer is one who takes photographs.

Grognard wrote:
What defines a professional photographer? Is it:

1) 100% of your income from photography?

Sure...

2) Any paying gig you can get?

Not necessarily...

3) Use of "Pro" equipment?

Nope

4) Selling a photograph?

Nope

5) Attitude, marketing, and more attitude?

I don't know about attitude... but marketing and commercial skills... for sure

6) Amount of gear?

Nope

7) People pay you for THIS?

Yep

8) Or something else?

Well... when looking at it commercially... it is about: earning a living from it, having clients, running a business, marketing, survival, competition, etc...

When looking at it artistically... even a pro can produce shit... and even an amateur can make brilliant work

the way i would define a pro is this; a person's whose lively hood is affected by their career/hobby.

Pro to me is... someone who makes a living off photography or


Someone who knows the technical ins and outs of photography.


Everyone else are just well heeled enthusiasts.

patriot wrote:

Defintion a professional as a noun (as in someone who is a professional): (Websters)

"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>"

Definition of a professional as an adjective (as in someone who conducts themselves as a professional): (Websters)

(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 (3): following a line of conduct as though it were a profession"


A professional photographer would therfore most likely be defined as someone who makes most of their living with their camera, and would enter "photographer" when answering the question "what is your career?". The gear would not matter, nor how they conduct themselves.



Whoa, how can you quote an authority, then say "therefore" and conflict with the definition you had just cited?

The source you quoted did not indicate "most" of their living and it did indicate that "how they conduct themselves" matters.

Do people in other professions have to justify their financial existence/professional competence based on a dictionary definition, or let an agency like the IRS qualify you? Call yourself whatever you like. If you get your "title" wrong, it doesn't matter, does it?

Barry Pehlman wrote:
Do people in other professions have to justify their financial existence/professional competence based on a dictionary definition, or let an agency like the IRS qualify you? Call yourself whatever you like. If you get your "title" wrong, it doesn't matter, does it?

Not to yourself anyway... To clients it may matter though

RDKirk wrote:
patriot wrote:

Defintion a professional as a noun (as in someone who is a professional): (Websters)

"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>"

Definition of a professional as an adjective (as in someone who conducts themselves as a professional): (Websters)

(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 (3): following a line of conduct as though it were a profession"


A professional photographer would therfore most likely be defined as someone who makes most of their living with their camera, and would enter "photographer" when answering the question "what is your career?". The gear would not matter, nor how they conduct themselves.



Whoa, how can you quote an authority, then say "therefore" and conflict with the definition you had just cited?

The source you quoted did not indicate "most" of their living and it did indicate that "how they conduct themselves" matters.


Not sure that contradicts the definition when used as a noun ... the definition says "participating for gain or livelihood", which could imply all or some of one's income. My opinion on that would be "most", but not all. A professional football player, for example, derives most of their income playing football. But they can earn a sizable part of their total income from endorsements, appearances, etc.

The OP's question covers both noun and adjective use of the word "professional". I'll hold with my definition of a "professional photographer" as stated above.

However, using "professional" as an adjective, I'd say has no bearing on the noun use of that same word. In other words, being a "professional" at something in the sense that it is someones career does not ensure that that person will always conduct themselves in a "professional" manner.

Barry Pehlman wrote:
Do people in other professions have to justify their financial existence/professional competence based on a dictionary definition, or let an agency like the IRS qualify you? Call yourself whatever you like. If you get your "title" wrong, it doesn't matter, does it?

Not dictionary definition - but sometimes a dregree

Gochugogi, "I'd rather call them a master photographer. Professional often implies less mastery but more business sense. It's the same way in the music word. The finest artists are not professional and many of the professionals are not artists."

agreed.

R.H. Johnson II
Master of Light Studios SOS

Why is there so much anxiety surrounding the status of "professional" on this board? This topic comes up every few weeks & always generates several pages of comment.

Just by itself the definitions "pro" and "amateur" don't mean a lot. There are amateurs who take interesting pictures, there are amateurs who take boring pictures, there are pros who take interesting pictures, and pros who take boring pictures.

"Pro" and "amateur" are fairly unhelpful definitions. I would just suppose that on average a pro photographer would make a much higher proportion of their income from image sales, but where the cut off point comes who knows.

Why is there so much anxiety surrounding the status of "professional" on this board?

Most of us would be drawing stick figures if it weren't for digital cameras. It's so easy to be a pro too, or at least think you can be a pro if you didn't have the other damn day job. Everybody who makes super sharp pictures of their kids, or a made-for-camera landscapes, or a picture of a semi-clothed girlfriend is in the game... they just want to know if they really qualify.