Hate to be so cynical but it boils down to a way to get more money out of the photographer's pocket into the PPA organization. While I am a member and I do appreciate what the PPA does as far as their many programs and legal counsel. I just don't believe in the regurgitation tests to put letters after your name.
Most workshops I have attended say (PPA promoted) you can get away with being a so-so photographer, but if you are not a good marketer or business person you are toast. So what difference do the tests/degrees make if that is the reality of having a photography business? Most say you are better off being a business person who's business happens to be photography, than being a photographer with a business of photography.
Some studio/pro photographers seem to think that it will thin out the GWC's, Uncle Bob's, and give themselves more credibility. Can't say I agree at all.
Agreed, the public might get mad that the '$50 for a CD of images' guy messed up their wedding photography. But you get what you pay for and anyone hiring anyone should look at the body of work before making a hiring decision - due diligence is required when you are looking for someone to capture irreplaceable moments.
If you're a beginner and looking for some form of credibility, then it wouldn't hurt. In the world of commercial advertising, it has no bearing on your standing as a photographer.
Micky Bill wrote:
You need to update c.d. You should say that and $5.65 will get you a venti mocha low fat decaf extra hot two shot frapaccino.
Now that is funny!
Some of the best photographers I've worked with in my career haven't even been "photographers". They have been electronics technicians, forensic anthropologists, Video engineers...a label, is only that, a label.
If you feel your portfolio isn't enough to stand by itself, well. If your reputation is one that says you are a great photographer, but a real ( insert really nasty name here) well, that might by your label. I aced my Statistics final, however, that information is in the "data dump" category.
Passion and treating people with respect, all the rest should fall into place.
Hate to be so cynical but it boils down to a way to get more money out of the photographer's pocket into the PPA organization.
The certification commission is a different organization--that money does not go to PPA.
Most workshops I have attended say (PPA promoted) you can get away with being a so-so photographer, but if you are not a good marketer or business person you are toast. So what difference do the tests/degrees make if that is the reality of having a photography business? Most say you are better off being a business person who's business happens to be photography, than being a photographer with a business of photography.
I get a different message from that. They are emphasizing the importance of business to an audience that is already sold on the importance of art. Painters have to get the same speech.
To say that a good artist who is a poor businessman will starve is not the same thing as saying one should not strive to be a good artist who is also a good businessman. I've never heard anyone say, "Forget the art," and all those who are at the top are good artists.
There are some top artists who are lousy businesspeople, but have had the wisdom to employ good businesspeople.
I haven't seen anyone reach the top who is not a top artist...hacks who are good businessmen tend to flow at a lower level.
CPP for 10+ years. Not a huge benefit to business. That being said the test is not easy. Once you get down to it, most "professional photographers" don't know the answers and can't pass the test. It stands to reason that if everyone that was truly professional took the test it would elavate the professional as a group. We get enough bad press directly related to those that can't pass the test and they should not be taking images for money.
In this profession you don't have to have a license. But to get freaking haircut the hairdressers have to have a license in order to do a $20.00 haircut.
OTOH, my son just told me his buddy with whom he graduated from high school with last year is a "photographer", apparently after purchasing his first DSLR. It would be lovely to be able to differentiate 'having a camera and being into photography' from being a 'professional level photographer who is a CPP or has a Masters by asking "So your buddy has already taken the CPP exam or is he just getting into photography?" Now that I think about it, that alone is worth it.
"The certification commission is a different organization--that money does not go to PPA."
I thought dues were higher for CPP members? Mea Culpa
Do you think both of them are hacks or do you think both of them are "at the top?" I would not agree with either or those propositions.
Or do you think both are lousy businesspeople who have employed good business people?
I'm not sure of your point.
I think Annie Liebovitz is at the top but makes some bad business decisions (like what got her into her closely avoided bankruptcy), I think Thomas Kinkaide is a joke as an artist but a brilliant marketeer.
The only test that matters for a professional photographer is to walk into a meeting with a prospective client, show your work and walk out with a job. All the testing in the world will not produce a portfolio that will do this. It won't hurt to know all the answers, but in the end that is only a small part of being a professional photographer. You will also need to pass the test in marketing, business and computer science to succeed. In this economy and changing world of image production I think a photographer has to be certifiable just to be in this business!
Micky Bill wrote:
I think Annie Liebovitz is at the top but makes some bad business decisions (like what got her into her closely avoided bankruptcy), I think Thomas Kinkaide is a joke as an artist but a brilliant marketeer.
Leibovitz has had a very good agent who has made business decisions for her. She's made some extremely bad personal finance decisions, but her business is booming. I mentioned that situation.
RDKirk wrote:
Leibovitz has had a very good agent who has made business decisions for her. She's made some extremely bad personal finance decisions, but her business is booming. I mentioned that situation.
Kindaide is not at the top.
I guess I missed your point...At the "top" of what Thomas Kinkaide, as an artist/marketeer made ,millions of dollars had galleries all over the country selling his paintings to gullible collectors and until the real estate bubble burst there was a housing development in northern California building a neighborhood in the Thomas Kinkaide style...To me this is someone who although IMO a marginal artist was able to run a very successful businessto be honest I don't know if he is still in the business of marketing is art...
Annie L seems to be doing ok after the public financial and supplier/vendor problems she had. There's no real debating her talent.
more than a certification we need a representation , since we have none. A quick look at the orphan work bill story and only the NPPA went to the hill to talk (but the volume was low). Therefore we are on our own. And that's a fact.
we already need to produce a proof of our published work to get a press ID but not via our organizations but via the local Police Department .
so another fact , about us being on our own.
the problem is that we all are primadonna and don't want to be under some union-like organization, but again it's not good for us, because we have no voice.
In regard to the specific topic I don't think that this matter can be possibly confused with another organization asking more fees from us.
Here is the latest update to obtaining your CPP... if you were to pursue it. At least they have come up with what appears to be a better baseline to test people on?
I looked through the PPA site for photographers who have the CPP... and it's just my opinion... the current standards needed revamping. The work in a large majority of the sites I viewed was lacking to say the least. No.. I'm not the greatest photographer in the world... my work needs improving as well. That being said... do a search on the PPA site,...narrow the results down to CPP only and have a look at who is or has been certified. It's an interesting mix.
Good times!
Hatch
www.hatch1921.com
Important Changes to the CPP Image Submission Review
The Professional Photographic Certification Commission will institute changes to the CPP Image Submission Review, beginning with the June 24, 2011 review period.
The April 22, 2011 CPP Image Submission Review will be the last review that will not require the compulsory images. There will be no exceptions.
Beginning June 24, 2011, all portfolios (CPP candidates and re-certifying CPPs) will require the completion of a compulsory section of 6 images, showing standardized technical proficiency that all professional photographers, regardless of specialty, should know.
These images may come directly from client files or may be set up to demonstrate the technique that is required.
What are the compulsory images?
The compulsory section is comprised of 3 mandatory images and 3 elective images.
Mandatory Images
Image 1: Short lighting 3:1 ratio
This image will demonstrate proper lens selection and perspective with short lighting and a medium 3:1 lighting ratio.
Examples, based on your specialty:
Portrait Wedding Commercial Sports/Event
Closed or open loop; head shot Wedding portrait demonstrating short lighting Still life; product; food; model Individual portrait. Use of fill light or reflector to achieve 3:1 ratio.
Image 2: Broad lighting 3:1 ratio
This image will demonstrate proper lens selection and perspective with a broad lighting setup and a medium 3:1 lighting ratio.
Examples, based on your specialty:
Portrait Wedding Commercial Sports/Event
Closed or open loop; head shot Wedding portrait demonstrating broad lighting Still life; product; food; model Individual portrait. Use of fill light or reflector to achieve 3:1 ratio.
Image 3: Selective focus with minimal depth of field
This image will demonstrate how the viewer’s attention is impacted by selective focus.
Examples, based on your specialty:
Portrait Wedding Commercial Sports/Event
Creative use of selective focus. Close up Product photo; macro image Creative use of selective focus.
Elective Images 4, 5, and 6 (Choose 3 of the following)
* High Key Image
This image will demonstrate the proper technique in lighting a subject for a high key.
* Low Key Image
This image will demonstrate the proper technique in lighting a subject for a low key.
* Rule of Thirds
This image will demonstrate subject placement and organization.
* Use of Shape, Form, and Texture
This image will demonstrate these basic elements of art.
* Balance (symmetrical or asymmetrical)
This image will demonstrate the principles of balance achieved through subject size, placement, weight, or color.
* Color Harmony
This image will demonstrate the harmonious relationship of colors.
* "S" Curve Line
This image will demonstrate a "S" curve or feminine posing.
* Assertive, Angular, or Masculine Line
This image will demonstrate an assertive, angular, or masculine pose.
* Architectural
This image will demonstrate the commercial application of architectural photography. (Cannot be chosen for the portrait category.)
Submission Information
The first 6 images that you will upload will be the compulsory images. You will be provided with step-by-step instructions during the upload process for providing statements of purpose for these images. The remaining 14 images will come from your client work in the last 24 months, based on your specialty (or specialties percentages).
The CPP Certification judges will review the 6 compulsory images before reviewing the remainder of the body of work. If one of the compulsory images does not pass, the entire portfolio will not pass and the remaining 14 submitted images will not be reviewed. If the compulsory images did not pass, any feedback session will only discuss the compulsory portion of the portfolio.
Reminder: If you are seeking certification as a portrait or wedding photographer, do not submit "landscape" images. Commercial and event photographers may enter landscape images providing they were "commissioned and paid" and not images that were sold "after the fact."
sethny wrote:
more than a certification we need a representation , since we have none. A quick look at the orphan work bill story and only the NPPA went to the hill to talk (but the volume was low). Therefore we are on our own. And that's a fact.
we already need to produce a proof of our published work to get a press ID but not via our organizations but via the local Police Department .
so another fact , about us being on our own.
the problem is that we all are primadonna and don't want to be under some union-like organization, but again it's not good for us, because we have no voice.
In regard to the specific topic I don't think that this matter can be possibly confused with another organization asking more fees from us.
Actually, the PPA was very vocal on the orphan works proposal and spent years lobbying against it--something more than a "quick look" will show the extent of their involvement. The PPA has also spent years lobbying for professional associations to bargain collectively with health insurance companies to provide insurance to associated small businesses at the same rate as large corporations. And whether you like it or not, whenever Walmart or Walgreens asks for verification of copyright license before making a copy of your image, PPA is respnsible for that, too.
Truer words were never spoken 
Thomas Kinkaide, as an artist/marketeer made ,millions of dollars had galleries all over the country selling his paintings to gullible collectors and until the real estate bubble burst there was a housing development in northern California building a neighborhood in the Thomas Kinkaide style...To me this is someone who although IMO a marginal artist was able to run a very successful businessto be honest I don't know if he is still in the business of marketing is art...