Beginner/enthusiast/semi-pro/professional

Sir SR

Sir SR

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,635
Name
Shaheed
Edit My Images
No
Just a bit of light hearted fun

Looked at entering a competition and it asked to describe your level of experience.

How do you differentiate between a semi pro and an enthusiast!?
 
Sir SR said:
I'll put myself down as an enthusiast!
Click to expand...

Professional = full time - I don't like the use of the word, but it does work for things like photography and the arts where people get paid to do what many do for fun. I know a lot of musicians, only a couple of professionals.

Semi Pro = again, it's twee. But it does separate those who charge for their work but aren't full time. The idea that you can charge as an amateur is counter intuitive. It's not a label I'd use, but it's a technically accurate description.

Enthusiast = someone who devotes too much time and money to their hobby, they could be gear heads who think it's all about the gear, or genuinely talented artists.

Beginner = Anything from iphone to first DSLR.
 
Phil V said:
Professional = full time - I don't like the use of the word, but it does work for things like photography and the arts where people get paid to do what many do for fun. I know a lot of musicians, only a couple of professionals.

Semi Pro = again, it's twee. But it does separate those who charge for their work but aren't full time. The idea that you can charge as an amateur is counter intuitive. It's not a label I'd use, but it's a technically accurate description.

Enthusiast = someone who devotes too much time and money to their hobby, they could be gear heads who think it's all about the gear, or genuinely talented artists.

Beginner = Anything from iphone to first DSLR.
Click to expand...

I think my wife would agree with the time/money bit!!

The longer I've been doing photography the more I realise it's less about the gear - some of the last film shots I did (IMHO) are better than some of the work I've done with a d800, 70-200vr2 and several lights. The film camera was a fraction of the cost but a lot of fun.

Don't get me wrong though, I still like nice shiny things and would love a long "wildlife" lens but that can definitely wait!!
 
Sir SR said:
I think my wife would agree with the time/money bit!!

The longer I've been doing photography the more I realise it's less about the gear - some of the last film shots I did (IMHO) are better than some of the work I've done with a d800, 70-200vr2 and several lights. The film camera was a fraction of the cost but a lot of fun.

Don't get me wrong though, I still like nice shiny things and would love a long "wildlife" lens but that can definitely wait!!
Click to expand...
You know I think you're one of the better portrait photographers round these parts.

It's never about 'the gear', but yet subtly it is. The wrong gear gets in the way of the process, and you've proved with your film kit that different gear forces you to behave differently, which had a great influence on your keeper rate.
 
Phil V said:
Enthusiast = someone who devotes too much time and money to their hobby, they could be gear heads who think it's all about the gear, or genuinely talented artists.

Beginner = Anything from iphone to first DSLR.
Click to expand...

From some of the questions I've seen from people on their first DSLR (possibly only a few weeks old) about what lenses (plural!) to buy next, I'm not so certain of this distinction between enthusiast and beginner :D.

If it's to "place" people into categories for a competition, then it's going to depend on the subject matter. As a wedding photographer, I'm a beginner (never done one, don't want to) whereas in some fields I've years of experience and hope I have acquired some knowledge if not skill.
 
Sir SR said:
I think my wife would agree with the time/money bit!!

The longer I've been doing photography the more I realise it's less about the gear - some of the last film shots I did (IMHO) are better than some of the work I've done with a d800, 70-200vr2 and several lights. The film camera was a fraction of the cost but a lot of fun.

Don't get me wrong though, I still like nice shiny things and would love a long "wildlife" lens but that can definitely wait!!
Click to expand...

Phil V said:
You know I think you're one of the better portrait photographers round these parts.

It's never about 'the gear', but yet subtly it is. The wrong gear gets in the way of the process, and you've proved with your film kit that different gear forces you to behave differently, which had a great influence on your keeper rate.
Click to expand...

My photography improved massively (I think so at least, you may disagree) when I abandoned what photographers are expected to have and carry in terms of lenses. I used to own 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 85mm. I would have a heavy bag because you know, just in case. Now, anything that isn't a wedding, I head out with a single focal length and 100% of the time it's on a film (or a couple of) body. Even if I have more than one body, the focal length is effectively the same, so no lens swapping, just between 35mm and 645/6x6 cameras.

I can't even begin to say how much better it is. Just shoot. No distractions of swapping lenses or having a screen that demands I take a look at it every shot or three. When I went on the Iceland TP trip, folk had bags of gear weighing them down and then there was the, "what should I shoot this with" train of thought. I just grabbed the camera and took photos. Wouldn't do it any differently given the opportunity again.

I know that was OT but Shaheed started it and it was his thread. :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gazmorton2000 said:
My photography improved massively (I think so at least, you may disagree) when I abandoned what photographers are expected to have and carry in terms of lenses. I used to own 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 85mm. I would have a heavy bag because you know, just in case. Now, anything that isn't a wedding, I head out with a single focal length and 100% of the time it's on a film (or a couple of) body. Even if I have more than one body, the focal length is effectively the same, so no lens swapping, just between 35mm and 645/6x6 cameras.

I can't even begin to say how much better it is. Just shoot. No distractions of swapping lenses or having a screen that demands I take a look at it every shot or three. When I went on the Iceland TP trip, folk had bags of gear weighing them down and then there was the, "what should I shoot this with" train of though. I just grabbed the camera and took photos. Wouldn't do it any differently given the opportunity again.

I know that was OT but Shaheed started it and it was his thread. :P
Click to expand...

I still have the "just in case" moments when I go out. And only ever use 25% of the stuff I take with me!!
 
Well, when it comes to gear I used to spend many times more on lighting than on anything else, simply because it makes the most difference - now of course I don't have to spend anything on it:)

And I have a total of 3 lenses for my Nikon, a wideangle zoom, a nifty fifty and a telephoto zoom, and neither of the zooms zoom very much - but I don't need anything more for the limited range of stuff that I spend nearly all my time doing, and all that I want of a lens is that it produces the quality I need - I prefer to zoom with my feet anyway.
And on the odd occasions that I do need more, a friend/colleague has an enormous collection of 'L' lenses that are all in pristine condition because he's an "enthusiast" who buys everything but uses nothing... The only downside is that I have to borrow one of his Canon cameras too, which I find a bit complicated for me:)

But I digress...
I used to be a professional, no doubt about that, but now I just do professional photography for Lencarta, so does that make me a pro, a semi-pro or what?
I do though do some personal photography, so does that make me an enthusiast?
 
sk66 said:
A professional is someone who makes money from photography (*actual profits).
The rest you can divide up any way you want, but they all "spend too much money"....
Click to expand...

I disagree. A person who makes money (actual profits) is a successful professional. A person who charges money but operates at a loss is an unsuccessful professional (if you measure success by monetary gain and financial acumen)
 
The conventional wisdom is, get paid = professional, but I dunno, I don't think you can condense what it is to be professional down to something so simplistic.
I think being a professional is much more about attitude, conduct and product, and less about money.
I suppose the question is aimed at establishing the level you're working at and calibrating expectation before judging it.
 
Sir SR said:
I disagree. A person who makes money (actual profits) is a successful professional. A person who charges money but operates at a loss is an unsuccessful professional (if you measure success by monetary gain and financial acumen)
Click to expand...
I think that specifying "profits" goes to the point that there is a whole lot more to running a "professional" photography business than just photography. And I think that might even be too generous... making a profit doesn't necessarily equate to "making a living."

Is a "starving artist" a professional artist, or are they just "an artist?"
 
sk66 said:
I think that specifying "profits" goes to the point that there is a whole lot more to running a "professional" photography business than just photography. And I think that might even be too generous... making a profit doesn't necessarily equate to "making a living."

Is a "starving artist" a professional artist, or are they just "an artist?"
Click to expand...

If they sell their art, they would still be a professional. Just crap at business.
 
Was Vincent van Gogh an amateur :thinking:? I assume from the above he was...
 
It's pretty simple, you don't have to file taxes/paperwork for a pastime/hobby... There are "professionals" and then there is everyone else (semi-pro/enthusiast/beginner) as some vague definition of amateurs. As such I like Phil's definitions in post #4.

adjective: professional

2. (of a person) engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime.
  1. "a professional boxer"
  2. synonyms: paid, salaried
antonyms: amateur

Merriam-Webster:
2a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer>

Cambridge:
B1. used to describe someone who does a job that people usually do as a hobby:
"She's a professional dancer/photographer."

("gain, livelihood, job" all mean profit/income, not loss)

There isn't really any association of talent/knowledge/skill associated, but we tend to use the terms as if there is...
I was a professional photographer, but I'm not any more even though I do occasionally sell photos and take the odd job. I am an amateur and I do photography because I want to, not because I have to. TBH, I have more knowledge/skill now as an amateur than I did when I was a paid professional (working for newspapers)... but I think my "talent" as a photographer is about the same :(.
 
These days I just tell people I'm a photographer and let that be that. I'm not sure that that's even true though. :/
 
The23rdman said:
These days I just tell people I'm a photographer and let that be that. I'm not sure that that's even true though. :/
Click to expand...
Nowadays I just tell people that I'm retired, just wish it was actually true:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top