What constitues a Pro/Semi-Pro/Amateur?

[DiddyDave]

Mentioned on another thread today was the point of if you sell a print does that mean you're becoming a Pro?

If no, because you just happened to take a shot that someone later decided to buy, then how often does that need to happen before you're becoming a Pro?

Example: you have a fab Lakeland Gallery of your favourite shots. You are emailed a few times by people who would like to buy a print. You add a PayPal account to the website and prints start at £10, over the next year you sell just one a month but at an average of £25 per print. The next year you sell 5 a day at £25 a time (that's then about £27,000 in a year)

Somewhere in that year you'll have changed your idea of whether you're a Pro or not - but when?

Or, as often happens - as you have a 'posh' camera a mate asks you to shoot his Wedding. You do a decent job and the family/friends of the day leads to another 2 bookings. You're doing it for sod-all money, really just for the 'experience'

Soon enough you're asked to do more but you don't want to, you were only doing it as a favour for £100, so now to put them off you say £600. Shockingly, they say 'Yes'

So now you're doing the odd Wedding, perhaps 8 a year, for £600+ a time - are you a Pro yet? A semi-Pro perhaps? Or an Amateur making a few bob on the side - but now at the expense of the Pros locally to you?

Or do you become a Pro simply when you tell HMRC you're selling your services, whether you make any money or not? :shrug:

 

[Steep]

You're a full pro if you make your living exclusively by photography. If you earn money irregularly then that's semi pro.

 

[DiddyDave]

So if you earn £30,000 as a BT engineer and £20,000 as a photographer, you're a semi-Pro

But if you earn £9,000 as shop assistant and £10,000 as a photographer you're a Pro?

Does that make sense?

 

[mmcp42]

if you give up the day job, you're a pro

 

[DiddyDave]

So money has nothing to do with it as such then, it's simply a commitment thing?

You can be a broke Pro, but a loaded (from your part-time photography work) Amateur

 

[..MD..]

i have always thought right or wrong...

a pro earns all his /her monies from photography..


a semi pro has a day time job and earns some extra money doing photography but does not need to as his /her day job pays the bills..


a amateur does not sell his/her photos " but would love to one day" [this is me by the way]

just my thoughts but this is what i belive


md

 

[whiteflyer]

i have always thought right or wrong...

a pro earns all his /her monies from photography..


a semi pro has a day time job and earns some extra money doing photography but does not need to as his /her day job pays the bills..


a amateur does not sell his/her photos " but would love to one day" [this is me by the way]

just my thoughts but this is what i belive


md

Yes thats how I understand it.

Now monkeydave you buy one of mine and I'll buy one of yours we'll both be semi pro

 

[oldgit]

Pro, is short for Professional. Which in turn means a profession, or job.

A Professional (noun): A professional is a worker required to possess a large body of knowledge derived from extensive academic study (usually tertiary), with the training almost always formalized.

Most commonly an amateur is understood to be someone who does something without pay or formal training. Conversely, a professional is someone who has received training in a particular area and who also makes a living from it. The word comes from French, and can be translated as "lover of", reflecting the amateur's motivation to work as a result of a love or passion for a particular activity. (nicked this paragraph from Wikipedia).

Just goes to back up what Mr MonkeyD said.

There's your answer

 

[DiddyDave]

Interesting OG

But where does that put the Pro who does it for the love rather than the money, and who knows enough to get by but not as much as the well seasoned club amateur (or TP member)

CT (another thread) referred to not wanting a Pro section as it could alienate non-Pros and give an elitist perception of superiority, but there are plenty of thick Pros (compared to enthused amateurs)

So although most will associate a Pro with vast knowledge and experience, perhaps the only thing worth noting is what MD said; whether the Pro is broke or not is irrelevant?

Is the 18% (grey) area then is where the amateur working part-time makes more money than the full-time Pro? :shrug:

 

[CT]

A pro photographer is one who earns his living exclusively from photography. That would be most people's understanding of the term I would think. Being a professional in any of 'the professions' also implies being well versed in your chosen field, and having a professional approach to how you conduct yourself and do the job.

Professionalism is a wonderful thing to aspire to and it's a term which shouldn't be conferred or adopted lightly.

Some of the best photographers I've ever met have just been crap businessmen, in fact the one I always considered the best I ever met, went bust and ended up driving a van. :shrug:

 

[theMusicMan]

Pro, is short for Professional. Which in turn means a profession, or job.

A Professional (noun): A professional is a worker required to possess a large body of knowledge derived from extensive academic study (usually tertiary), with the training almost always formalized.

Most commonly an amateur is understood to be someone who does something without pay or formal training. Conversely, a professional is someone who has received training in a particular area and who also makes a living from it. The word comes from French, and can be translated as "lover of", reflecting the amateur's motivation to work as a result of a love or passion for a particular activity. (nicked this paragraph from Wikipedia).

Just goes to back up what Mr MonkeyD said.

There's your answer

Not sure about this OG... some of it I agree with and some I don't.

I am formally trained as a musician, having what could be considered professional qualifications as such, and I have been paid as a Musical Director and also as a performer, but I certainly do not consider myself a professional musician. I have extensive knowledge, formal qualifications, and am recognised by my local education authority as a tutor, but I am not a professional musician.

I have also been paid for some photography work, have no formal qualifications in photography, don't have extensive knowledge of the subject - and also don't consider myself a professional photographer.

I have recognised formal Project Management qualifications, am security cleared by HM Government, I have a degree in Business Management and have made several appearances as a keynote speaker - and am readily engaged by several clients for my Project Management and consulting expertise. I do consider myself a professional Business Consultant / Project Manager.

This seems to point to income being the determinant.

 

[..MD..]

sorry change of mind

 

[DiddyDave]

I'd hoped this one would be thought provoking

MD drunk & still committed to the forum? - top man

 

[dazzajl]

Being pro is when it's your job.

Not something you also earn money from.

It does not in any way, shape or form mean you are good at it.

 

[WeddingHack]

I would disagree with the training / qualifications point, most pros I know are self taught (including myself).

It would be easy to say it's when the majority of your income comes from photography, but one of my favourite photographers has it as a second income - but he's definitely a pro.

IMHO when people are prepared to pay you money to do something, you can call yourself a professional - maybe the classification would be better as full time, part time, amateur ?

 

[mole2k]

Im sure there is people out there considered professional photographers who dont do photography full time because it would burn them out photographically.

Only speculation of course.

I've seen people who call themselves professional photographers who dont take or act professionally about photography and I know people who dont consider them professional but are professional in both their manner and work.

 

[dellipher]

Wow this is a debate and a half!!!!
I have people who think I could sell, some of my photos, but haven't yet....hehe...and some who are willing to pay for good "candid" shots of their kids....
But I'm still an amature, just one who has a creative eye.
I think when i lose my creative eye I'd stop taking photos....so maybe "professionals" [people who do it full-time] lose they're focus and being, and we'd all just be better being semi-pro's?

 

[Ratty]

Glad I could give you the inspiration for the thread Diddy

As someone who has been accused of being a pro in a certain field I'd have to say that it's not earnings related at all. I earn nothing from it right now but if I were to pick up a tool of that trade and do a job it would be done professionally, irrespective of being paid or not.


I really don't think it has an answer as it is so very subjective in it's meaning(even if it has a definition) and peoples' perceptions dictate how they see it.

 

[Woodsy]

i have always thought right or wrong...

a pro earns all his /her monies from photography..


a semi pro has a day time job and earns some extra money doing photography but does not need to as his /her day job pays the bills..


a amateur does not sell his/her photos " but would love to one day" [this is me by the way]

just my thoughts but this is what i belive


md

100% agree, and tbh, I'm the same as well!

 

[jigga1980]

I think people label you as a semi pro/amatuer if you have an SLR and assume you are great because you have a 'pro camera. Don't know if it's just me but if I turn up with an SLR everyone says "oww the paparazzi are here" or words to that effect.

Someone said the other day on about photography "jon your really good at photography" I said not really. I would say I have an eye for a photograph but skills wise i'm still very much learning. I guess when you look at some of the photos on here you see what people with good skills can actually achieve. But most people won't have so aren't aware how creative you can be both from a technical and composition point of view. Probably wouldn't be aware of the skills nessary to take such photos, or assume the camera because it's a pro one does it for you :bang:

 

[kelack]

It does not in any way, shape or form mean you are good at it.

That's me then

I've been the "official photographer" for the rugby club dinner & dance. Sell 50 photos form these but I think if they could afford it, they would pay for a pro. It's just cos I'm there a free and make money for the club. Wouldn't say I'm semi pro - thought I had to take half decent shots for that.....so I'll be the exception to the rule