Hobbyists

MarylandBill said:
Well I will be.. mmm.. Ok, I will have to think of a better example :). But sure, the activity of model railroading.

How about stamp collecting?... Well, I suppose being a dealer would make you a professional... mmmm

Well, lets just say that some activities are generally recognized as being professional and others are not... yeah that is it...

--
Bill
Click to expand...

I can't think of a profession that isn't also someone's hobby....even the world's oldest profession.:D
 
Hi,

For me the first question is who do I have to justify it to? And the answer's no one...

Amateur means someone who does it for love, from the Latin, of course, unlike commercial photographers who do it for money. I doubt if anyone gets paid for typing away on this forum, that's a good example of "amateur". Not to be confused with "amatory".

It's PR's, politicians and those wicked advertisers who are trying to turn words round so that we say "professional" when we mean "commercial" and "amateur" when we really mean "unskilled". It's something we should be resisting; like saying "obsolete" when we really mean not advertised in double page spreads in this week's copy of "Silly Knick-Knacks for the Brain Dead"...

Regards, David
 
I buy the tools I need or want. I do it 100% for the love of it, under my terms....and get paid full time to do it......does that make me an amateur with no job...?...;-)
 
For me justifying buying gear has nothing to do with my status as an amateur. I get the question in my head when I bought gear at times, when I didn't shoot pictures as much as I wanted - so it was more the uprising of the question, if I am a (amateur-)photographer or a collector. It helped to realize, that I am both because I love old mechanical things which can be used too. And I love to use my different cameras at different times. Another time I had to justify buying gear was when I suffered from GAS and spent money on gear which I could have used for other needs too - those are thoughts that might not come into mind when you are a pro and NEED some gear for work.
 
Most Olympians are amateur. Top of their field... and amateur. To me being an amateur is doing something without being paid. It doesn't speak for quality.
To be a professional, you must belong to a professional association. Doctors, lawyers, accountants etc. If you are not a member (and sanctioned by) a professional association, you are not a professional.
 
Mark T said:
. . . To be a professional, you must belong to a professional association. Doctors, lawyers, accountants etc. If you are not a member (and sanctioned by) a professional association, you are not a professional.
Click to expand...
Hardly. What about the Oldest Profession? And many so-called 'professional' associations are self-aggrandizing flim-flam.

And to frostfire90: 'enthusiast' had quite negative connotations until maybe 200 years ago.

Cheers,

R.
 
Investment in a camera is often not just an investment in the eventual images. It often leads back to an investment in the ego, to keep up with others, to boast, or to legitimise themselves. There are those that revel in buying the latest things knowing they will depreciate, simply because it shows everyone the money they have to burn. If you don't want to burn so much or justify your investment so much then you can buy used, yes.
 
nikkor-watching said:
Investment in a camera is often not just an investment in the eventual images. It often leads back to an investment in the ego, to keep up with others, to boast, or to legitimise themselves. There are those that revel in buying the latest things knowing they will depreciate, simply because it shows everyone the money they have to burn. If you don't want to burn so much or justify your investment so much then you can buy used, yes.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, there are those who DO invest in the right tools to do what they want to do, i.e. produce images that match their vision. How much are we concerned with those who are merely on ego trips?

Cheers,

R.
 
Some people have a need to justify everything. There are various reasons for that. Often has to do personal history.

When I decided to get back into photography, a boss wanted to know how I was going to justify buying digital SLR. He could not see any sense on spending money (even on a cheap entry level camera) if there was no monetary return. But this comes from a guy who grew up during the 40s and 50s in rural East Texas. His dad hewed railroad ties by hand in the woods where the trees were felled. I think his dad got 10¢ per tie. That's 10¢ for a few hours labor with an ax. Most of us today have no concept of working that hard for such a small return. This lesson on hard work and value of a dollar was ingrained in my boss, so you can see why he can't understand photography unless it has value beyond enjoyment.
 
This lesson on hard work and value of a dollar was ingrained in my boss, so you can see why he can't understand photography unless it has value beyond enjoyment.
Click to expand...

As you say, it's a generational thing. Think on this: the western economy, also more and more the world economy, is based on consumerism. People foresaw this in the 'forties and 'fifties and much was written on the evils it would bring. In the mid 'fifties, Frederick Pohl wrote a short story, "The Midas Plague", which dealt with a world in which the rich lived in small, simple houses while the poor were forced to live in mansions and consume until they dropped. It's a fun story and worth a read.

The truth at its core, though, is that our current model is transitional. Pohl foresaw the problem as its own solution. I'll let you read what I think is a very witty tale to see how he handles it.

What I think is going to happen is the death of the factory and a transition to an economy based on machines not far different from the Star Trek "replicators". We already have 3D printers which make objects as small as replacement teeth and as big as car body parts. A lot of work is going into multi material printing, with the eventual aim of 3D printers that can make more 3D printers. Once we get there, the world economy will change even more dramatically than it has over the last two hundred years.

Personally, I'm looking forward to ordering up my latest camera design, loaded with 5x7 inch film before I go to bed, ready to take out of the cooker in the morning...

:D
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
Hardly. What about the Oldest Profession? And many so-called 'professional' associations are self-aggrandizing flim-flam.

And to frostfire90: 'enthusiast' had quite negative connotations until maybe 200 years ago.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I don't know Roger. It's possible to argue common useage, or exceptions to the general rule. However, my point is that whilst an amateur acts without being paid, earning money does not necessarily make someone a professional.

I think it's important to remember that the earliest photographers (if they even called themselves that), were largely amateurs. Furthermore, an amateur is by definition doing something because they want to. They aren't getting paid for it, so they shoot what they want, when they want, how they want. Being paid to take photographs means that you lose that freedom, although I'm sure there are rare exceptions that don't need to be pointed out.

With this in mind, I would rather be an amateur photographer than a professional at any time. Irrespective of what negative connotations some professionals attach to being amateur.
 
Mark T said:
I don't know Roger. It's possible to argue common useage, or exceptions to the general rule. However, my point is that whilst an amateur acts without being paid, earning money does not necessarily make someone a professional.

I think it's important to remember that the earliest photographers (if they even called themselves that), were largely amateurs. Furthermore, an amateur is by definition doing something because they want to. They aren't getting paid for it, so they shoot what they want, when they want, how they want. Being paid to take photographs means that you lose that freedom, although I'm sure there are rare exceptions that don't need to be pointed out.

With this in mind, I would rather be an amateur photographer than a professional at any time. Irrespective of what negative connotations some professionals attach to being amateur.
Click to expand...
Dear Mark,

I had absolutely no intention of disagreeing with you about the relative merits of 'amateur' and 'professional', and indeed, I'd go further: I'd argue that when it comes to photography, there are very few professionals (in the sense of being paid) who are not also amateurs (in the sense of doing it because they love it).

My dispute was over the way that more and more trades want to call themselves 'professions', and over the definition of 'profession'. Historically there were the three 'learned professions' of divinity, the law and (later) medicine, and of 'profession of arms', or soldiering -- none of which had a single overarching 'professional' qualification or body.

Because of (what I regard as) a false reverence for the idea of a 'profession', all kinds of trades have set up so-called 'professional' bodies or organizations. Some are for pure prestige; many are 'closed shops' to make it difficult for non-members to compete in undemanding and sometimes frankly shady trades, such as selling real estate; and a few are a sort of accolade, of interest only to the more intellectually minded members of a given 'profession' who want to keep up with the latest information. As an example of the latter, my father is an Associate Member of the Institute of Marine Engineers (A.M.I. Mar. E.). It's not a qualification in any way; no employer would ever demand membership; but it shows what sort of person he is.

Cheers,

R.
 
Mark T said:
Being paid to take photographs means that you lose that freedom, although I'm sure there are rare exceptions that don't need to be pointed out.

With this in mind, I would rather be an amateur photographer than a professional at any time. Irrespective of what negative connotations some professionals attach to being amateur.
Click to expand...

I see this all the time and I just don't get it, always this focus on those who might not have the freedom you do and none on the ones who actually have far more freedom in photography than you do just so you can say you would not want to a professional photographer, a truly bizarre ritual of denial...
 
FWIW, I always think in terms of those who press the button and those who do the rest. Kodak hit the nail on the head imo.

Regards, David

PS And, doing it for a living, doesn't mean you can't take pictures for your own enjoyment, like the wife, children, cat etc.
 
As with so many things the word "professional" has been requisitioned by the marketing men in recent years. In my youth we aspired to use the Gentleman's entrance not the Players one, looked down on the sham and military athletes other countries entered in the Olympics and generally gave a higher status to the people who did things for the love of it.

In a consumer society there seems to be a necessary misunderstanding or denigration of the true meaning of amateur in order to market all this professional gear more successfully.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom