Your basic premise of a pro photographer is already flawed.

Selling photos does not make you a pro.

if your foto is not sellable and have no commercial value at all..u still consider pro ah...

Again your statement above is still flawed on your initial premise that anyone who sells photos is a professional photographer.

---

Added on September 25, 2007, 5:34 pmI write reviews for Lowyat.net but I am not a professional writer or a journalist. I get paid for them but does that make me a professional writer?

This post has been edited by Mavik: Sep 25 2007, 05:34 PM

why not..u r just being humble..to me u r a pro writer

Nah its not that about being humble and all.

The definition of a professional for photographers is very gray meaning its not properly defined compared to other professions such as accounting, engineering, doctors or lawyers where they have to be accredited to an organisation or body to prove their authenticity.

Check out this article by Ken Rockwell, its not exactly the most accurate but it gives good points.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/pro-not.htm

This post has been edited by Mavik: Sep 25 2007, 05:49 PM

Yes u r rite ....
there is a Title for photographer, from Diploma to PHD (available most University)
world most famous photographer society is Royal Photographic Society from UK, it open to the world and Photography Society Malaysia (PSM) is under them but current local photographer is almost forget or don't even know this society is exit ......

RPS still provide ARPS, FRPS, DRPS for those qualify photographer,that is not less then 500 ARPS title and not more then 50 FRPS holder in Malaysia ..... check this site www.kcchoophoto.com (one of the ARPS photographer use to stay in Malaysia)

What will be the photography student study ?
First Year : Understanding Negative (flim,ISO, procces,enlarger, develop, touch up, current is sensor, photoshop), Lighting (natural, force, add on).

Second Year : Colour.

Third year : Camera.

Fourth year : (choose your major, studio, Building, Wild, natural, event, Journal) then go understand what is it ......

You think those so call photographer will spend 5 year to study all this to become a PRO or they can spend rm 20k to buy all the pro equipment to show they are PRO ?

A pro photographer will tell you why, how and 100% understand what they take ....
example : A lot ppl like to take dragon fly but do they understand dragon fly ? how fast the wing swing ? how to different it (color, culture, attitude), no they only come out the question : why my dragon fly wing always blur ? answer : my lens no sharp, camera not good, shutter not fast, other brand better .....
Pro answer : let the pro to answer here


Sorry i'm a bit out off topic ....

wah well explain...

My opinion..

A professional photographer is not a photographer who can sell his photos. I would say, the photographer is tagged with the professional status when his name and works are recognized and well known by the people in the industry.

put it this way la. great photos have monetary value.

whether or not the photographer decides to sell them, it's up to him/her.

i believe the may and may not sell them is subjected to interpretation.

a pro can pain the feeling onto the photos. making money from shooting doesn't mean that he is pro

what is defined by making money here?

some people are just having monthly payroll. they just shoot what they can, like some person who works at a carnival manning a photo booth.

others on the other hand, sell their pictures. for such people, they HAVE to be skilled to know what are the money making shots.

some people snap great shots that are worth $$$ but they don't sell, does that not make the pro?

from first time looking at the fella, with full gears, carrying big bag.. u will say.. whoaa.. damm pro wei that guy.. but later, seeing with good pictures only will say pro..

from the way i see la.. hahah

option 5 for me. and seems like most of us here opted for option 5 despite all the "u sell photo doesnt make you pro" talks here.

in my opinion,
'pro' doesnt mean yu should have working in studio// photography firm// sell photos// else.

'pro' is the way PHOTO is look like when its captured ((=

i think that pro means can take well picutre and get his or her picture can impress people....thats all
hahah

errr newbie incoming

i think what define a pro photographer is the person who
can express our world that our human eyes cant see.
just like looking at the sun from a different perspective,
or doing something else entirely different. its freaky yet interesting

just my saying lar

OPTION 2 for me

my point of view

a PROFESSIONAL is someone who earns his living from photography - it is his CAREER, not a hobby, not as side-income, not an opportunist being in the right place at the right time being the only person capturing the only photographs of a world-changing event which he then sells to the media.

Having said that, and in respond to the example of a carnival staff being assigned to snap holiday pics using polaroid to be sold...
there are GOOD professional photographers and LOUSY professional photographers

I know i will not be very popular by saying this...
but as long as your rice bowl is NOT photography... you're not a professional photographer.

You might be a very good hobbyist photographer, but you will not be considered a professional photographer.

I think many people fail to remember the rule of thumb for any professionals, that's why there is NO CLEAR DEFINITION of a professional photographer... simply because there is no need ... if you earn a living taking photographs, you're a so-called "professional" photographer... or simply put, you're a photographer.

you don't see the labels professional singers, professional soccer players do you? either you're a singer.. or you're not...
let me give everyone some parallel example to put things in perspective...
(i) you can have a great voice and put many of the so-called singers these days to shame, but all you ever do is wow your friends and peers during karaoke sessions... can you call yourself a "professional" singer? (ii) you're a really good soccer player, in fact your technique and skllls might far surpass the greatest soccer player in the world... but if you don't make a career out of playing soccer, can u call yourself a professional soccer player?

similarly, you can take beautiful and great pictures, or even consistently take the best photos the world have ever seen... but if you're not making a living out of photography, then you cannot call yourself a "professional" photographer. you can call yourself a very extremely good photographer tho'

These days, anyone and everyone who holds a camera and take a lot of photos as a hobby is claiming themselves to be photographers. And the practice gets so common amongst the hobbyists photographers, fueled by forums where all these hobbyist photographers congregate... that they start claiming to be photographers and patting each other's back and calling each other professionals... just because they take lots of good photos. let me ask you... if you go sing karaoke everyday during your free time because you like to sing, and you're good at singing... can you claim to be a singer?

----
option 1 is not accurate... as example has been given... if i happen to be able to sell just one photo in my entire life (someone who makes ANY AMOUNT of money out of photography, even if it's just that one time) ... i can;t be considered a professional photographer.

option 3 actually fits the description, but is too limiting in its context, cos there are many professional photographers who don't work in studios or photography firm, eg photo-journalists.

option 4... i don't think i need to go into that, everybody knows that the equipment does not make the man. Otherwise i can buy a grand piano and put at home, but can't play for shit, and call myself a professional pianist

option 5... a photographer that takes great photos... is simply a great photographer until and unless he makes a career out of it, he cannot call himself a professional... see my examples of singers/soccer players/pianist for my argument.
----

as for skills... just as there are lousy singers who can't sing for shit, and lousy soccer players who can't play for shit... there are also good/great professional photographers and professional photographers who can't take a decent photo.

----
someone mentioned that photography is an art... to the hobbyist, photography is an art... yes... but to a professional photographer... photography is a science. there are too many examples, i could go on and on... i'll just mention a few...

take news photography for example... those of you who cover events where there are press photographers will be able to relate to this.. the hobbyists will take many photos... the press photographers will always take only one or two shots... the important shots that will make it to the newspaper the next day... sure, your photos might be great, nice, beautiful, everything correct... but why isn't your photos published in the newspaper the next days (even if you were to sell it to the newspaper)... simply put... yours is an expression ... an art... while for the press photographer, it is a science... eg. get the VVIPs and VIPS in the picture shaking hands with the event text and background / backdrop clearly seen... compared to your photos, it will be dull and not exciting... but it gets the job done

i'll give another 2 examples... many of you here shoot events like F1, Japan GT, MotoGP... what are the photos u take? cars after cars, racequeens after racequeens... i have yet to see someone posting a photo of the winning car / bike crossing the winning line with a marshal waving the chequered flag in the background somewhere... or photos of the 3 winners at the podium, or even a phoo of the winner holding the trophy or being presented the trophy... if you're a professional photographer covering the event, those will be the shots u cannot afford to miss.

one last example regarding art vs science... you guys take photos at PC Fair... if i'm PIKOM... what photos do u think i'll want from you? i don't need all the booth babes photos... yes, those are very pretty girls and nicely taken photos... but what i'll really want are photos of the crowd (to show how successful it is)... photos of some of the special booths maybe....
----



actually... "a person who takes great shots, having great understanding of photography technics and vast knowledge in photography BUT not doing it as a profession (making a living)" can be called a good/expert photographer

u can use the term "amateur" for someone who is new in photography, or who points and shoots but does not go into great length to understand photographic techniques.

owwww, it hits me hard coz i am dedicated to photography and still new about it.
but i call myself a beginner i dont know where my mistakes are coz
the lack of comments given. i am sure i got lotsa stuff to still learn about.
thats why i go here, this thread is my no.1 source for learning photography.
i avoid comment them other pictures because i still dont know whats
the problem with mine

This post has been edited by MR.Shiney: Dec 12 2007, 11:45 AM

haha... no worries... you shouldn't take it the hard way... there is no negative connotation to the word amateur

amateur [noun]is defined as...

from dictionary.com -
1. a person who engages in a study, sport, or other activity for pleasure rather than for financial benefit or professional reasons. Compare professional.
2. an athlete who has never competed for payment or for a monetary prize.
3. a person inexperienced or unskilled in a particular activity: Hunting lions is not for amateurs.
4. a person who admires something; devotee; fan: an amateur of the cinema.

from American Heritage Dictionary -
1. A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.
2. Sports An athlete who has never accepted money, or who accepts money under restrictions specified by a regulatory body, for participating in a competition.
3. One lacking the skill of a professional, as in an art.

from WordNet -
1. someone who pursues a study or sport as a pastime
2. an athlete who does not play for pay [ant: pro]

from Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary (Beta Version) -
1. a person who takes part in a sport etc without being paid for it
Example: The tennis tournament was open only to amateurs.
2. someone who does something for the love of it and not for money
Example: For an amateur, he was quite a good photographer.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/amateur

There is one pro in his mid 50 age said keep constant casual chat while taking those model's photo. Good take will eventually appears.