View Single Post
21-01-12, 04:33 PM
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: England, UK
In my opinion, the term 'Photographer' refers to intent as opposed to quality. A Photographer is a person who takes photos as a means of art, though there is no line of standard. A Photographer's art that might considered sub-par though they still possess the title, which I think is entirely fair.
The distinction between Professional and Amateur is easy. I think one who has sold any amount of their art should be considered a professional, as that is the text-book definition, but we should learn to not associate high-quality with the title. I admit that I would prefer if there to be a Professional 2.0 that would require a line of standard, for example, but I don't think we strip an artist of their title just because they might not earn as much as someone else. That's primarily because a sub-par photographer might have gotten lucky with a magazine whereas this incredible photographer may be completely unknown.
When I hear about someone being a 'professional', I'm much more interested in their level of work as opposed to how much they earn. Besides, the title is often given by someone else as opposed to self-promoting, least, that's the general idea from photographers I have been in contact with.
500px Photography Work
View Forum Profile
Send a private message to ThoseCameraCurls
Visit ThoseCameraCurls's homepage!
Find all posts by ThoseCameraCurls