What makes a pro?

[Brian K]

Brian, you illustrate perfectly my point (although have you heard of Tom Grill ?). Now how do you call someone who makes his living by licensing stock photography at the exclusion of any assignment ?

QT, I don't determine whether someone is a professional by how much money they make with photography. I know a few amateurs who can produce professional quality work on demand whenever they want, and I have known professional photographers who were unprofessional and were only as good as their assistants that day. Believe me I've met many of those. And even some of the very well known are incapable of producing even the most rudimentary image without nearly all of the photographic work being done by others.

As for Tom Grill, I looked up his work and he seems to mostly do stock people work. The very generic kind, that does have a fairly large market. I know that many of the stock agencies have lists of images that have been recently asked for and they send those lists to photographers who may choose to shoot them on spec. I don't know how Tom Grill works, but he may very well work that way. Working purely on assignment with a deadline, high end clients with vast experience at assigning photography milling around and large amounts of money at stake tends to separate the men from the boys. Believe me when the client you are working with that day spent the previous week working with someone like Irving Penn you know the bar is set high.

Brian Ellis, you know of clients who buy their photographers equipment?!!! About equipment. An amateur only has to have the gear that they want. A pro has to have the gear that his client's images require. A pro with any sense has redundancy with all his gear, what if the deadline is tomorrow, it's midnight and your camera or lens or strobe pack breaks?. I had to have enough gear to be able to set up 4 complex LF sets simultaneously. Four Sinars all with auto ap or expolux shutters, redundant lenses, 4 camera stands, and enough lighting, light stands, clamps, reflectors, fill cards, etc. I would have much preferred to have that money in my pocket. An amateur has that choice, I didn't.

[Robert Oliver]

The difference is marketing. Jobs usually happen because a photographer labors to get his/her name out there and the right person at the right time notices. Once the name is established it is much easier to get more work. It's just like all great photographs are made when skill and preparation meet luck.

Some very mediocre photographers make a great living because they market themselves very well.

Some very talented photographers don't get work becuase they don't.

(I spent the last 15 years as a "professional" before retiring to go after a teaching credential/degree)

[Oren Grad]

Pro = someone who uses his cameras too much.

Yesterday I got back a Pentax LX that I'd sent to Pentax for an overhaul. The fine print on the invoice says that the warranty on the repairs is only six months, instead of Pentax's usual one year, because the LX is considered a "pro" product.

[roteague]

Some very mediocre photographers make a great living because they market themselves very well.

Some very talented photographers don't get work becuase they don't.

Like: http://www.douglaspeebles.com/

Some would consider his work excellent, some mediocre. Different opinions of the same persons work. The point is that there is room for all types.

[QT Luong]

Why so many people want to equate professional photography and assignment photography while there exists two different words in the English language ?

[Jim Hunter]

Why so so many people want to equate professional photography and assignment photography while there exists two different words in the English language ?

And what about technical and scientific photography or service photography like portraits and weddings. There are many "professionals" in those fields as well. Professional photography as a whole has many sub-specialties just like many other professions.

[QT Luong]

BTW, Brian, since you didn't do so, I'll answer my question myself. Roger Ressmeyer (a "man" by your criteria) calls them "professional amateurs". Enlightening, isn't it ?

[Steve J Murray]

To me a professional photographer is simply one who gets paid for photographing something, whether its a wedding, machine parts for a catalog, portraits, architecture, etc. It often has little to do with artistic ability or creativity, and more to do with having the skill and knowlege to do what it required by the hiring party, and to do it in a timely fashion, and within certain cost paramaters.

[Kirk Gittings]

By that definition, which is the most common of course, I know a few "professional" photographers who do not do professional level work.

[squiress]

... I know a few "professional" photographers who do not do professional level work.

I would venture to say they probably won't be pros for a very long time. Even the IRS says you have to make money three out of five years in order to claim deductions. Without satisfying customers, it's unlikely they will survive.