Who are we? What are you?

[vince123123]

Can I ask, does a critique need to be good in the subject matter that he is doing a critique on?

For more consideration, I refer to this post by another moderator on another issue which I think sums up this concept pretty well. Whilst the analogy may not be 100% relevant, the general idea is there. I think it might be fallacious to stipulate that a critique must achieve a standard which excels the person or work he is criticising.

The same could apply to your interest in upholding the standard of photography in Clubsnap. Just show us photos of yours which you think are good, instead of denigrating what others choose to call themselves.

 

[roygoh]

Can I ask, does a critique need to be good in the subject matter that he is doing a critique on?

For more consideration, I refer to this post by another moderator on another issue which I think sums up this concept pretty well. Whilst the analogy may not be 100% relevant, the general idea is there. I think it might be fallacious to stipulate that a critique must achieve a standard which excels the person or work he is criticising.

I don't think that's the message Streetshooter is trying to put across.

He is not saying that Deadpoet has to be as good as a professional before he can criticize others for calling themselve a professional.

DP's logic, from what I understand, is this: He feels that people who are not meeting the criteria he has set for a professional photographer are calling themselves one nonetheless, and that, according to him, is lowering the overall standard of photography (for the professionals, I presume). So DP's ranting here about that is part of his effort to uphold the standard of photography in general.

SS's response to him is that, the more effective (or maybe correct) way to uphold the standard of photography is to produce better work himself or help others produce better work, instead of ranting about what kind of photographer others choose to call themselves.

The problem I have with DP's logic is that in the first place, there is no such thing as a general standard of photography which a group of photographer must sustain. Photographer A may produce great work and earning a decent income from it, and photographer B may be producing junk but still call himself a professional. Why should the action of photographer B affect the perceived standard of photographer A? Why should photographer A be bothered by what photographer B calls himself? For that matter, why should an amerture photographer C be bothered by B?

 

[vince123123]

I have a better appreciation given the effort that you have taken to explain the point in more detail, assuming that was the point.

When I see challenges like "show me your stuff" which are unwarranted, and without proper explanation, I tend to get concerned on the way it is going.

P.S. OT - anymore Kevin's photo stories? HEHEH

I don't think that's the message Streetshooter is trying to put across.

He is not saying that Deadpoet has to be as good as a professional before he can criticize others for calling themselve a professional.

DP's logic, from what I understand, is this: He feels that people who are not meeting the criteria he has set for a professional photographer are calling themselves one nonetheless, and that, according to him, is lowering the overall standard of photography (for the professionals, I presume). So DP's ranting here about that is part of his effort to uphold the standard of photography in general.

SS's response to him is that, the more effective (or maybe correct) way to uphold the standard of photography is to produce better work himself or help others produce better work, instead of ranting about what kind of photographer others choose to call themselves.

The problem I have with DP's logic is that in the first place, there is no such thing as a general standard of photography which a group of photographer must sustain. Photographer A may produce great work and earning a decent income from it, and photographer B may be producing junk but still call himself a professional. Why should the action of photographer B affect the perceived standard of photographer A? Why should photographer A be bothered by what photographer B calls himself? For that matter, why should an amerture photographer C be bothered by B?

 

[vince123123]

Forgot to address this - I think what DP is saying (at least thats my impression of his first post) is not so much the standard of your photographs before you call yourself a professional but more of your involvement in it:

But claiming that you are a professional just because you shoot one or two weddings a year, or did a botched up photoshoot for a catalog for the company you work for during the day and only got the job because your company is too cheap, or picked up a job here or there for peanuts, does not a professional photographer make.

The problem I have with DP's logic is that in the first place, there is no such thing as a general standard of photography which a group of photographer must sustain. Photographer A may produce great work and earning a decent income from it, and photographer B may be producing junk but still call himself a professional. Why should the action of photographer B affect the perceived standard of photographer A? Why should photographer A be bothered by what photographer B calls himself? For that matter, why should an amerture photographer C be bothered by B?

 

[Deadpoet]

Let me give an analogy. I think we should uphold the standard of English used. You have some glaring mistakes in the post above, but I won't bother to correct you, because it's up to you to improve yourself in this area. How I uphold the standard of English is to make sure I (personally) use grammatically correct (and correctly spelled) English.

The same could apply to your interest in upholding the standard of photography in Clubsnap. Just show us photos of yours which you think are good, instead of denigrating what others choose to call themselves.

Please excuse my spellings and grammar. I am educated in the US, and as you know, English standard in the US is notorious. We are known not to be able to spell nor write. I promise I will try to craft this response in the best proper English I know how.

There are lots of professional photographers, who are not very good artistically, but managed to create a niche for their products and services and make good money, meanwhile there are just as many who produces brilliant images but manage to earn only a meager income from the efforts. I have no problem calling them and anyone in between professional.

To reiterate my beef, my irritation comes from people who call themselves professionals simply because they own the right equipments, may have shot a few paid assignment on the side, and cannot shoot straight to save their own lives.

By the way, I am hoping, with all the time I spent shooting, I did manage to improve a little over time. How much my work had improved and how I should improve my work, to help uphold the standard of photography is irreverent in this discussion. I could be as good as Greg Gorman, and have absolutely no effect on the damage to the standard of photography from the wannabe professional photographers.

Some of you thought my logic is off, because there is no general established standard for photography. Well, I did not start this discussion base on logic. It was based on the passion for photography and the witnessing of the lowering of the standard of photography today.

I was annoyed and irritated from wannabe professional photographers claiming that they are professional, but cannot upheld whatever minimum professional standard there is. What is this standard, as Roy had stated, we don’t know. However, we all know, professionals are held to much higher standards. And, from my observations, these wannabe professional photographers did not achieve these higher standard, but have no problem calling themselves professional photographers.

 

[AhV]

Please excuse my spellings and grammar. I am educated in the US, and as you know, English standard in the US is notorious. We are known not to be able to spell nor write. I promise I will try to craft this response in the best proper English I know how.

There are lots of professional photographers, who are not very good artistically, but managed to create a niche for their products and services and make good money, meanwhile there are just as many who produces brilliant images but manage to earn only a meager income from the efforts. I have no problem calling them and anyone in between professional.

To reiterate my beef, my irritation comes from people who call themselves professionals simply because they own the right equipments, may have shot a few paid assignment on the side, and cannot shoot straight to save their own lives.

By the way, I am hoping, with all the time I spent shooting, I did manage to improve a little over time. How much my work had improved and how I should improve my work, to help uphold the standard of photography is irreverent in this discussion. I could be as good as Greg Gorman, and have absolutely no effect on the damage to the standard of photography from the wannabe professional photographers.

Some of you thought my logic is off, because there is no general established standard for photography. Well, I did not start this discussion base on logic. It was based on the passion for photography and the witnessing of the lowering of the standard of photography today.

I was annoyed and irritated from wannabe professional photographers claiming that they are professional, but cannot upheld whatever minimum professional standard there is. What is this standard, as Roy had stated, we don’t know. However, we all know, professionals are held to much higher standards. And, from my observations, these wannabe professional photographers did not achieve these higher standard, but have no problem calling themselves professional photographers.

:thumbsup: .... now...points noted .... your views werent too hard to understand :bsmilie:

 

[tim]

A bit OT, I am try hard to find the definition of Professional Photographer in world wide web.

Quoted:

1. A professional works to receive payment for an activity (as a profession), which usually requires expertise and carries with it socially significant mores and folkways. That is to say, behaving professionally would indicate that the person's actions remain in accordance with specific rules, written or unwritten, pertaining to behavior, dress, speech, etc. By extension, the adjective professional can indicate that someone has great expertise or skill in a craft or activity.

2. (Noun) Professional Photographer - someone who earns a living by taking photos or teaching photography

3. Taken out of a book;

August 19, 2005
"Amateur" vs "Professional" Photographer: Do labels really matter?
Labels like "pro" and "amateur" don't ensure photographic results every click of the shutter. But another set of criteria does matter, to all lovers of the craft.

The word "amateur" means "someone who isn't paid for their work, or someone lacking professional skills." It can also mean "dabbler" or "dilettante" with no burning desire to achieve professional results.

But "amateur" originated from a Latin word meaning "lover, admirer, enthusiastic pursuer of an objective." That meaning, although rare, is still valid.

So if that older definition describes your relationship with photography, then you are an amateur—even if you are a pro!

Unquoted

 

[AngelZhou]

The common believe in ClubSnap

owning a

D2X = pro
D200 = semi pro
D70s = aspiring pro

owning any of these two is SUPER PRO

owning all three is DIEHARD PRO

Pick your choice, walk out from Cathy this afternoon with these cameras you can be a pro at no time.

*sigh* no wonder i'm always newbie, not even afford to be an 'aspiring pro' =p

 

[ptwong]

But "amateur" originated from a Latin word meaning "lover, admirer, enthusiastic pursuer of an objective." That meaning, although rare, is still valid.

Unquoted

I love this quote....ain't we all "lover, admirer, enthusiatic pursuer" of photography? I don't mind being an "amateur" forever....

 

[student]

I don't think that's the message Streetshooter is trying to put across.

SS's response to him is that, the more effective (or maybe correct) way to uphold the standard of photography is to produce better work himself or help others produce better work, instead of ranting about what kind of photographer others choose to call themselves.

Somehow I cannot get myself to agree with you on the way you interpreted SS's comments.

SS wrote: "Just show us photos of yours which you think are good, instead of denigrating others.......". Put in another way "do not talk bad about others, show us the good works you have done".

Pardon my grammar. Was never good at grammar.

But SS's statement appears to be past tense to me (or is it past perfect?). Not quite what you interpreted as "to produce better work" which is looking to the future.

I get the same vibes as vince123123 when I see the way the challenge was issued.

I certainly do not think DP need to show his photographs to put forth his point about the "professionals". What I am more interested is his logic or reasons to be irritated by these "professionals".

And therefore I feel that asking DP for his photographs is not something I would do.

 

[Clockunder]

Do we have to be good soccer/basketball etc. players or good actors/actresses ourselves before we're allowed to judge whether others are good players or good actors/actresses? :think:

 

[Jemapela]

I'm sure Deadpoet's observation of DSLRs being used in the current market by lesser experienced Toms, Dicks and Harrys have not been missed by the true professionals. I'm also sure that some of these true professionals are feeling hurt by this trend (although it wouldn't surprise me if they act as if they were not).

It's very logical, although sadly not always practised in the real world, that a photographer should be selected and hired based on his portfolio and not his equipment. The customer should critically and cleverly assess several photographers' works before deciding on the suitable one. It is also very likely that many customers are ignorant, hence making bad choices.

I'm not some almighty respected famous professional. Like many others, professional, amateur or beginner, I try to continually improve. At anytime should I have a customer looking at my portfolio, feeling that my work looks prettier than others', and hence resulting in my hire, then I should be happy. That's how the way the world works isn't it?

Also to add, I recall reading from somewhere that a professional (judging by income) can be said of someone who earns more than 50% of his total income by performing a trade -- I'm trying to say that the figure I read was 50%, not 100% as stated by another ClubSnap member.

 

[redstone]

I'm not replying to anyone's post here. I'll state my views.

My case....

I never took up any photography course..
First digicam was p&s Dimage Xg...

Now I got Oly SP500. But I barely know anything. I only read up short photography articles, and experiment, test my camera in different environments. By trial-and-error. Still yet to master my camera. Pictures still don't come out as I hoped. I'm still basically a newbie hobby photographer.

When I show my camera, some people think I'm very good at photography.:nono:



Think this is a misconception.
It's like saying someone who drives a Rolls-Royce is a better driver than someone who drives, say a Honda. :bsmilie:

 

[Stoned]

First, I apologise if anything seems convoluted as I'm rather sleepy at the moment.

People generally tend to refer to themselves as "pro" or "semi-pro" after just shooting a few assignments, or less! Seriously though, a label is just a label. If you're good(or shall I use great), you usually are referred to by name(for instance, Ansel Adams) and not by 'professional photographer'. I would call these famous people well-regarded(commonly) photographers as they are widely thought to be masters of the photographic craft. The term professional photographer simply refers to someone who's into photography as a profession, which may or may not mean that he's good at photography per se. Generally this would mean that the person is of some decent standard, else he would be starving and begging on the streets.

Really though, I think the problem with many "pro" photographers is the problem of humility. A good deal of us amateurs as well do think rather highly of ourselves as well and sometimes we tend to get a little cocky about our photography. Inevitably, sometimes the word 'professional'(such a loosely bandied about word really) will slip off the tongue precisely because we're always too full of ourselves. Sometimes when I meet members of this forum, especially the "pro" ones, I take the time to chat with them as well. While there are a good deal of, shall I say, working photographers who speak humbly about their craft(as it should be!), there are too many that I've met that speak about themselves like they're the queen of England.

You know what's the oddest thing? The more down-to-earth photographers are the ones that usually hold portfolios that display a masterful grasp of photography that I aspire to reach, whereas those that are stuck in Buckingham Palace are those that hold portfolios that are technically proficient, but stale.

Think about it, if you're stuck on Cloud-9, how are you ever going to rise any higher in your level of photography?

 

[Jemapela]

I really don't understand the mindset of some S'porean photographers who challenge others to show their works.

Symbolically, it sounds like asking a guy to show his prized manhood for comparison, and if it's really bigger/longer, he should be treated with utmost respect and elevated to the rank of pact leader. It's... what? Childish? Silly? (Any psychologists here who can provide an expert opinion?)

Also, some S'porean photographers also treat exhibitions and published books too seriously, and hold exhibiting/publlished photographers with shallow high regard. Really, if they knew how some exhibitions/publications were executed, there's really little prestige or no big deal. All it takes is just someone rich enough to hire the venue for exhibition or pay for 10000 copies to be printed. No exhibition visitors or book buyers is ok... as long as the exhibition happened and the books are on store shelves, there's something to brag about.

So often (with proof all over this forum), I see ClubSnap members squabbling and squabbling, and more squabbling. Come on! What's riding up your butt cracks? :think:

But I admit that this has, so far, been a good read. Applaud for Deadpoet.

 

[zhang3feng]

Come on! What's riding up your butt cracks? :think:

:bsmilie:

 

[wong1979]

Hi there, I have never gotten into a flaming talk or whatsoever. I have been following certain thread topics but never partake in them. Today, I shall be kaypoh here, pls dun mind

Quoting from DP's 1st post:
"Why are so many people, who just got their hands on a D70, a 350D, 5D or whatever DSLR they got their hands on, will immediately claimed that they shoot professionally also. I wonder whether they know what it means, what it takes, and what it is all about."

I wanna ask: Did he say that he's a full-time or part-time professional? If he only said that he shoots professionally. I see that as a good thing even if he uses any camera be it PNS or prosumers. Shooting professionally just means that he takes great pride in executing only the best shots. That's all. Simple as that.

However, still in ur 1st post. You claim that he called himself a professional. Did he said he was or you assumed it up urself?

So what if he uses a D70, 350D or anything? What has that got to do with him shooting professionally? For that matter, he could be using analog MFs or such before switching over to digital. But anyway, equipment doesn't proclaims oneself a pro automatically of course. Like many says, it's still the man behind the camera.

Of course, ur topic here is about what makes a professional photographer really. In order to further dwell into the topic as to DSLR newbie claiming to be pros n upsetting markets whatsoever, or degrading the value of photography,etc etc... pls provide the source of information (ie. the thread that made u wrote all these). You mentioned you championed free speech, yah? So I see no reason why you need to not disclose who's the person.

Because, what I'm suspecting here, is just simply miscommunication, misunderstanding of words written.

Cheers..

 

[Clockunder]

In my industry, there are institutes like CFA institute (formerly AMIR) to administer exams to test knowledge, assess experience for certification of the CFA designation (which is recognised worldwide) and set standards for professional conducts.

Unless there are similar institutes in photography, the debate will rage on and be inconclusive as long as there is no widely accepted standards with which we can base our judgement of "professionalism" on.

 

[StreetShooter]

Just to clarify (and I won't be coming back to this thread because I have better things to do), Roy's interpretation of my intention is correct.

I'm honestly not interested in viewing DP's work to see if he has any credibility for making his comments. And it certainly wasn't a challenge to him to prove that he had any right to make them. Read what I wrote again - I have not edited it.

The way I uphold good English (and yes, poor English irritates me) is not by correcting other people, but to simply use good English myself (as best I can) and show the way.

The analogy, therefore, is that if DP is interested in upholding good photography, he should be showing the way by giving examples of good photography rather than just being critical of what other people choose to call themselves.

Of course, you can uphold good English by correcting everyone else, just as you can uphold good photography by lambasting well-endowed newbies about what they choose to call themselves regardless of their photographic standards (whatever the definition of THAT might be). But that is not a good way, in my opinion, and I think DP would be the first to defend my right to my own opinion, even if he does not agree with it. Right, DP?

So, guys, you're wrong. There was no challenge at all.

 

[LittleWolf]

Maybe, loudly claimning that they are a "professional" photographer, makes them feel better about themselves. ...
But still, they are only make believe professional, professional in their own mind.

So some people might feel better if they call themselves "professionals". But you seem to feel worse if they do it - aren't you just as preoccupied with the word "professional", even if in a different sense?

In the end, why does it matter? What counts are results, not whether the respective person makes his/her living this way. "Professional" as an indication of quality or responsibility has little meaning in this day and age as many people who used the service of "professional" craftspeople like electricians, plumbers, etc. that produce shoddy work can attest.

I look at the newspaper in the morning or listen to the radio on the way to work, and there's so much utter bulls**t being spewed at the readers/listeners every day. Even news from the science scene get sexed up and distorted to grotesque extents. It's hard to believe people are so naive as to blindly believe all this crap (although I sometimes wonder when I see people regurgitate technobabble marketing speak in equipment discussions). There's so much nonsens around, why should anyone take the "professional" marketing label serious?