The "Ugly" Business of Photography

ohkphoto

Snow White
Since the "pro" vs "amateur" discussion has reared its ugly head, I wanted to address it here briefly.

There is only one difference between pro and amateur: one runs a business and the other does not. Nothing to do with quality, knowledge, or expertise in photography.

One of the most rapidly evolving and most controversial areas in the pro photography world is copyright and licensing. I'm posting a link to an excellent discussion about this topic that anyone who sells or wants to sell their images needs to listen to. And if you find the content dry and boring, it's probably a good indicator that you should not go into the business part of it, or hire yourself someone to do the business part.

Two quotes rose to the surface for me:

1. a more creative society is a more sane society.

2. I'm not just a photographer. I'm also a business person. And if I don't put the black ink to paper, then all I have is an expensive hobby.

Keeping Our Rights and Sharing Our Work
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
Interesting video...I was watching it this afternoon as well. Chase Jarvis is awesome, and is one of the "good guys" in my book when it comes to working pros. I mention him in a blog post I'm writing, which is very relevant to this topic as well.
 

fotojack

Senior Member
I found this very interesting, and thanks for the link, Helene. A huge amount of poignant and valid points. I forget the lady's name that was on the panel, but she was all over the place with her comments! Hard to follow her reasoning on many points. Anyway, besides what she was trying to say, I found the rest of it most interesting. None of it applies to me personally, because I don't plan on making money with what I do, but nonetheless, a most interesting discussion.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
I enjoyed reading your blog Anthony, very interesting. I really like the subscription concept, a photographer on retainer essentially, I would think there is alot of potential if marketed correctly. Also liked the website you have your blog on, your business one seems kinda dry (just an observation, not to be critical). It is ashame traditional film photography has gone by the wayside (although there is still a small nitche market for this art form), but it's survival of the fitest now and the old ways must yield. I'm raising my wedding rates to three cases now!
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
I certainly appreciate the comments. And yes, the business site still needs some attention. I designed them both, but the personal site is much more "me".

I agree on the subscription pricing model. It will be interesting to see if time share pricing leaks into the photography market.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
Since the "pro" vs "amateur" discussion has reared its ugly head, I wanted to address it here briefly.

There is only one difference between pro and amateur: one runs a business and the other does not. Nothing to do with quality, knowledge, or expertise in photography.

One of the most rapidly evolving and most controversial areas in the pro photography world is copyright and licensing. I'm posting a link to an excellent discussion about this topic that anyone who sells or wants to sell their images needs to listen to. And if you find the content dry and boring, it's probably a good indicator that you should not go into the business part of it, or hire yourself someone to do the business part.

Two quotes rose to the surface for me:

1. a more creative society is a more sane society.

2. I'm not just a photographer. I'm also a business person. And if I don't put the black ink to paper, then all I have is an expensive hobby.

Keeping Our Rights and Sharing Our Work

I think you hit it right on the head! There is no quality or expertise standard in the photography trade for one labeling themselves a "pro". The "pro" that did my wedding, although highly recommended, did a terrible job. I think some type of industry accreditation would go a long way in weeding out the pro-wannabies. Perhaps if an organization of professionals established quality standards, someone labeled a "pro" would have credibility and be held to a base level of quality by the organization accrediting them. A degree or expensive equipement (like my wedding photograher) creates an image of professionalism, but it is no guarantee of professional results.
 
Last edited:

Browncoat

Senior Member
There is no quality or expertise standard in the photography trade for one labeling themselves a "pro".

I believe that is one of the issues this industry faces. There are several organizations out there (ASMP comes to mind) who have their own criteria for judging quality. Some are fairly stringent, others simply require a membership dues to obtain their "certification". There is little protection for the consumer, and there is no unifying badge of honor. They're all just about equally worthless to the general public.

The auto industry was faced with this problem in the late 80's. As you can imagine the number of suppliers to the auto industry is immense, yet there was no standard. Enter ISO 9000. I'll spare everyone the details of ISO (International Standards Organization), but basically this certification is a true, unbiased standard of quality and business practices. Different industries custom tailored this standard to their own applications (the auto industry uses QS 9000). I don't see any reason why photography couldn't do the same.
 

fotojack

Senior Member
Cynram (although I don't believe that could possibly be your real name ;) ). I can agree with you 100% on the standards aspect, although what you said later on in your post poses another conundrum.
"Perhaps if an organization of professionals established quality standards...". My question would be............who would determine who these professionals would be? See what I mean here? Even if an organization sprang up and called themselves the International Organization of Professional Photographers, who decided that? One guy? A group of photographers? What made them professionals in the first place? And how would they decide who and how to certify? What would the criteria be? Would anyone care?
I don't think it's going to be an easy task to solve this problem of who's a pro and who's not. Should be interesting to see how this all plays out.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
Therein lies the trick in all of this, Jack. And largely why this industry finds itself in such a mess right now. Everyone wants to be the top dog. It happens in all industries...let's look to the NFL for example:

In 1920 representatives of several professional American football leagues and independent teams founded the American Professional Football Conference, soon renamed the National Football League.

While currently united under one banner, it wasn't always so. At one time, there were several different professional football leagues in America. I can name at least a dozen very different markets where this very thing was an issue at one time. The major difference is, they united and became better for it. The photography industry seems to be content with maintaining a rift for whatever reason. Until the powers that be can get over themselves and realize the damage they're causing as a whole, the mess continues.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
Jack- You can call me Rick, or "hey you"- just don't call me all those names my wife calls me :).

I think it's a matter of evolution, as Anthony touched on with other trades. If one of the groups Anthony mentioned would step out in front and take the risk of creating standards (and enforceing them) the group as a whole would benifit (and so would the customer). One of these groups needs motivated members to lead the charge and take the risk of loosing poor performing members (substandard pros by their criteria). Once industry standards are established the consumer will seek those out which are in compliance.

But who?? It's going to have to be young intuitive pro's like Helene and Anthony.

I think this is an exciting time for photography, there is a huge opportunity for change with Digital comming of age. I think eventually the "pro" seperation will happen by either "pros" realizing they are destroying each other or consumers demanding a higher level of service/expertise. The "pro" needs to distingush themselves and offer services and results a part time semi-pro amatures cannot. I'll never have the time, knowledge and drive to accomplish what pro's like Helene and Anthony are creating and can offer, so old washed up darkroom guys like me will eventually fade away. I'd be content to sell a few prints online to supplement my social security which will dry up the day before I retire.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, there are people who walk into Costco, pick up a kit camera, and start advertising themselves as "pro" ___________ photographers. They undercut people like me who are just starting to build clientele, because they don't have the:
1. Business license
2. Insurance
3. Gear (most with kit lenses, not f/2.8 and f/1.8 quality lenses)
4. Business overhead (advertising, business cards, brochures, etc.)

But, in this economy, people are going to go with the cheaper solution. I've met a couple of people like that, and they even admit some of their work is stolen off the internet - just so they can make an extra few hundred bucks...

My pricing reflects what I need to get in order to make a modest profit off my work until I have enough of a client base, and a large enough portfolio of work in order to justify raising my rates.
 
Top