Making Money , interesting read, and comments


PG

Link Posted 09/03/2010 - 19:44
My day job is as a software engineer, so I'll use an analogy from software engineering.

Photographers complain that digital cameras have lowered the bar and allowed everyone to be a "photographer". This is like a software engineer complaining that cheap digital computers and the availability of free software like Linux coupled with excellent development tools that are available for free has cheapened their products. Practically anybody today can pick up a computer programming book and start cranking out commercial grade software. After all you are using the same equipment that the professionals use, so what's the problem?

The problem is that you need to be disciplined enough to commit to learning the craft. This applies to software engineering, it applies just as well to photography. You can't just pick up the camera and expect to be producing excellent photos over night. Hours and hours of time has to be invested before you become proficient. Some say that there is a 10,000 hour rule - you need to invest 10,000 hours into learning something before becoming an expert at it. This definitely applies to photography.

Take a look at any software company. What percentage are engineers? If you took a quick survey of the major software companies, you'd find that roughly 20% of the workforce comprises of software engineers. That's because there's a lot more to successful business than just focusing on your core product. How much time do you think a professional photographer spends taking photographs versus the time they spend doing other things (i.e. the boring stuff) like meeting clients, marketing themselves, producing prints/albums, various admin work?

What separates the professional from the amateur is the amount of work they put into the boring stuff. An amateur will not be able to offer the kind of service and support that a full time professional can. In weddings, the amateur delivers the images on a CD or on standard prints. The professional meets up with the clients after the event, and goes through the process of arranging the album with them. The amateur struggles to build working relationships with clients as they have a separate full time job to attend to.

So no, I do not think that the professional photographer has anything to worry about. They have to adapt, but then that's just like any other industry.
PhilipGoh.com - Wedding and Portrait Photographer

paulgee20

Link Posted 14/03/2010 - 22:39
Digital is a 'development' which allows manipulation. This is from an old thinking 'Purist'

However, I as all people, am never too old to learn or develop with time/technology. I have learnt however that a 'a fair to good shot' can be made into a far better shot. So in that respect digital technology cant be that bad.

Also from our 'basic' mistakes and learning curves, digital will makes us improve and develop our basic techniques.

Paul
K5's (2)both gripped, K10d gripped, Pentax 28-90 f3.5, Sigma 18-250mm, Sigma 150-500mm. Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro, Sigma 10-20 f.4-5.6.EX DC, Hoya 135 f2.8, Take on 28mm f2.8 Pentax AF360 flash, 2 fill in slaves. 30 metre remote release, Rt angle viewfinder, Giotto NOT 3261B Tripod with Manfrotto 808Rd4 ball head, Manfroto 4861RC2 monopoly, shoulder stock, various filters etc, Panasonic SET HBS HD Video cam, Tamrac Explorer 8x backpack and a sore back.....
-------------------------------------------------------
Photography is an index for measuring futility and pride.......

Paul

:wink
http://s743.photobucket.com/home/pg20_photos/index http://www.flickr.com/photos/pg20
Last Edited by paulgee20 on 14/03/2010 - 22:40

edumad

Link Posted 15/03/2010 - 11:07
The article makes a very good point, of making the disadvantage and advantage. The abundance of new wannabe pros into and abundance of pupils for example is a great one.
TWAPSI Blog
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.