Professionalism.

[zollo]

[QUOTE=Scotty72;641967]

Yes, but you are totally missing my point (as does Kiwi a few posts up)..

If a radiologist /radiologist does sloppy work - people can die.
If a barrister does sloppy work - innocents can be imprisoned - or the guilty can walk.
If a teacher does sloppy work - educational opportunites can be lost forever.
If a photographer does sloppy work - a bride can burst into tears.


I have deliberately put these into a sliding scale of 'who cares-ness'.

I would contend that the first two are of absolute importance to society and the consequences of mistakes in these areas can be very grave - requiring govt regulation, licencing etc. The community would expect this.

The third, this is perhaps more of a grey area... there would be less agreement about whether a teacher can destroy a young life - or the young life gets over the one bad teacher and moves on.... still - I think most would expect some regulation.

The last, really - who cares? Is this an area in which the heavy hand of govt has any business in? It is 'he said - she said'. If you have an issue you can a) get over it or b) take it to Judge Judy. No life is going to be ruined.

So, sure - join a body - improve... but to call for regulation? To call for complusion to join? It is clearly a ridiculous idea that presupposes photography as 'nationally or vitally important'.

People, it is not! Get over it!

Scotty

who cares?
a) well if you run a business as a photographer then you will care. it is your income, livelihood, basically a matter of a quality life or a starving artist life. bankruptcy or loss of homes are pretty important to most people.

b)so if these peak bodies can instill a sense of security in the public that their members will keep to a certain standard, then more power to them. If you choose not to display that logo because you dont believe the bodies mean a thing - it is entirely your choice. And best of luck convincing smart customers that your work exceeds all those who do have the logo. also when you are charging the sums that i have seen for photoshoots $50,000 plus, good luck convincing clients with a portfolio of family member portraits, no papers, no peak body memberships etc.

[zollo]

I've produced plenty of tenders for Gov, State and Federal and the abscence of the "piece of paper" has certainly not resulted in my submissions being disregarded. As I've worked for, and still do many goverment bodies, I can categorically state that I've shot for many without issue, which includes Tourism Australia and Qld Tourism

I'm coming to the conclusion that if these type of myths continue to be posted, repeatedly that those making the claims are going to believe in their own propoganda.

The only time I have ever needed the "piece of paper" was when I asked to teach other students, which I can completely understand.

thats your experience, mine differs and is def not a myth. regards

[Longshots]

Jasevk, that's a little naive as AIPP and other industry bodies are nothing but a Union promoting the self interest of members. To think they may represent the general public or the "client" is at best fanciful. Certainly they like to portray that image but usually they are so under resourced they often have difficulty in staying afloat. You only have to look at their membership across the years to see they only attract the less resourceful and usually for only a period until the member establishes independence or bankruptcy.
Okay, that may be a bit harsh but it's factual.
When a prospective new member is trying to build a business they would be better focussed on networking with industry and commerce who are the only people that can source potential clients.
The bottom line is you need to make money out of the industry to survive and to have the added expense and pressure of an industry group telling you to invest in more resources and training (which they usually sponsor) would be folly.
The fact is that in 26 years with this and the film industry my sole source of work has been from networking with commerce and that's despite a lengthy period as chairman of a number of so-called industry bodies.

Whilst agreeing with your final comments. I'd disagree with your former paragraph. Everyone to their own. My view of AIPP and ACMP is that it suits some people and doesnt suit others. I've yet to meet a new member who hasnt gained considerably out of membership. I've met plenty who've been members for 10 years plus, who question their membership though. My view is you get out what you put in. Its not a union though. Its an association. There is a very big difference.

In brief, those I've suggested try AIPP membership have rarely if ever regretted the outlay. As its a tax deductable expense for professionals, then it seems to me to be a bit of a no brainer. Which is why I pay AIPP subscription and 4 other associations around the world. Add them all together and they are less than the simple bold listings I have in Yellow and White Pages, for which I get seriously poor value.

So while I disagree with some of your views Redgum, I wholeheartedly agree with some



And can I quickly add that AIPP are not calling for compulsory regulation - as this myth seems to be continuing in this discussion

[Scotty72]

[QUOTE=zollo;641976]

who cares?
a) well if you run a business as a photographer then you will care. it is your income, livelihood, basically a matter of a quality life or a starving artist life. bankruptcy or loss of homes are pretty important to most people.

b)so if these peak bodies can instill a sense of security in the public that their members will keep to a certain standard, then more power to them. If you choose not to display that logo because you dont believe the bodies mean a thing - it is entirely your choice. And best of luck convincing smart customers that your work exceeds all those who do have the logo. also when you are charging the sums that i have seen for photoshoots $50,000 plus, good luck convincing clients with a portfolio of family member portraits, no papers, no peak body memberships etc.

Firstly, I don't imagine I'll be charging $50 for my work any time soon, let alone $50,000. And, I suspect if I am charging $50,000, it will because I have an industry-wide reputation - not because I have a piece of paper.

Eg. I do not know anyone's professional qualifications on here but, if I were to engage anyone on here for my wedding, I would ask JM... why, because a) he seems to produce quality work in his sleep and b) most people of here seem to respect him. Yet, I have no idea what, if any, pieces of paper he has. If I wanted to buy a sea-scape - Xenedis for much the same reasons plus, I have met him a few times and when he is not throwing himself and his camera into the ocean, he is a great bloke who is always willing to help others take better photos.

I'll repeat, I am not against people joining organisation to learn and improve.

However, regulation and forcing people to join is very different and should be applied to jobs where lives, liberty or other very serious matters are at stake.

What you seems worried about in your first point is either a) industry reputation or b) professional jealousy.

This is none of the government's business and nor should you ask it to play nanny for this.

Scotty

[ricktas]

Just a thought. So all of us that are not professional photographers..does that make us unprofessional photographers?

[Longshots]

thats your experience, mine differs and is def not a myth. regards

Thats the whole point of this discussion - talking about first hand experiences and not second hand.


And I wasnt referring to this as a myth but countering a claim that you made, which is here:

just on that note - have you ever tendered for a Government project. The company I started off with did (tourism). Tenders from unqualified (no piece of paper) Photographers were disregarded. Not all photography is based on taking baby pics for private clients (not that there is anything wrong with that) Regards

You ask a question, and then state that if an unqualified photographer submits a tender to Gov projects, that they will be disregarded.

Doesnt appear that an experience you would have received as you have that "piece of paper"

My experience clearly demonstrates that thats not true.

[zollo]

yep there will always be work for all types of photographers, so horses for courses. do not disagree at all.

[zollo]

Just a thought. So all of us that are not professional photographers..does that make us unprofessional photographers?

haha i see where you are coming from - but professionalism is a given if you want to run a home or a world wide business. to discredit organisations (of whom some have not even heard of) or peoples memberships of them, is unprofessional in my view.

[Longshots]

Just a thought. So all of us that are not professional photographers..does that make us unprofessional photographers?

LOL I like that. Same thing then; I've met plenty of full time photographers who are no professional, but I wouldnt be rude enough to suggest that they're amateurs when they're not being "professional" as it would be harsh to amateurs.

Strikes me that some people really cannot tell the difference between the use of an adjective and a noun in this particular case

[hoffy]

Still a very interesting balanced conversation here.....and what, no name calling?

I am trying to put it into my perspective here as well. I compare this to my wife, who has a Bachelor of Commerce (an accountant) and is a CPA. The only reason she decided to do her CPA was that in a previous job (working for the Auditor General in SA), it was a requisite that she became one. She has now been out of the Auditing position for nearly 10 years and her current position doesn't require it. But she still pays her membership each year (tax deductible, as per what Longshots said above). She also has to do her x amount of hours professional development. Why? Because being a member of an organisation such as that gives her a big leg up in certain areas. She can use events to network (yep, its not what you know some times, but any advantage will help). It does give her a better standing then just saying she is an accountant.

But, I then look at the professional IT organisations (apart from the things like MSCE's and CISCO certification, which is vastly different). I have never ever known anyone to get a single ounce of benifit out of any of the IT bodies (but I am probably naive) .

Professional bodies have there place, even if it is just to help the members networking and having that little competitive edge. Thats what the bodies are there for. The fact that the AIPP requires active membership (I.E., portfolio reviews) is a good thing. It means that togs can't simply rely on the one good shoot that they had 5 years ago to get them work.

And just on the side, I am wondering whether its worth the while of AP to actually have a thread where the different photography bodies in Australia are listed, what they are about and what benefits they have (mind you, it would have to be moderated to keep an impartial level and not to create a slag fest)

[I @ M]

With a bit of a review of this thread and the original question / rant / view of the OP I feel that it was never meant to be a thread along the lines of pro / anti photographic organisations or their members.

The various bodies that exist do so for many good reasons and purely debating the merits of those organisations doesn't do much for the original aim of this thread.

[Longshots]

With a bit of a review of this thread and the original question / rant / view of the OP I feel that it was never meant to be a thread along the lines of pro / anti photographic organisations or their members.

The various bodies that exist do so for many good reasons and purely debating the merits of those organisations doesn't do much for the original aim of this thread.

Scuse me quoting you - I just wanted to 100% agree with your point. And it would be nice to go back to the OP's original point. Please ?

[kiwi]

Im not real good keeping to topic, the thread would have ended ages ago

[Redgum]

I think it's spot on topic. Really depends on your point of view (narrow or wide)?

[Scotty72]

haha i see where you are coming from - but professionalism is a given if you want to run a home or a world wide business. to discredit organisations (of whom some have not even heard of) or peoples memberships of them, is unprofessional in my view.

Ah-ha!

This demonstrates the point I made in my first post in this threat.

Un-professional is generally a term we use to describe and discredit that which we do not personally like.

Therefore, it is a weasel word.

Scotty

[Scotty72]

Im not real good keeping to topic, the thread would have ended ages ago

Yeah, JM and I were talking battleships - if you don't mind, let's all get back to that!

[JM Tran]

Yes I quite like talking about battleships and real men's toys over cameras and the AIPP and the AAPP and the CBF and the ###

!