Stay at home mums (and others) and photography as a profession

[triptych]

Tryptich I'd be happy to offer you some one on one advice - like I said we all started somewhere. Getting yourself organised for when you get more work, is the key to finanical success.

Call me - go and look at my website for contact details. Happy to offer some advice - for free

What a great offer! Thank you, I will call you later next week when I have time to sit down and concentrate hehe...

[Finlaw]

I'm a part time stay at home mum who would love to be a professional photographer. In my case the camera is my first baby and was here way before my 2 young kids. However I am under no illusion about how hard and time consuming it is and have a long term plan. I am my own worst critic and never like my own work but I beleive there is a market out there for me. Why? I tested the waters and it escalated way too fast & big for me. I had to put the breaks on, pull right back. For now I am doing a maximum of 1 or 2 shoots a month and concentrating on my skills and business knowledge. Am I one of those mums that post and disapear? probably but I'm still lurking and learning, I just don't have the time to be very active and sometimes don't even get to read for a month or more at a time.

My family is young and for now I can't commit to being professional and running a business but I am working towards it.

Oh and the stay at home mum comment is a bit sexist, I know numerous Dad's with the same aspiration but then (and this is a generalisation and from my experience only) Men tend to be taken more seriously accross the board no matter what their profession or dreams. On the other hand I love the Aussie spirit of giving someone a fair go and I hope I pass it on to others.

[Pine]

Professional is really misleading as it gives the impression that one is a qualified Photographer with a long degree such as a Medical Doctor or Engineer which is simply not true.

The truth is anyone with a camera can call himself a Professional Photographer which really means nothing.

I have been at a few weddings were my equipment and photos were better than the "Professional Photographer" but that does not necessary make me a good photographer.

Maybe "I am a Photographer making a living out of photography" is more appropriate

Regards

[ricktas]

I'm a part time stay at home mum who would love to be a professional photographer. In my case the camera is my first baby and was here way before my 2 young kids. However I am under no illusion about how hard and time consuming it is and have a long term plan. I am my own worst critic and never like my own work but I beleive there is a market out there for me. Why? I tested the waters and it escalated way too fast & big for me. I had to put the breaks on, pull right back. For now I am doing a maximum of 1 or 2 shoots a month and concentrating on my skills and business knowledge. Am I one of those mums that post and disapear? probably but I'm still lurking and learning, I just don't have the time to be very active and sometimes don't even get to read for a month or more at a time.

My family is young and for now I can't commit to being professional and running a business but I am working towards it.

Oh and the stay at home mum comment is a bit sexist, I know numerous Dad's with the same aspiration but then (and this is a generalisation and from my experience only) Men tend to be taken more seriously accross the board no matter what their profession or dreams. On the other hand I love the Aussie spirit of giving someone a fair go and I hope I pass it on to others.

Ah yes, but then from what you have said, this thread isn't about your approach. You are very well aware of the difficulties of running a photography business. But it would be interesting to hear if you thought it would be EASY when you first decided to 'test the waters'. Did you think, 'hey I can make money from this, easily"? What made you think that way? This is the question that this thread is about. It is asking WHY people think photography is an easy career choice before they become aware of the reality. What causes this false perception?

The general public know that it takes years of training to become a Doctor, or a teacher. Even a flight attendant, most are aware there is an intensive course before one takes to the skies, but for some reason, photography doesn't have that, why is it perceived the way it is, as an easy choice, by many?

[Duane Pipe]

My cousins step daughter is getting married today and the tog is a friend of the bride ( she is also part of the bridal party) who has been doing a photography course for the last 12 months or so.

Warning: Removed at request of poster due to personal nature of comments

PPS Stay at home mums

[Longshots]

My cousins step daughter is getting married today and the tog is a friend of the bride ( she is also part of the bridal party) who has been doing a photography course for the last 12 months or so.

Warning: Removed at request of poster due to personal nature of comments

PPS Stay at home mums

OK yeah, I understand. But first of all its not those who own a camera and make some dosh out of it (sometimes, without any declaration, and therefore with no PL insurance and standard business cover), its the cheap clients who are just as much to blame.

Doint g a photo course for the last 12 months doesnt make anyone professional IMHO.

So what does ?

Its one of those long standing, and always produces a lengthy debate.

IMHO Professional means professional approach - its that simple.

Sure there are plenty of crap photographers out there, but they generally fall into the same basis of you get what you pay for.

And yes you're right, you cant be in the bridal party and do a professional job - thats absurd. I dont have a problem either with people charging a professional fee for a professional coverage of a wedding. Again the client is the decision maker here. Why blame those who are simply not up to the job ?

A bit like buying a Lada - (russian car that my ex wife once bought that broke down on the day it was delivered and was a piece of crap, and utter joke for its brief existence with her), and then comparing it with a BMW - hey both had four wheels, four doors, and steering wheel. But one was a great deal cheaper. And you can go even cheaper again if you buy a hand built scrap renovation/reclaimed car, that too will be cheaper. All 3 may get you to the end of the road, but which one will feel professional ?

Basically, I'm sorry to say, but the bride will get what she paid for. Good luck in getting some good shots - I have no doubt that you will.

But, this is important and please dont take this the wrong way, being a professional is all about doing this type of thing on a regular basis, relying on it for your income tends to give people the motivation to doing it well, and then its also not just about taking and producing a few good shots, but producing a professional package.

I trust the bride has employed a professional dressmaker, has employed a professional venue, a professional limousine/car service, and employed a professional celebrant.

I could claim to do all of those things on a professional basis:
I own a sewing machine and I can sew
I have a house with a good sized yard and deck
I own a car and can drive
I have a rough idea of what needs to be said at a wedding (been wed a few times and shot many)
and while I didnt think about it back then
I own a guitar (FWIW I dont call myself a musician)

There is a considerable difference in the industry these days, from those who are deliberately misleading potential purchasers as to their photographic ability; those who just enjoy taking pictures; and those who are either earning their living from full time photography, or aspiring to that eventual, or even part time, goal.

The people who confuse, or deliberately choose to select and pay a photographer, anything from a pittance/carton of beer, to a proper market level of sustainable professional photography; and these are the people that should be held accountable; are the CLIENTS.

This example Duane is one I hear on so many occassions that its sad. I can pretty much guess that the bride will be hugely dissapointed in the overall photographic cover. Sure you might be, and I hope you do, capture a few good shots.

But when the cakes gone, the wedding dress no longer fits, and the memories fade, what is there to look back on ? One of the very few things that are ever shown in decades to come will be the wedding pictures. Seems such a shame that stupidity often dictates that particular purchase decision. So my advice to your cousin's step daughter is to employ a real professional and hopefully one who has some real credibility, real experience, real photographic examples.

[zollo]

Professional is really misleading as it gives the impression that one is a qualified Photographer with a long degree such as a Medical Doctor or Engineer which is simply not true.

The truth is anyone with a camera can call himself a Professional Photographer which really means nothing.

I have been at a few weddings were my equipment and photos were better than the "Professional Photographer" but that does not necessary make me a good photographer.

Maybe "I am a Photographer making a living out of photography" is more appropriate

Regards

why do photographers get hung up on the term "professional photography"
I use the term to present my business to the public, that is all. Other photographers can call me photographer, tog, amateur, warrior, whatever, it doesn't bother me if it makes you feel better.
I have a Diploma in Photoimaging, took two years to complete, so I do have some formal "qualifications" but other photographers tend to get qualifications in a non regulated industry confused with qualifications within a regulated industry, which photography is not. Guess what, it doesn't matter if it's regulated or not, you can still be a professional in your field of work. Get over it people.
an assistant of mine is studying Bachelor of Arts (photography) and when she is finished, I will have NO hesitation in calling her a professional. She is good. And I will be honoured that she got her start with my little co. Others have had 20-30 years experience selling their work and truly deserve to be called Professionals too. I reckon the public have no problem with it, only other "photographers"

[kiwi]

Tall poppy syndrome ?

[Longshots]

no not at all - sorry Zollo, but if you're referring to what I said and my frustration with those out there who are deliberately misleading, and/or are simply delusional, then I've clearly failed to communicate by way of responding to the original point.

I rarely read your comments and disagree. On this occasion I disagree.

This has no relation to people doing courses, gaining accreditation or even being a self starter.

Of course few should question whether those examples would have any trouble being referred to as a " photographer", or "professional" if they are acting professionally.

Its those who purposely mislead, and in some cases use fraudulent methods to suggest or claim that they are "professional" - and to give one example, those who steal others images to populate their websites, or use stock images that they havent a hope in hell of being able to produce. They're the ones who frustrate me.

For what its worth, like many of my friends who earn a full time living from their photography, I dont use the word "professional" in my description.

All of the 5 ( ! ) earlier pages describe quite clearly the frustration that seems to emanate from those who are trying to help those entering the profession to BE professional, and to ACT professionally.

I've fought against (yes fought in the 1990's) against the move in Qld to licence the profession of photography - and fortunately common sense produced the obvious outcome, which was that it wasnt required and wasnt feasible. So I didnt think anyone had earlier banged a drum about licensing.

I thought this discussion was about those who simply buy a camera, and with weeks produce business cards, websites and I certainly have direct knowledge of one person who within months launched themselves as an educator to other "photographers" (and it should be pointed out that their confidence far outweighed their ability).

So my comment continues, that I couldnt care less if someone describes themselves as professional - I do care if they deliberately mislead potential consumers if they're not following typical business expectations that I and many other "professionals" have to follow by law.

My continuing argument is that the expectation that its odd that people should automatically call themselves a photographer when they buy a camera. Excuse me for repeating my earlier comment that when I buy a guitar I would not then automatically describe myself as a musician.

Tall poppy syndrome has nothing to do with this, thats a comment based on not understanding this particular discussion !

[WhoDo]

why do photographers get hung up on the term "professional photography"

Probably because of a lack of a common understanding of the term. Here is what the Free Online Dictionary says:

pro·fes·sion·al (pr-fsh-nl)
adj.
1.
a. Of, relating to, engaged in, or suitable for a profession: lawyers, doctors, and other professional people.
b. Conforming to the standards of a profession: professional behavior.
2. Engaging in a given activity as a source of livelihood or as a career: a professional writer.
3. Performed by persons receiving pay: professional football.
4. Having or showing great skill; expert: a professional repair job.
n.
1. A person following a profession, especially a learned profession.
2. One who earns a living in a given or implied occupation: hired a professional to decorate the house.
3. A skilled practitioner; an expert.

Among the adjectival uses (descriptive use of the term) some here are applying definition adj 1b, some definition adj 2/3 and others definition adj 4. Frankly I prefer to use definition adj 4 when referring to the output of respected photographers (definition n 3), and definition adj 2/3 when referring to those who have simply "hung up a shingle" and invested financially in following the profession (definition n. 2). Definitions adj 1a and n 1 are of little relevance in this discussion of the OP's original question since they relate principally to academic qualifications and standards.

So before anyone starts arguing the toss about who or what is or isn't "professional", I suggest you start with a common understanding of what you mean when you use the term.

In referring to the OP's post, SAHM's (and others) may fit definitions n 1 and n 2 without coming within a bull's roar of definition n 3! Certainly that former class of "professional" doesn't appear to be bound in any way by the requirements of definition adj 1b (i.e. conforming to professional standards), and that is the horns of the dilemma for those who truly love, invest personally in and value their profession well beyond its capacity to earn them an income. That very passion and personal investment prevents "getting over it (sic)" when those whose only commitment is financial give the industry a black eye.

Some sections of the market now see photographers in general, particularly those doing weddings and portraiture, as little better than used car salesmen and that is very distressing to those who have put in so much time and effort to elevate the industry's standards toward expert performance (adj 4) and away from simply earning an income (adj 3).

I hope I have made my point clear, despite the many references.

[zollo]

Longshots I agree with pretty much everything you posted above, but I think I was talking about a slightly off topic subject here, my post was in direct answer to the quote within it and you basically said the same thing with

Of course few should question whether those examples would have any trouble being referred to as a " photographer", or "professional" if they are acting professionally

Whodo as far as i am concerned EXCLUDE adj. 1a. and then roll the rest into a big ball and that is my definition of a "professional photographer". I dont take apart the word to have 20 possible meanings, I'll leave that to those professional lawyers.

[WhoDo]

Whodo as far as i am concerned EXCLUDE adj. 1a. and then roll the rest into a big ball and that is my definition of a "professional photographer". I dont take apart the word to have 20 possible meanings, I'll leave that to those professional lawyers.

I agree that adj 1a is irrelevant to this discussion, and said so. As for rolling the rest together, that might be nice if everyone agreed but this whole thread is evidence that they don't. Many here do NOT include SAHM's and others (weekend warriors, etc) making a few dollars on the side from photography as "professionals", even though may they clearly fit adj. 2/3, as do certain "professional" footballers whose main source of income is actually derived outside of the sport.

While I appreciate your all-inclusive approach when using the term, zollo, for the sake of effective communications with others in the discussion it is impossible to avoid the distinctions. Even the thread title REQUIRES those distinctions in place. It might be useful to at least draw a distinction between those who are, by your definition, semi-professional vs. full-time professional.

[Longshots]

Sorry I got lost a bit with the definitions.

This started because there is a perception that this (photography - as an income producing lifestyle) is an easy option. That was how, and is how I'm answering the topic on the word professional.

I started as a self taught, part timer. Some could have used the term weekend warrior - which I dont have a problem with BTW - except I was doing it at the same time as my first career. I then eventually made the transition to full time photographer after 17 years of part time selling my work, and running it as a business. I only started to understand what that meant once I sought and gained the advice from other full time photographers.

Most of those who enter the business of photography - and this is the section for that discussion - do so (in my experience of giving advice on how they should extract themselves out of some trouble or problem) with almost no real research into what is involved in producing a photographic service on a commercial basis. The standard level of research is a quick browse of other photographers offering a similar package/genre, and then offering the same type of thing at 50% of the price. In the end it becomes a game of the blind leading the blind and an amazing point where photographers are paying their clients to shoot in an effort to gain work. Eventually they leave the business having accomplished an increase in their debt level and little else. But seamlessly they are replaced by an ever increasing number of eager shooters, who are convinced by sloppy marketing by desperate product manufacturers that sell the concept of "buy our product and you too can be a professional".

The level of bulls--t from those bluffing their way through the business, when they in reality produce very little, and convincing others that they have a successful operation is the icing on the cake when it comes to encouraging delusionalism in the extreme.

Yes it can be done. Yes it takes some effort. Its not rocket science. Just make sure you know what you're getting into. And if you want to seek advice, make sure that you're listening to people who have real experience in the field. Go and speak to them one on one.

[Pine]

why do photographers get hung up on the term "professional photography"
I use the term to present my business to the public, that is all. Other photographers can call me photographer, tog, amateur, warrior, whatever, it doesn't bother me if it makes you feel better.
I have a Diploma in Photoimaging, took two years to complete, so I do have some formal "qualifications" but other photographers tend to get qualifications in a non regulated industry confused with qualifications within a regulated industry, which photography is not. Guess what, it doesn't matter if it's regulated or not, you can still be a professional in your field of work. Get over it people.
an assistant of mine is studying Bachelor of Arts (photography) and when she is finished, I will have NO hesitation in calling her a professional. She is good. And I will be honoured that she got her start with my little co. Others have had 20-30 years experience selling their work and truly deserve to be called Professionals too. I reckon the public have no problem with it, only other "photographers"

There is a lot of snob value on who can be considered a professional or not but it really means nothing.

Some people are simply great on what they do irrespective of qualifications and the same applies to photography.

I am regularly humbled by the brilliancy of some photographers on this forum and stand amazed

Now what ever you term these select few, professional or not, ordinary people will never match their ability.

The key question is "Do you make sufficient money out of your profession or not" and if you do you are truly a professional

Regards

[pgbphotographytas]

I think it is a case of people taking a few photos, family and friends seeing them and then these people thinking they can do it and make money. I guess they think this because anybody can go and buy a dSLR and look like they know what they are doing. Due to the low start up costs and ease of access they jump at it without understanding what it really involves.

Paul

[dt86vyss]

A course does not qualify/equip one with experience... This can only come with time. Taking great photos consistently takes practice, lots of practice takes lots of time... That is all.

[jjjnettie]

LOL. It's not just stay at home Mum's who try to run before they can walk. I see similar happening all the time on a different forum I belong to. But instead it's the men. Photographers, some very good ones too, diving in at the deep end, buying all the top shelf astro gear and proclaiming they're going to take these wonderful photos of nebulae and galaxies. 3 months down the track, all that lovely expensive gear is up for sale at half the price they paid for it.
Nothing will dissuade them. I have a camera, I can do this.

I think that you can be a successful photographer, without being a Professional.
But you can't succeed as a Professional, without success behind you, backing you up.
(did that make sense?)

[sonofcoco]

I blame facebook for these ills.
On that site one only has to look around those who offering themselves as photographers under the "professional services" heading and enjoying all the accolades from their friends whilst setting out to fly solo for the first time at a wedding and in the same breath asking all and sundry about how they should structure their pricing.

Yeah, I'd agree with this to an extent. Have just seen a mate's wife's new Facebook page advertising herself as a professional photographer and have had a look at a couple of the shoots she's done...to be brutally honest, they're not very good at all. In my opinion most people with a little experience could spend 20-30 minutes snapping off a few shots (with a compact camera) and do quite a bit better. It wasn't that long ago she was putting up her first pics of her kids with her new camera, and now she's a 'professional'. Good luck to her, but I would think the less you had to learn as you go the better your results and your reputation when you set out. I just hope she's not charging too much, and her clients aren't expecting too much.

It was unfortunate in the case of her last shoot that her clients were my best mate and his family...I would've taken a few pics of their family for free as I have known him for 20 years and he was just back from England on holiday. In this woman's defence, she may well have done the same as she knows them too. The fact they're up on her businesses page did suggest to me they paid money for them though. I have noticed on Facebook that you can basically put up an out-of-focus shot of a big toe that is poorly composed and under-exposed and you'll get a bunch of friends telling you how great a shot it is, that you're so 'creative', and asking if you've thought of starting your own business!?

[Xenedis]

The problem with people new to photography (or any hobby, really) is that they don't know how much they don't know.

If only I could be a surgeon purely by owning a scalpel or being creative with carrots in the kitchen...

[Plonk]

When I first started photograpghy I had a great teacher and I really loved it. I was photographing newborns at a hospital. Then I thought to myself that oneday I would love to work for myself and not anyone else. So I started my journey with it. I have to be honest its not easy. So much to do to make sure I do it right.
I found this forum and have found it to have endless knowledge to learn. With great peolple to learn from too and the small stuff that I can offer for other members. Then I got side tracked from everything and didnt have time to be here and most to work. I came back and a member let it rip a little at me for not contributing and not being here. Another member stepped in and I felt better. I had contemplated in staying here as a member because of that. I felt it wasnt fair with what was said. Anyway, I dont think that everyone understands that we all have dreams and sometimes they dont work out or they are that easy to make it happen. I am a mum who children arent so young and also a foster parent in waiting. I do try to come here when I do have time to get advice and see if I can offer some.
No matter what we choose in a career its not always going to go smoothly. So how about giving the beginners a break. They prolly dont have time to be on here every single day.