Professionalism.

[Scotty72]

Scotty, the AIPP has very good reason to help the public understand what professional photographers ate about, how they operate and what to expect when they engage the services of a photographer... The AIPP is committed to ensuring that pros are provided with all the resources and business tools to be able to minimize risk to the client. They are also launching a program to ensure that pros are keeping their skills up to date by attending seminars and workshops etc, which at the end of the day is nothing but beneficial to members AND peace of mind to their clients.

Therefore... I don't see what's so silly about the comments made earlier???

The comments related more to the fact that the photographers need to promote the AIPP
to Joe Public. Joe public doesn't care! Joe public cares about examples of quality photos.

People are talking about photography as though it were brain surgery or some other highly skilled occupation on which lives, liberties or nations depend... Come on, get over it! The most at stake here are the feelings of bridezillas and egos.

Sorry to sound harsh but, true!

When I had to go into hospital for a brain scan (MRI), I didn't care what organisations the radiographer, radiologist or neurologist belonged to (or even if there exists such organisations).

You send your kids to school; do you grill each of their teachers as to which professional organisation they belong to? I have been the teacher of literally thousands of different students in 2 states and in Korea. I have never once been asked - ever.

The once I have appeared before a magistrate represented by a barrister (thankfully for which I did not have to pay), I didn't ask him about his memberships.

I had the pleasure on stepping on board the USS Missouri many years ago; damn, I should of asked the captain if he belonged to the 'captains of ships capable of destroying the world club' and demanded he resigned if he could not produce his card.

I would contend that:-

your health;
your kids' education, and;
your liberty
defense of the free world

are far, far, far, far, far, far, far (get the point?) more important than the absolute sharpness of your wedding photos

If we trust people in these vital areas, then really - a few photos? A big deal? I don't think so.

[Redgum]

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.

[JM Tran]

I had the pleasure on stepping on board the USS Missouri many years ago; damn, I should of asked the captain if he belonged to the 'captains of ships capable of destroying the world club' and demanded he resigned if he could not produce his card

HAHAHAHA! I actually had to laugh out loud at that good call Scotty

but if u must know, the first captain of the USS Missouri belonged to the 'gun club' - battleships and heavy cruisers during WWII that were against the advent of aircraft carriers and favoured the good old naval tradition of sailing up to your enemy and pounding them with the biggest guns you have

wow must be a long time ago when she was still operational

[Scotty72]

HAHAHAHA! I actually had to laugh out loud at that good call Scotty

but if u must know, the first captain of the USS Missouri belonged to the 'gun club' - battleships and heavy cruisers during WWII that were against the advent of aircraft carriers and favoured the good old naval tradition of sailing up to your enemy and pounding them with the biggest guns you have

wow must be a long time ago when she was still operational

1992.

I remember she did a test fire of her guns off Sydney way back then, saw the footage. What power!

Aparently, if all the big guns were fired at once to the side, the ship would lurch several metres to the opposite side.

Each shell was about the weight of a family sedan and could be thrown up to about 25 miles (40 km).

Now, that is a ship's captain you do not want angry at you.

[JM Tran]

1992.

I remember she did a test fire of her guns off Sydney way back then, saw the footage. What power!

Aparently, if all the big guns were fired at once to the side, the ship would lurch several metres to the opposite side.

Each shell was about the weight of a family sedan and could be thrown up to about 25 miles (40 km).

Now, that is a ship's captain you do not want angry at you.

was the ship doing a promo tour for the movie Under Seige? LOL

I remembered a scene where one of the bad guy was near one of the 16 inch guns when it fired, he was in a lot of pain but in real life he would have been knocked unconscious by concussion and probably bled to death in the ears hehe

[Scotty72]

Now, that is a ship's captain you do not want angry at you.

Unless you live over the mountains - then, you go ahead and tell him his mother wears army boots...

[Scotty72]

was the ship doing a promo tour for the movie Under Seige? LOL

I remembered a scene where one of the bad guy was near one of the 16 inch guns when it fired, he was in a lot of pain but in real life he would have been knocked unconscious by concussion and probably bled to death in the ears hehe

Yeah! I remember that movie - Steven Segal...

I read about that scene in a movie -mistakes type web page. They said pretty well what you did - but I think they went a step further to say if you were within a few feet, you may literally get torn to pieces by the concussion. I would believe it (but have no way of verifying and am not willing to be the subject of a test) considering the energy required to lob a weight equal to a Holden Commodore 40kms through the air.

It would definately hurt!

[jasevk]

Red... Not naive unless you've misinterpreted me mate. I didn't say the AIPP represent clients, I did however mention that they have an interest in providing resources for togs in helping clients understand how it's members operate.

[kiwi]

Err, well, if those here ( you are a phitogapher in your own that is I hope trying to get better and better) that can't see the importance of providing a high quality product to paying clients ethically and professionally then I just shake my head. Photography is of course not life or death, neithers accountancy, or teaching for that matter. Very few professions are. But the consumer in each has the right to expect a certain minimum standard and someone somewhere had to ascertain and support that standard and if the shit hits the fan the photographer.

Redgum you've obviously had bad experiences with aipp or whoever but my observation to date doesn't at all align with yours. I guess with all these things it's a matter of personal opinion and experience and they vary much greater than I would have thought.

[farmer_rob]

Err, well, if those here ( you are a phitogapher in your own that is I hope trying to get better and better) that can't see the importance of providing a high quality product to paying clients ethically and professionally then I just shake my head. Photography is of course not life or death, neithers accountancy, or teaching for that matter. Very few professions are. But the consumer in each has the right to expect a certain minimum standard and someone somewhere had to ascertain and support that standard and if the shit hits the fan the photographer.

Redgum you've obviously had bad experiences with aipp or whoever but my observation to date doesn't at all align with yours. I guess with all these things it's a matter of personal opinion and experience and they vary much greater than I would have thought.

I think your points about what a photographer should be providing are good. However, the connections to the industry bodies is weak.

The "importance of providing a high quality product to paying clients ethically and professionally" is two-fold: ongoing business and recommendation; and not ending up in court. However, the industry bodies are (IMO) irrelevant to that at the moment - they have no enforcement power, no public visibility and a photographer can provide a proper service without the industry body's assistance (and a defence with a licensed lawyer, dependent of course on the quality of the lawyer, which is not reflected in the licensing).

"But the consumer in each has the right to expect a certain minimum standard and someone somewhere had to ascertain and support that standard" - this is typically the consumer affairs department in the relevant state. Why should photographers be any different to others offering an unlicenceable service? What relevance do the industry bodies have here? (At least at present.)

[Redgum]

Redgum you've obviously had bad experiences with aipp or whoever but my observation to date doesn't at all align with yours. I guess with all these things it's a matter of personal opinion and experience and they vary much greater than I would have thought.

Kiwi, I've not had a bad experience with any industry organisation. I'm simply relaying my thoughts on their value to the professional and that experience has not been good value. However, each must enjoy their own experience so if a budding photographer needs that support, great. There are better ways though.

[Redgum]

1992.

I remember she did a test fire of her guns off Sydney way back then, saw the footage. What power!
Aparently, if all the big guns were fired at once to the side, the ship would lurch several metres to the opposite side.
Each shell was about the weight of a family sedan and could be thrown up to about 25 miles (40 km). Now, that is a ship's captain you do not want angry at you.

Now here's a lesson in history for both of you, Scotty and JM.
She came to this country in 1967, she came in anger for R&R from the Vietnam war. In those days I worked in a Bank and was a gunnery officer in the Navy Reserve (Sydney). Those roles earned me flight by Tracker to Cairns and the most wonderful trip on the Missouri from there to Sydney exchanging money for her officers and crew before they got leave. When we arrived in Sydney I had the pleasure of escorting some of her officers to places of interest in and around that town.
Anyway, back to the ship, rigged for war she carried nearly 5000 crew, the officers cabin from which I worked was bigger than a normal house and with any 16" broadside the ship would move up to 20 feet sidewards. The ship was so heavy that they would take off all power just north of Newcastle so that she could stop when she reached Sydney heads.
As I was also a Navy photographer I got hundreds of shots of her some of which were published in the Sydney Sun newspaper on her arrival. It was a big event.
Just out of interest she had five fully functional cinemas on board, was fully fitted out with two television stations and the photographic contingent numbered well over thirty people. The food onboard was exceptional and Yank officers were often willing to pay $500 for a round trip by taxi to the Blue Mountains (hence the escort by Australian officers). A lot of money in those days.
Ahhhh!!! Young togs have no idea of adventure these days.

[Nina]

I am amazed at the number of people who buy a camera,take some photographs, add photography after their name a think they are a photographer. It is owed to anyone using your services that you have some knowledge of the workings of a camera & related matter & you owe it to yourself to have some basic business acumen and legal knowledge relating to contract & photography laws.
I have come across so called photographers who do not ask for permission to take an obviously "private" photo. Neither have they known or bothered to find out about the legality of shooting at a park, event or zoo etc..
I also cringe when I see " I've got a wedding what sort of lens do I buy?" or "Do I need a back up camera for weddings?" If you are touting yourself as a professional be one.
If you are serious about calling yourself a photographer register as a business, take some courses & pay some taxes (or not as the case may be) the same as the rest of the profession. It does have benefits.
You must register for GST if:
1. You are carrying on an enterprise
2. You're annual turnover will exceed $75,000
Whether you register or not depends on advice from an accountant.

The starting post and boy has this thread moved on.
I just finished reading the 4 pages yesterday and I get on FB chat "oi what lens would you use for weddings"
I ask why.
"Cause I am a second shooter at a wedding tomorrow". This person falls in to the category of just got a dslr with a nifty fifty. Who is helping a friend.
Asked who the pro tog was, another person who just happened to have a new dslr and a nifty 50.
Not sure on backups, possibly a camera from memory.

Are these the people that make you cringe or were you one of them? (General question to members) Not to Tony B. Did you dive into the business like this and sink or swim?
Do clients really see the difference between paying for a photographer that has been in the business with 20+yrs experience with a great portfolio or paying for someone that is starting out. When they want to save on the dollars as they need it to pay for the rest of the wedding or honeymoon.
Is it other togs who see that the lighting was crap the composition appalling and focus issues, plus the wedding dress being blue and the blacks being clipped.
And merely the clients just want their day captured, better than nothing?
Just had to share I couldn't believe that it happened to be honest.

[Redgum]

Are these the people that make you cringe or were you one of them? (General question to members)

In the eyes of the community photographers rate between a used car salesman and a lawyer. That's last and third last. If you tell people you're a photographer they usually respond by asking when you intend to get a real job.
So when you ask "do I cringe" I say no. Was I one of them, probably. In my early days I bought the equipment I could afford and simply used my passion and creativity to carry me through, I made mistakes (still do) but I certainly achieved my goals and my clients still love me (at least pay me).

[bigdazzler]

Do clients really see the difference between paying for a photographer that has been in the business with 20+yrs experience with a great portfolio or paying for someone that is starting out. When they want to save on the dollars as they need it to pay for the rest of the wedding or honeymoon.

And merely the clients just want their day captured, better than nothing?

Like it or not .. theres a market there. Simple as that. It all comes down to individual priorities, budgets, and hopefully realistic expectations.

I see the benefit in buying a Mercedes Benz over a Commodore ... but I cant afford it, so I buy the best car I can afford. Photography is no different.

[arthurking83]

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

So on that note:

You know for sure that tenders from unqualified photographers were disregarded?
From what source?
If this source is revealing information as to the tendering process, I think there may be a conflict of interest somewhere in the system.

if the company you used to work for is revealing this kind of info to you or anyone else, then there is the case for very unprofessional conduct by your initial employer!

I would rather deal with honest but uncreative and talentless amateurs posing as professionals, rather than devious underhanded 'marketing machines' posing as photographers!

Disregarding that facetious commentary by me there, the absolute endpoint of what you say there Zollo, with respect to requiring some form of qualifications to secure employment.. the greatest of the greats.. Ansel Adams would struggle to find employment as a photographer then.
The department that offered the tender would have simply brushed over and dismissed Ansel's tender and seen that his only admittance to any form of qualification was that he taught himself the piano when he was younger.

Maybe I'll apply for a tender one day soon even though I have no professional photographic accreditation to add to the raft of other non existent formal qualifications just to see how it all pans out.
Although I'll be sure to add efficient and proficient with an external light meter.. just to be sure!

[zollo]

[QUOTE]

The comments related more to the fact that the photographers need to promote the AIPP
to Joe Public. Joe public doesn't care! Joe public cares about examples of quality photos.

People are talking about photography as though it were brain surgery or some other highly skilled occupation on which lives, liberties or nations depend... Come on, get over it! The most at stake here are the feelings of bridezillas and egos.

Sorry to sound harsh but, true!

When I had to go into hospital for a brain scan (MRI), I didn't care what organisations the radiographer, radiologist or neurologist belonged to (or even if there exists such organisations).

The Australian Institute of Radiography is the peak body representing radiographers, radiation therapists and sonographers in Australia.

Yes - lucky for you there are orgainisations and hoops to jump through that these radiographers (another field of photography i learnt about and could have pursued) belong to that regulate the industry. you dont seem to understand this. Lucky for you it wasnt a hobby-ist that had lots of experience xraying mice in the shed, or maybe you did get one of these. as the consumer you had trust that the xrayer was qualified. and do you think the xrayer would have got his job without his quals? maybe as a trainee. http://www.air.asn.au/ hey and guess what radiology when stripped back is only taking of photos

The once I have appeared before a magistrate represented by a barrister (thankfully for which I did not have to pay), I didn't ask him about his memberships.

again, you assumed that he was a professional and qualified to do his job. again the onus was on the barrister to be part of any organisations that he felt would help him be a better barrister. so whats it to you that i as a photographer and business owner have a) got a diploma in my field and b) belong to any number of peak organisations that i so choose. so what if I feel that by having a few extra letters behind my name and maybe a member of (insert evil money making peak photographic body name here) logo on my portfolio, i feel the client is slightly more re-assured that i have standards of work i'll try and keep to. so what?
get over it alright.

[Scotty72]

[QUOTE=zollo;641952]

The Australian Institute of Radiography is the peak body representing radiographers, radiation therapists and sonographers in Australia.

Yes - lucky for you there are orgainisations and hoops to jump through that these radiographers (another field of photography i learnt about and could have pursued) belong to that regulate the industry. you dont seem to understand this. Lucky for you it wasnt a hobby-ist that had lots of experience xraying mice in the shed, or maybe you did get one of these. as the consumer you had trust that the xrayer was qualified. and do you think the xrayer would have got his job without his quals? maybe as a trainee. http://www.air.asn.au/ hey and guess what radiology when stripped back is only taking of photos



again, you assumed that he was a professional and qualified to do his job. again the onus was on the barrister to be part of any organisations that he felt would help him be a better barrister. so whats it to you that i as a photographer and business owner have a) got a diploma in my field and b) belong to any number of peak organisations that i so choose. so what if I feel that by having a few extra letters behind my name and maybe a member of (insert evil money making peak photographic body name here) logo on my portfolio, i feel the client is slightly more re-assured that i have standards of work i'll try and keep to. so what?
get over it alright.

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

[I @ M]

Zollo, the AIR is rather a poor example to use I feel.

It isn't an organisation that a radiographer must belong to in order to practice their profession and by the organisation's own admission on their website, they represent over 70% of radiographers.

Does that mean that I am in danger from the other 20+% that aren't members and should I be asking to see their credentials or examples of their previous work before I go for my next CT scan?

I think not as they and all the rest operate under the government regulations pertaining to their field of expertise.

The similarities between the AIR and a body that represents photographers are very similar, for a fee they will assist and educate you as well as providing benefits to your working life.

However, radiographers must be licensed to practice under government regulations, photographers do not.

[Longshots]

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

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.