Can you call yourself a "photographer" ?

[BEGM83]

Ok my twopenneth as a newbie to this photography lark.

To me a photographer is someone with an eye for taking photos. Nothing to do with experience or knowing the jargon or the technical no-how but someone to who everything falls into place with ease. To me it's an art. Like music or painting you either can or you can't.

I've seen some pictures by people with all the lenses, top notch camera's, can baffle you with all the jargon in the world about Apateure and the like, or bore you to tears on how to get the lighting just right on a shoot with little Jimmy and Jane. But you look at the picture and it's, well, flatter than a fart in a vacuum. No life or soul to the image. Yet they profess to be photographers, and professional ones at that.

Personally i know nothing about the technical jargon, but i dont shoot purely in auto - in fact i dont think ive used auto on my DSLR to date - because i like playing with the settings and going 'ooh buttons to press!' (no not the sole reason for getting a DSLR lol). But i like to take photos. Does that make me a photographer? No. Im learning. Like i learned to play the piano to the point it made me a musician. Knowledge accumulates over time and if someone who is enthused by a subject matter and loves what they do don't knock them for not knowing the technical terminology. They may have something you don't ... talent.

So there you go...i also waffle too...

[cdgaskin]

i was always told:

Pro - full time paid job.

semi-pro - still paid work but not main source of income.

amatuer - non paid hobbie

unfortunatly quality, skill, understanding and equipment dont always factor at the top of the totem pole sometimes.

[mrodgers]

Originally Posted by BEGM83

To me a photographer is someone with an eye for taking photos. Nothing to do with experience or knowing the jargon or the technical no-how but someone to who everything falls into place with ease. To me it's an art. Like music or painting you either can or you can't.

Reminds me of watching the documentary on Metallica, arguably one of the most popular heavy rock bands ever.

James Hetfield stated, when they talked with Michael Kamen, the conductor of the San Francisco Orchestra, on doing a concert together, Michael said, OK, just write some music for us and we can get to work. James said in the film, I don't know a single note, what am I suppose to say, 'First press here, then press there...' as he fingered the frets of a guitar.

Is James Hetfield not a musician since he doesn't know what a musical note is? He creates music, just doesn't know the theory or jargon of music.

Going with the driver analogy in my opinion does not fit. Being in the US, 99% of cars here are automatic transmissions (I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find a car I can buy because of this.) Someone said earlier, "I have a car, so I am a driver but it doesn't mean I'm a professional race car driver." In my eyes, this is false. To be a driver, you must operate a vehicle. If you do not have all the necessary equipment and features to drive a vehicle, you can't be a driver. With an auto, you don't have the equipment to drive. You are merely guiding a vehicle, making it go, stop, and turn. That is not driving. Driving does not require creativity. It requires you to operate the vehicle and when you can not select the proper gear to operate it correctly, you are not driving.

You create music. You create a photograph. None of those things require you to fully operate a piece of equipment. You can create music on a computer and you can create a photograph in auto mode on a camera. The creativity comes from composing the music and composing the image. You do not create driving. You operate the equipment and that is driving. When the equipment is doing it for you automatically, you are no longer driving.

I firmly believe that any statement "I am _________" is very limiting.

[BEGM83]

Originally Posted by mrodgers

Reminds me of watching the documentary on Metallica, arguably one of the most popular heavy rock bands ever.

James Hetfield stated, when they talked with Michael Kamen, the conductor of the San Francisco Orchestra, on doing a concert together, Michael said, OK, just write some music for us and we can get to work. James said in the film, I don't know a single note, what am I suppose to say, 'First press here, then press there...' as he fingered the frets of a guitar.

Is James Hetfield not a musician since he doesn't know what a musical note is? He creates music, just doesn't know the theory or jargon of music.

Going with the driver analogy in my opinion does not fit. Being in the US, 99% of cars here are automatic transmissions (I'm finding it increasingly difficult to find a car I can buy because of this.) Someone said earlier, "I have a car, so I am a driver but it doesn't mean I'm a professional race car driver." In my eyes, this is false. To be a driver, you must operate a vehicle. If you do not have all the necessary equipment and features to drive a vehicle, you can't be a driver. With an auto, you don't have the equipment to drive. You are merely guiding a vehicle, making it go, stop, and turn. That is not driving. Driving does not require creativity. It requires you to operate the vehicle and when you can not select the proper gear to operate it correctly, you are not driving.

You create music. You create a photograph. None of those things require you to fully operate a piece of equipment. You can create music on a computer and you can create a photograph in auto mode on a camera. The creativity comes from composing the music and composing the image. You do not create driving. You operate the equipment and that is driving. When the equipment is doing it for you automatically, you are no longer driving.

Exactly how i see it. You don't need to be a great technician to be a great artist.

[TheKingInYellow]

I am still new at this, but I love this hobby and at some point I would like to consider myself a 'photographer' but I doubt I will ever earn a dime from it. Basically, I have a good job in a good field and I don't need to earn from it.

So this is why I find the definition of amateur/semi-pro a bit disheartening. I would like to think that you would define someone by their talent, not their income.

Just my couple of pennies.