From: ehr@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Ernest H. Robl)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Amateur vs. Pro (was Re: International Photographer)
Summary: a few thoughts
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:08:03 GMT
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service



I have been following the amateur versus professional thread with some
interest and have been thinking about how to respond to some of the
issues raised.

First, let me mention that though photography is currently not my main
source of income, I have been doing photography "professionally" for 
most of my life.  That gets me to my first point:  Yes, you can do
something professionally without having it be your main source of
income.

Most of what I currently do photographically falls in the category of
stock photography.  I deal with a wide variety of book and magazine
publishers.  Most do not know that I am not a full-time photographer;
those that do know don't care.  I don't make a secret of it; it just
normally does not come up in my dealings with these people.

They contact me for photos of specific subjects -- normally in one of
my subject specialties -- and these photos get evaluated against
photos from a number of other sources.  If my photos are the ones that
best suit their purposes -- notice, I did not say the best photos --
they get used.  And, I get paid for their use.

I get repeat customers because most of these people find me easy to
do business with.  Just because I am not a full-time photographer does
not mean that I do not take a very business-like approach to what I
do.  Unfortunately, when you do anything as a business, you spend more
time on the business end than on the main activity.  (By the business
end, I mean things like correspondence, accounting, other record-
keeping, and organizing my transparency files.)


Getting access:  Much of my stock photography does involve getting 
access to areas not open to the public.  I selsdom have problems in
this area, though I am not working on assignment for a specific
client.  (With stock, I am shooting for my own files, in anticipation
of the fact that a client will later request a particular subject.)
Of course, part of it is that (1) I can show a track record of 
published material; (2) I try to be diplomatic and make sure that I
explain why I want access and what the photos are likely to be used
for; and (3) I make sure that they know I understand their field and
that I am fully aware of any hazards involved.  In the latter case
this may involve signing a liability release.  (I normally bring that
issue up myself.)  Some organizations require the release; others
don't and care more about how they think you will conduct yourself
on their property.

(For the record, one of my subject specialties is transportation,
particularly railroads.)


News photography:  I did start out in the news business, and worked
for both newspapers and United Press International (UPI) for a number
of years.  For 95 per cent of the news photography that I did, no one
cared about credentials.  What mattered was being on the scene.  And,
in breaking news situations, behaviour counts for more than credentials.
If you don't get in the way of those trying to control a situation,
they will be as helpful as they can be under the circumstances.  Or,
you can have all the credentials in the world, if you are getting in
their way, they aren't going to be very happy about that.

Sports events are a special situation.  You aren't going to get
credentials to top sports events unless the organizer thinks it's
in their best interest.  To convince them of that, you either have
to have an assignment from a publication or a track record or both.

On the other hand, it's easy enough to find small events to get
experience at -- and you can probably find a small publication that
may be interested in coverage.


Getting started:  Though my degree is in journalism, much of what I
learned in that field came from practical experience, particularly
working on a daily college newspaper for which I did both writing and
photography.  During those early days, I found the professional
photographers that I met at news and sports events very helpful and
willing to answer questions -- as long as it did not interfere with
their primary work.

I bought my first Nikon because that's what I saw everyone else using
-- and soon found that other photographers I got to know were even
willing to let me try out a lens or other accessory at these events.

In fact, I think that's where I first came across the concept of 
"paying forward."  In other words, you can't always pay someone back
for a favor he has done you.  But, there is frequently the opportunity
to do the same favor for someone else.

In the long run, everyone is better off for that attitude.


Marketing:  I often come across people who are trying to break into
selling their photography.  Their biggest problem is usually not 
that they are not good photographers, but that they are not willing
learn and devote time to the business end.  There is a vast range
of clients for photography, most with different needs.  They do not
care if you are a great artist -- only whether or not you can meet
their needs, at a reasonable (depends on the market) price with a
minimum of hassle.

Doing photography or anything else as a business is work -- usually
more work than fun, though you can still enjoy something and make
money from it.


Just my $0.02 worth. -- Ernest

-- 

"My other computer is a Nikon N8008." -- Ernest H. Robl
Ernest H. Robl (ehr@ecsvax)  Durham, NC, USA   +1  919   286-3845
                                         FAX:  +1  919   286-1696
Newsgroups: rec.photo