Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
PHOTOGRAPHERS.. SHOULD BE LICENCED
Page <<first <prev 6 of 18 next> last>>
Oct 31, 2011 10:22:08   #
sparky192 Loc: Manitoba, Canada
 
LICENSING???
The Canadian government spent TWO B I L L I O N DOLLARS on gun control and registering firearms. It didnt worked and is being scrapped and all records destroyed. and PROFESSIONALS(??) are running the country.
WE DO NOT NEED MORE LICENSES LAWS AND PERMITS!!!
This supposed to be a hobby for some, a job for others...

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:24:34   #
ruben.vuittonet
 
I think we should have a licensing requirement for those who want to license people.

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:28:53   #
George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
dongrant wrote:
FOTOSTAN wrote:
Back in the "good old days" when a person said "I am a photographer" the end result: a print or slide was his proof. No drug store processing, but good darkroom working knowledge. TODAY. it's another story. All I see and read is not photography, but..." I've got a Zulu D 317 camera, can some one help me and tell how to use it" or, "should I use a 800mm lens for shooting birds, or a zoom lens" etc... Now aday a so-called photographer is someone who owns a camera. How many times did I see and hear.. " I put my X camera on auto focus, but the pix is out of focus" OR, "what mm lens should I buy, since I want to photograph birds 12 miles away" Even at weddings, a so-called pro photographer shoots many hundreds of images on a memory stick, and gives it to the couple, saying, " now go and have prints made someplace, money please?.. I write this complaint because, just the other day, a PRO PHOTOGRAPHER who got his certificate from a mail-order house stating he was a pro, at a photo shoot, didn't know how to use his "Z" camera and had to use a point and shoot... SOME PRO.. Learn your craft, prove your knowledge, THEN, be proud of a honorable trade...
Back in the "good old days" when a perso... (show quote)


To though a fly in your ointment, many people will tell you that some of the worse photographers are Pros with all kinds of credentials academic and otherwise and some of the best are simply very passionate self-taught amateurs. Note the use of the qualifier "some". Are you going to License ditch diggers? Just because you can hold a shovel does not mean that you know how to dig a ditch... but to license every job type would bring the economy to a dead stop. Think people! Maybe we should require a license to allow breathing.
quote=FOTOSTAN Back in the "good old days&qu... (show quote)


Dongrant,
Took me a while to understand what you meant. You have thrown no fly in the ointment at all. I have said this if you go back and look into my posts. I have seen the work of some of these so called pros and they produced terrible photos. Licensing will do one thing make money for whomever is issuing the license. You will still have the incompetent shooting that has the money for the License.

Reply
 
 
Oct 31, 2011 10:33:54   #
George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
ruben.vuittonet wrote:
JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
ruben.vuittonet......who was your post directed to?


To the original post.


Ruben,
Would you care to explain why it was directed at him since it seems you misunderstand what he wrote? That is the impression that I get, I could be wrong.

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:37:20   #
dongrant Loc: Earth, I think!
 
George H wrote:
dongrant wrote:
FOTOSTAN wrote:
Back in the "good old days" when a person said "I am a photographer" the end result: a print or slide was his proof. No drug store processing, but good darkroom working knowledge. TODAY. it's another story. All I see and read is not photography, but..." I've got a Zulu D 317 camera, can some one help me and tell how to use it" or, "should I use a 800mm lens for shooting birds, or a zoom lens" etc... Now aday a so-called photographer is someone who owns a camera. How many times did I see and hear.. " I put my X camera on auto focus, but the pix is out of focus" OR, "what mm lens should I buy, since I want to photograph birds 12 miles away" Even at weddings, a so-called pro photographer shoots many hundreds of images on a memory stick, and gives it to the couple, saying, " now go and have prints made someplace, money please?.. I write this complaint because, just the other day, a PRO PHOTOGRAPHER who got his certificate from a mail-order house stating he was a pro, at a photo shoot, didn't know how to use his "Z" camera and had to use a point and shoot... SOME PRO.. Learn your craft, prove your knowledge, THEN, be proud of a honorable trade...
Back in the "good old days" when a perso... (show quote)


To though a fly in your ointment, many people will tell you that some of the worse photographers are Pros with all kinds of credentials academic and otherwise and some of the best are simply very passionate self-taught amateurs. Note the use of the qualifier "some". Are you going to License ditch diggers? Just because you can hold a shovel does not mean that you know how to dig a ditch... but to license every job type would bring the economy to a dead stop. Think people! Maybe we should require a license to allow breathing.
quote=FOTOSTAN Back in the "good old days&qu... (show quote)


Dongrant,
Took me a while to understand what you meant. You have thrown no fly in the ointment at all. I have said this if you go back and look into my posts. I have seen the work of some of these so called pros and they produced terrible photos. Licensing will do one thing make money for whomever is issuing the license. You will still have the incompetent shooting that has the money for the License.
quote=dongrant quote=FOTOSTAN Back in the "... (show quote)


So...If I understand you then, we are more or less in agreement. As are most of the people that have posted on this thread. And most will say that the idea of licensing photographers is about as absurd as you can get. Am I correct?

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:38:44   #
George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
sparky192 wrote:
For my two cents, getting a drivers license is just a paper that says you are safe enough to venture out in public with a huge heavy machine. Driving is a lifetime of learning, and for most of us, getting better each day.
Photgraphy is the same. How many people had a polaroid for the first camera. The subject didnt really matter, it was getting the picture printed in your hand that was unique.
Having too many photographers might make it tougher for pros to make a buck, but look at the advances in gear and technology and reduction in prices because of the numbers of users.
The same could be said about wanna be writers and authors. Before the advent of computers and word processors writing was a skilled trade. It took me years to establish myself and land a job as an editor for a large magazine.
NOW?? You can talk to the computer and tell it a story, then run the text through right writer or style writer, do a spelling and grammer check and fire it off to a publisher. There is so much pure crap being submitted now that a pro has trouble getting throught the door.
But life goes on. I am not a "Professional" photographer, but my work has graced the covers and pages of numerous publications in support of articles or features I have written.... and been paid for .... does that make me a pro??
For my two cents, getting a drivers license is jus... (show quote)


Sparky,
In simple terms yes it does, you were paid by someone because the photos you took were of the quality they needed for a cover or article. As an editor you know that as well as I do. Now I do agree with your statement of being overwhelmed with submissions.

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:39:42   #
BBNC
 
Time and time again, it has been shown that the mere possession of a license is not proof of one's competence.

I have a friend who has made his living as a professional photographer most of his life. He is not afraid of so-called "professionals" because he knows they will weed themselves out eventually. Professional photography is a tough business, like any other art, and those who don't perform are soon gone by the wayside.

Study and perfect your craft, that will speak for itself.

Reply
 
 
Oct 31, 2011 10:39:47   #
marmesto Loc: Hamburg, NY
 
Carl wrote:
Your spelling doesn't bother me (you are not claiming to be an English teacher, a profession that also doesn't need to be licensed),


In my state, English teachers do have to be licensed and certified. Demonstrated success at student teaching is required before a B.S. is awarded. Five years of probation, a Masters Degree, and annual performance reviews occur prior to permanent certification. Even with that, performance reviews occur at least annually. Should that level of scrutiny be applied to photographers?

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:42:30   #
George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
dongrant wrote:
George H wrote:
dongrant wrote:
FOTOSTAN wrote:
Back in the "good old days" when a person said "I am a photographer" the end result: a print or slide was his proof. No drug store processing, but good darkroom working knowledge. TODAY. it's another story. All I see and read is not photography, but..." I've got a Zulu D 317 camera, can some one help me and tell how to use it" or, "should I use a 800mm lens for shooting birds, or a zoom lens" etc... Now aday a so-called photographer is someone who owns a camera. How many times did I see and hear.. " I put my X camera on auto focus, but the pix is out of focus" OR, "what mm lens should I buy, since I want to photograph birds 12 miles away" Even at weddings, a so-called pro photographer shoots many hundreds of images on a memory stick, and gives it to the couple, saying, " now go and have prints made someplace, money please?.. I write this complaint because, just the other day, a PRO PHOTOGRAPHER who got his certificate from a mail-order house stating he was a pro, at a photo shoot, didn't know how to use his "Z" camera and had to use a point and shoot... SOME PRO.. Learn your craft, prove your knowledge, THEN, be proud of a honorable trade...
Back in the "good old days" when a perso... (show quote)


To though a fly in your ointment, many people will tell you that some of the worse photographers are Pros with all kinds of credentials academic and otherwise and some of the best are simply very passionate self-taught amateurs. Note the use of the qualifier "some". Are you going to License ditch diggers? Just because you can hold a shovel does not mean that you know how to dig a ditch... but to license every job type would bring the economy to a dead stop. Think people! Maybe we should require a license to allow breathing.
quote=FOTOSTAN Back in the "good old days&qu... (show quote)


Dongrant,
Took me a while to understand what you meant. You have thrown no fly in the ointment at all. I have said this if you go back and look into my posts. I have seen the work of some of these so called pros and they produced terrible photos. Licensing will do one thing make money for whomever is issuing the license. You will still have the incompetent shooting that has the money for the License.
quote=dongrant quote=FOTOSTAN Back in the "... (show quote)


So...If I understand you then, we are more or less in agreement. As are most of the people that have posted on this thread. And most will say that the idea of licensing photographers is about as absurd as you can get. Am I correct?
quote=George H quote=dongrant quote=FOTOSTAN Ba... (show quote)


Yes, you are.

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:45:59   #
ruben.vuittonet
 
George H wrote:
ruben.vuittonet wrote:
JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
ruben.vuittonet......who was your post directed to?


To the original post.


Ruben,
Would you care to explain why it was directed at him since it seems you misunderstand what he wrote? That is the impression that I get, I could be wrong.


There is nothing wrong with being ignorant or new to a field (in this case photography). Especially, in my opinion, on a site like this one which contains a liberal mix of both experienced (and sometimes professional) and amateur photographers. I say "Especially," but perhaps I mean specifically.

It may be that one wishes to learn about photography, yet does not have 40 hour a week, 2080 days a year to spend on its pursuit. Maybe one is home-maker and simply wishes to take nice photographs of one's family. Whatever the reason, when inquisitiveness is denigrated, it is offensive.

As I said, I have yet to find a "rule book" for discussing photography. When and if they (and who gets to pick 'they') post one, I suppose holding people to that standard might make sense. Probably not, however, if they are going to come off as snobbish and rude as the poster of the original post.

Sorry to become strident here, but I am a little offended by his post. My mother died a few years ago and I have taken up her sewing machine with an interest in learning how to sew. Perhaps they should register potential seamsters, too.

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:46:34   #
BBNC
 
Sparky,

Reply
 
 
Oct 31, 2011 10:49:34   #
dongrant Loc: Earth, I think!
 
George H wrote:
steve40 wrote:
A photographer implies one, who uses a camera to take a picture. Anyone who uses a camera to take a photo, is a photographer of sorts, just not always a good one.

Digital cameras, and PhotoShop have produced more I wanna be's, than it has actually good photographers. Anyone can shoot a mile wide scene, and later crop the sweet spot out of it. But can they find, and photograph it; using the one original image.

Sorry but there are more PhotoShop'ist, than real Photographers.

Steve,
Sorry but a crappy photo, is still a crappy photo, all the photoshop skills in the world will not save garbage, they can make it look a little better but at what cost, time. I never spent much time in the darkroom, I gave my raw film to a pro house to process. I was just too busy to spend the time processing. Now I have almost no choice but to process my own. I try to get the image that is in my head into my camera, so that post is almost not needed many times. Most of my shots require a small crop or maybe a slight alignment.
quote=steve40 A photographer implies one, who use... (show quote)


Question: Who determines what is good and what is bad? I bet you can not come up with an answer to satisfy all. While there may be SOME general agreement among a group there is never a definitive answer suitable to everyone. Quality is a very subjective matter and different individuals will have different sets of values.

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:51:54   #
BBNC
 
Sparky,

I know your job has got to be a tough one, especially these days. As a working editor, you should be able to spot the real writers and photographers through the fog of submissions.

The other side of that coin is when you receive something that fits your needs and is good stuff, does it really matter if it was done by an amateur or pro, unless name recognition is important?

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:52:15   #
alaskanfrog Loc: Alaska
 
To accuse people of not being a photographer just because they are not in the "elite" pro standards with a "License" is not fair. There are literally thousands of people who own cameras and love the craft of photography. I have seen many a professional photographer that have produced stunningly beautiful photos but at the same time, published crap I wouldn't even consider. I have also seen many an amateur photographer publish bad photos, but a the same time, produce photos that rival and even surpass professional works.

If you want to be a professional, then by all means, be a professional, be proud of your license, but don't take your frustrations out on honest people just because they truly enjoy what they are doing.

Most of us here are not in it for the recognition or claim to fame. We're here because we love doing photography. We're here because we enjoy each others company and the sharing and exchange of knowledge that goes on here without judging one another. This is an unfair attack on people who did nothing to deserve it and as a photographer I am offended by the words you chose to publish. I have been doing photography since I was 17 years old, mostly on an amateur level and only on a semi-professional level.

To make the statement that a "Photographer should be licensed" is unwarranted and shows a narrow minded attitude that is not befitting of the art of photography. This is not a popularity contest that I'm aware of. This website is a community of people who share something in common, a love of photography. This statement is debasing and will discourage others from coming and sharing in this site. Many newcomers who come here want to learn about this "honorable profession." I had to learn about it on my own as I'm sure many others did. I didn't go to school, I had no training. All that I know of photography was learned through trial and error, including setting shutter speed, ISO, F-opening, and whatever technical term that is used in the field and "craft" of photography. Photography is much more than just a profession or a craft. It's a true expression of creativity and a passion for many people, myself included...

How would you feel if you were discouraged from doing your profession simply because you didn't have a "License?" Where would you be if no one wanted you to do it because you weren't licensed and didn't exactly fit the criteria you are demanding that a photographer be? How long did you do photography without a license before you earned your credentials?

I might be going out on a limb here, but I feel it's important to speak for the "Non-professional" photographers who love this art. That BS of requiring a license before you can call yourself a photographer is exactly that: BS!!! I'm sure that what I'm saying will probably upset a few people at least, but I'm equally certain that there are many more who would agree with my opinion.

In fairness to you, your opinion is yours alone and you're welcome to it... I just happen to disagree with it, STRONGLY.

My Proof, I'm a photographer...
My Proof, I'm a photographer......

Reply
Oct 31, 2011 10:58:12   #
George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York
 
ruben.vuittonet wrote:
George H wrote:
ruben.vuittonet wrote:
JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
ruben.vuittonet......who was your post directed to?


To the original post.


Ruben,
Would you care to explain why it was directed at him since it seems you misunderstand what he wrote? That is the impression that I get, I could be wrong.


There is nothing wrong with being ignorant or new to a field (in this case photography). Especially, in my opinion, on a site like this one which contains a liberal mix of both experienced (and sometimes professional) and amateur photographers. I say "Especially," but perhaps I mean specifically.

It may be that one wishes to learn about photography, yet does not have 40 hour a week, 2080 days a year to spend on its pursuit. Maybe one is home-maker and simply wishes to take nice photographs of one's family. Whatever the reason, when inquisitiveness is denigrated, it is offensive.

As I said, I have yet to find a "rule book" for discussing photography. When and if they (and who gets to pick 'they') post one, I suppose holding people to that standard might make sense. Probably not, however, if they are going to come off as snobbish and rude as the poster of the original post.

Sorry to become strident here, but I am a little offended by his post. My mother died a few years ago and I have taken up her sewing machine with an interest in learning how to sew. Perhaps they should register potential seamsters, too.
quote=George H quote=ruben.vuittonet quote=John... (show quote)


Ruben,
Do you call yourself a Professional Photographer, one who makes his living shooting? If you do fine, I just hope you take photos that are good. I have seen some pros that do not take good photos, too dark, too light, not in focus, far too shallow depth of field for what is supposed to be captured. These are people who because they have great equipment, and were told how great they are, now come to Fashion Shows. Now most shots can look pretty good on the small screen on back of the camera, but take it to an 8x10 and it turns into a poor photo. The term Professional has now been compromised by mediocrity. Oh by the way I have also tried to learn how to sew, daunting.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 18 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.