Professional photography now a thing of the past?

I was reading an interesting blog post last week where another photographer had commented on the fact that more and more photographers are flooding the market with their new affordable DSLR cameras and claiming to be 'professional photographers'. This of course dilutes the meaning of the word as many of them are not pro's so the title no longer has the same value. Even for the legit pro's.

Does that make sense? What do you think about this?

In the big picture of things, I don't think it's going to make much difference. A professional has a certain walk to them that people can pick up. The newbies can be spotted from a mile a way

The influx of the craigslist pros may take business away from the pros.... But it certainly won't take the abilities of the pros away. I think it was said here in a similar thread, but creme always rises to the top! It's kind of amazing, at least in my area, to see the photo section on craigslist. There are thousands of ads for the newer cameras from private parties. It's as if you're reading thousands of buyer's remorse statements from people who were dreaming big at the thought of becoming a high class photographer based on the potentials of the new generation of DSLRs!

I know, right?

Gary

www.grhookphoto.com
facebook.com/grhookphoto

it's the quality of the work that counts- not the moniker that some folks bandy about. I agree with Scotty that the cream rises to the top and the craigslist folks aren't at the top so they are Pro in name only (PINO) and those whose work shines will always be the ones who are true professionals.

I actually agree with much of that. I see it all the time, nineteen year old college drop out buys a D40 and kit lens and goes "pro". It HAS been diluted, and this will continue as real jobs become more scarce....and the economy IS shrinking. This of course does not take anything away from the true fine photographers, but facts are facts. We have a supporting "Walmart" type customer base that demands "cheap pictures", and they will be satisfied. As mentioned above, there is also a tremendous failure rate in this field.......

The real key to survival is for the Pro to realize that they're not really missing out on anything but bad business when the Craigslist shooter hooks up with the Walmart client. They're both doomed to fail from the start because everyone's expectations are all out of whack.

My nephew has just bought a Canon 6D with 24-105 with the hopes that one day he might be able to help me with my work...

Lets see what happens there. Honestly if he sticks at it he could be good. He has some good ideas, but I'm drilling into him it's not an easy path and he does realise he has a lot to learn.

I think the market has certainly become saturated with talentless camera sluts, but there will always the better ones that'll become mistresses.

effron wrote: I actually agree with much of that. I see it all the time, nineteen year old college drop out buys a D40 and kit lens and goes "pro". It HAS been diluted, and this will continue as real jobs become more scarce....and the economy IS shrinking. This of course does not take anything away from the true fine photographers, but facts are facts. We have a supporting "Walmart" type customer base that demands "cheap pictures", and they will be satisfied. As mentioned above, there is also a tremendous failure rate in this field.......

the solution is to make more main stream a 'Master Photographer' license. This will be what separates the pro's from the true invested master photographers.

There are more "pro" photographers popping up everyday. Photography is no different from any other profession. The ones at the top perform consistently, know their opposition, have a game plan, think on their feet, are willing to change & update skills but most of all know their trade & their gear inside out & backwards.
Not everyone can be a Federer, Nadal, Djokovic or Murray. There are however thousands if not millions of reasonable tennis players but only a few hundred that stand out & command/earn large fees.
Similarly with photographers. The difference being that second or third rate photographers can charge a fee that is not commensurate with their level of professionlism & usually not based on performance. In fact if they were tennis players they would not be allowed to compete before first proving themselves. I converse with many aspiring photographers who have about as much photographic & business knowledge as my dog.- She is a Greyhound beautiful mover but not the most intelligent of animals .
I am not a professional but have been in a previous life & have photographic qualifications & diplomas etc. I am also an accountant which for me is a more stable & lucrative profession & from where I see the lack of business accumen of many would be photographers who do not know how to charge out their services, what gear to purchase etc.. I doubt a mechanic would book in cars then ask what tools he should use .
Many photographers these days service the stock industry because it is relatively easy to do so. Some earn enough to support their hobby.
The good will usually survive & their best adverts are the not so good. Unfortunately many employing a photographer will never realise they received a sub standard service.

Cathy Kadolph wrote:

effron wrote: I actually agree with much of that. I see it all the time, nineteen year old college drop out buys a D40 and kit lens and goes "pro". It HAS been diluted, and this will continue as real jobs become more scarce....and the economy IS shrinking. This of course does not take anything away from the true fine photographers, but facts are facts. We have a supporting "Walmart" type customer base that demands "cheap pictures", and they will be satisfied. As mentioned above, there is also a tremendous failure rate in this field.......

the solution is to make more main stream a 'Master Photographer' license. This will be what separates the pro's from the true invested master photographers.

How would you test for the license? I mean some people know a lot of technical stuff, but their photos are so-so. Though if you go the other way and look at the quality of their photos... that's so subjective it's hilarious. I mean some people even like HDR.