Do you need a certain quality of equipment to be a professional?

Good thread...

I have read several articles in the last decade where photojournalists have expressed that they often work with point-n-shoot style digital cameras. Recently there was one about a guy using his Iphone to document the troops in Afghanistan. They like them because they are small and discreet, and help them get the shot.

And of course there's always Terry Richardson who is laughing all the way to the bank with his cheap, crappy cameras.

It all depends on your budget too- I know several pro shooters who prefer the D70-80-90 series cameras and turn out outstanding images with them. I prefer the D90 bodies to shoot hockey because it's my SKILL that makes the images-not my camera even though it helps to have good equipment

Skills are the winning horse here, however if you show up to a wedding holding a polaroid good photographer or not, your clients will be double guessing you.

Henry Peach wrote: I have read several articles in the last decade where photojournalists have expressed that they often work with point-n-shoot style digital cameras. Recently there was one about a guy using his Iphone to document the troops in Afghanistan. They like them because they are small and discreet, and help them get the shot.

And of course there's always Terry Richardson who is laughing all the way to the bank with his cheap, crappy cameras.

Some of those point and shoots are pretty powerful small cameras. Not to mention the iPhones are up to what... 8MP now?

Monster wrote:

Henry Peach wrote: I have read several articles in the last decade where photojournalists have expressed that they often work with point-n-shoot style digital cameras. Recently there was one about a guy using his Iphone to document the troops in Afghanistan. They like them because they are small and discreet, and help them get the shot.

And of course there's always Terry Richardson who is laughing all the way to the bank with his cheap, crappy cameras.

Some of those point and shoots are pretty powerful small cameras. Not to mention the iPhones are up to what... 8MP now?

Dewitt Jones is doing an entire series using his iPhone.

it's not about the equipment it's about the person holding the equipment if your good and have a love and passion for what you do then you can use the cheapest of phones and point and shoot cameras but for me i have taken loads of nice photos without the need for expencive equipment but as you grow as a photographer you yourself want to be better and better equipment will only make me love what i do even more the more i learn the more i want lol ..


i could give my friend my canon 7d and i could use my old phone samsung d900 and i know i could still get a better photo than he could :0)

The pro can make an image that is good nonwithstanding the equipment used. The amateur can make a crappy image with a D3x. So charging market rates may get you to a D3 sooner than not.

These high level pros who use cheap cameras/iPhones to do "work" are the exception.

For example, Henry mentioned Terry Richardson... seems to have access more than anything else. He's a hipster taking photos of his hipster friends... some of which are models/famous and can't tell a good photo from a crappy over-exposed/saturated piece of rubbish that's just weird for the sake of being weird.... still he makes money so he must be good right?!

He does have his own style, I'll admit that. If people want him to take weird photos of them. All the best.

Oh guys like him are usually master self marketers... which is more important than talent...

Mostly it's " Because they can" when it comes to paying for the Ferrari model Hasseblad. But the images one makes should speak for themselves

Stealthy Ninja wrote: For example, Henry mentioned Terry Richardson... seems to have access more than anything else. He's a hipster taking photos of his hipster friends... some of which are models/famous and can't tell a good photo from a crappy over-exposed/saturated piece of rubbish that's just weird for the sake of being weird.... still he makes money so he must be good right?!

He does have his own style, I'll admit that. If people want him to take weird photos of them. All the best.

Oh guys like him are usually master self marketers... which is more important than talent...

A good promo story is more important than good gear. The most famous aren't necessarily always good self-marketers, but they find someone who is great at it and will work for them: agents, spouses, gallery owners, museum curators, etc...

Henry Peach wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote: For example, Henry mentioned Terry Richardson... seems to have access more than anything else. He's a hipster taking photos of his hipster friends... some of which are models/famous and can't tell a good photo from a crappy over-exposed/saturated piece of rubbish that's just weird for the sake of being weird.... still he makes money so he must be good right?!

He does have his own style, I'll admit that. If people want him to take weird photos of them. All the best.

Oh guys like him are usually master self marketers... which is more important than talent...

A good promo story is more important than good gear. The most famous aren't necessarily always good self-marketers, but they find someone who is great at it and will work for them: agents, spouses, gallery owners, museum curators, etc...

So the greats are all scabs?!


LOL

I will be the first to admit I am over my head with my Canon 5D Mii, haven't touched on 1/3 of what it can do, but I wanted it for the ability to have a full frame sensor, and the ability to crop as needed, as well as produce large wall hanging images. The 5d does what I wanted it to do. I consider myself a student of photography and will until the day I die. My skill however is in my hands and brain not the camera. As I have taken equally crappy work on both my 5d or my antique 10D.

MJ you turn out some beautiful work that shows your obvious talent regardless of the camera you used to produce it

Stealthy Ninja wrote: So the greats are all scabs?!

I don't know how you got that from what I said. Scabs are union breakers. I'm not sure what that has to do with getting famous as a creative.

I said the majority of famous artists have someone else working on promoting them. It's a completely different skill set, and a full time job. The artist needs to be able to work. You will find these agents (they often have other labels/jobs) somewhere in the biographies of almost all famous artists and photographers.