Years ago there was a commercial that featured the champion golfer Tom Kite and another professional golfer. The two were on massage tables getting rubdowns, discussing in weary, jaded tones whether they were going to take the trouble to fly to Hawaii to play in a golf tournament. It's been a very long time since I saw that ad, but, if memory serves, the two also discussed the huge prize money on offer as if it were barely worth the trouble.
The joke, of course, was that they were complaining bitterly about things the average golfer would dearly love to be privileged to do.
But how many of those jealous amateurs would really have enough desire to be a professional golfer? Those guys practice four, six, eight, even ten hours a day. They'll do two hours just practicing putts...and then do it again the next day, and the next. Would you want to do that? If you play golf, have you ever once worked with the same club for two hours straight at a practice range? Maybe you have if you were on the golf team in college. The average amateur hasn't, I'll bet.
Even if I were good at it, I think I'd be bored out of my mind inside of a week.
Number 36
It's the same way in many fields. The people who succeed have a great deal of energy for the work.
At least with golf there's the potential for reward. Top pool players also have to practice eight hours a day (three hours was about my max, back when I had a table) but the difference is stark: as a competitive-pool-playing friend of mine pointed out a few years back, the no. 36 pro golfer on the PGA tour earns more than two million dollars; the no. 36 pool player in the world (a friend of my friend's) has to sleep in his car when he travels to tournaments because he can't afford a motel.
People who succeed also have a huge appetite for the work. A desire and an interest—and a satisfaction when things go well—that keeps them going.
I think I read somewhere—in about '08, around there—that the average blogger writes four posts and then gives up. I have a relative who did exactly that—four excellent, well-conceived, informative, entertaining, well-written blog posts. Then, because the effort had tired him out, he took a few days off. That turned into a few weeks, and what do you know? A number of months later it emerged that he had, in fact, retired from blogging after those first four posts. He hadn't exactly intended to, but he did. Too much work, not enough reward.
This is blog post number 7,242 for me, and that follows more than 240 published columns in print and on the Internet, and around 200 published magazine articles and editorials.
Would you want to do that, or would it drive you crazy? You won't offend me if you say the latter.
Granted, not all of those blog posts are much good, but maybe 10% of them are. That's still 724 well-crafted mini-articles, most conceived and finished within a span of one to three hours. More than most writers would have the stamina for. There must be something keeping my batteries charged.
Be a happy amateur and be happy!
I have two separate points to make here. They don't necessarily relate to each other. The first is my belief that you simply have to have a certain amount of aptitude and ability for any type of work (or sport, or art, or anything) that requires so much time, effort, and practice. (Reward is a strong motivator, too.) That popular idea about 10,000 hours being needed for mastery is nice and tidy, but the fact is that if you don't have aptitude and ability for a particular pursuit, and if you're not getting real gratification from it, you won't be able to find the drive and the energy to keep going that long. Determination alone just won't do it. You can't force yourself to be what you're not. (And the worse you are at something, the more effort it takes to do it well.)
The second point is that it can be okay to be an amateur. Professional photographers work very hard. The job has an unusual number of facets and they have to be good at most of them. It requires a broad range of talents and abilities. And it never stops. If you're an amateur, think of the hardest you ever worked at photography and ask yourself, would I really want to do that all day long, five, six, sometimes seven days a week?
For most people, the answer is probably very much like it would be for the average amateur golfer: "Ahh...not really." Just as it's great fun to be able to play golf every weekend in the Summer and partake of an occasional golf holiday, maybe even practice a few times a week and enjoy reading about golfers and equipment, so it is with photography. For most of us it's lovely to be able to do many of the things I've done myself over the past week: head out for a few hours of exploring, looking around, and photographing; happily sift through those shots on the computer and spend some time feeling enthusiastic about the good ones; settle down for an hour to the satisfying task of making a great print of an image you care about; or sit down for another satisfying stint of reading a few more pages in the book I've currently got going, The Origins of American Photography. I love every part of it. It's a great hobby, and it keeps rewarding me. Add a dedicated photography vacation or workshop every now and then, a museum visit, and the company of intelligent and interesting like-minded enthusiasts (that's you!), plus the appealing distraction of the gear and gadgetry, and I'm contented.
But all the time? All day every day? The answer for me is clear: I love being an amateur photographer. And I'll continue to jealously guard that status. Your mileage, as they say on the Internet, may vary!
Mike
Original contents copyright 2016 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Help encourage no. 7,243:
Join our support campaign or buy something
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Rob: "I'm a musician, classical and jazz mostly, and the same thing applies. I tell my students to remember that practicing and playing (rehearsals, concerts, etc.) are not the same thing, and that high-quality practice is very intense—and hard—work. To become a competent instrumentalist requires years of four to eight hours of practice a day in addition to any playing that one might do. It might be great fun and spiritually rewarding but it is also d**n hard work!"
Gato: "I started college as a music major at one of the top schools. The thing that amazed me most—and moved me to change majors—was just how much time and work people put into developing their talent. At that age I just couldn't understand putting in six or eight hours a day in a practice room—on top of classes and rehearsals.
"A couple of years later I discovered photography and found myself spending six or eight hours a day in the darkroom, in addition to shooting, studying and classes. That is, putting in the kind of work the musicians had been doing. Then I began to understand what drove them.
"I was lucky enough to make a decent living doing the kind of photography I enjoyed for about 12 years—and also lucky enough to segue into a related career when it began to get old.
"I cannot imagine how awful it would have been had I been forced to continue churning out commercial-grade photography after the glow faded. Being forced to do work you don't like just to put food on the table is bad enough. Being forced to do work you don't like in a field you once loved would be torture—at least to me.
"Now I'm retired and can do photography on my own terms—and I love it again.
"By the way, my accountant loves accounting the way some people love photography or music. Some of us are lucky enough to find a calling and be able to pursue it."
Darlene: "Well I was a pro photographer for decades and I would do it all over again knowing what I know. I made a very good income, was my own boss, was well respected, met some incredible people and some famous personalities that I otherwise would never have met if not for my profession, and because I was good at it, doors opened for me and that was a pretty cool ride to be on. It was difficult at times to balance my personal life with my professional life, and it becomes hard work physically the older you get, but I have the passion and have always known that nothing else will satisfy me like photography does. I am equally happy doing personal work as I was doing commercial work, and I find teaching photography and the business just as satisfying; it truly is my life, it makes me happy and I do not care to be doing anything else. I see very few students with the passion I had early on, and others that I hope will find whatever it is that lights their fire before they grow too old or too tired because they ain't gonna make it in the photo business; this I know. Nothing wrong with their art, they lack the need to breathe! Passion is about risking everything for a dream no one can see but you, and when the risk turns into a negotiation with life, your passion will equal your need to breathe, and it is then you will succeed. Gotta have the passion to succeed."
Patrick: "Like most professional photographers, I started photography as a hobby, dare I say even a passion. When I started photographing professionally my shooting was split between work and personal. Sadly, the more successful I became as a professional (read: the more of my hours are spent photographing what others pay me to capture) the less and less I found myself doing photography for pleasure. At this point, six and a half days of every week are spent doing the job of professional photography (from shooting to editing to various business tasks) and I almost never pick up a camera for myself any longer. I guess it's a case of 'beware what you wish for.'"
Bruce McL: "Self-made billionaire Marc Cuban wrote a blog post on this subject. His advice: forget about following your passion. If you want to be successful, find what you like to grind away at and do that. Ideally it's something that you can't help but grind away at—every time somebody brings up a problem or issue around this subject you feel compelled to grind away until you have an answer you are satisfied with."
Gordon Lewis: "Having been a pro photographer in L.A. for a couple of years, I heartily agree with everything you've said. I might also add that the hard work involves a lot more than photography alone. Depending on speciality, it also requires marketing, accounting, client relations, bill collecting, travel, hiking, equipment transport and logistics, set building...the list goes on. That said, it was a great learning experience and I would gladly do it all again; I just wouldn't do it now. Writing ain't easy either, but at this stage in my life it's easier, and frankly, more rewarding."
Curt Gerston: "I've been an avid skier my whole life, got pretty good, and in college spent a season as a ski instructor...only one season. Turns out, I loved skiing as an escape for me, not as a job to be paid for. I feel the same way about photography...I tried shooting some weddings, portraits, events, just to see if I wanted to go pro...nope. Your post perfectly described my feelings about my 'amateur' status...I like to play at photography, not work for others."
Ade (partial comment): "Similarly, I've always wanted to be able to play the guitar but somehow I've never wanted to actually play the guitar enough to become competent at it. In fact, I suspect I'd rather be seen (and fêted) by others for being able to play it, rather than actually enjoying it as an activity in itself. This seems to be key for a lot of creative pursuits: if you can't subsist on the internal rewards alone, there are precious few external ones to compensate and they are usually hard-won. I guess it's fortunate that I've been able to make a career in IT, a field I'm happy to tinker about in anyway on my own time."
Peter Komar: "Photography was first my hobby and my passion and then I got my dream job of a professional photographer for a major corporation. The hobby and the career were totally different and although my photo career lasted over 12 years it just was not the fit I had expected. I grew in my career and learned so much but I also at times regretted my decision, the hobby and the profession were just so different, so for me if asked for advice I would simply say, think it over long and hard if the opportunity presents itself.
"The hobby was always and still is my passion."
Can o'worms Mike - What's a pro? Someone running a full time business, with premises, an agent, staff and so on, and able to change the car every few years and take a nice vacation and payin the kids college fees, or some poor schmuck tryin' his best to do everything on his/her own and barely making a living (or even worse, subsidised half the time by his/her spouse!)
Posted by: Ger Lawlor | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 09:52 AM
More than 10% of your blog posts are good.
Quite a few more than 10%, and I suspect most of your readers will agree with me.
:)
Posted by: Jim in Denver | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 09:52 AM
In the army, 1964-'67, I was a "pro" and I loved it. I wasn't tied to one place. I got to experience many situations and learn along the way about things that I otherwise would never have encountered. Of course, there was some drudgery, hours in the darkroom turning out hundreds of photos of the new commanding general to be placed in every building on post, various "grip & grin" shoots for press releases, getting dragged out in the middle of the night by the MPs to photograph auto accidents that involved GIs. I loved the aerial assignments. I once photographed an autopsy. The assignment I most loathed was the officers' wives tea parties. The range of what I did was exciting and fun but unlike the average independent commercial photographer, I did not have to go out and round up assignments. I think if I'd had to do all my own marketing it would not have been any fun at all.
Posted by: Jim Bullard | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 10:21 AM
The best comparison for becoming a pro photographer was the comment I heard once..."its the only thing harder than acting to get into"..
Posted by: will wright | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 10:26 AM
In finance the equation is risk vs. reward. Is the financial reward big enough relative to the amount of money invested? Mike's equation is work vs. reward. Is the reward (financial or otherwise) big enough relative to the kind and amount of work invested?
Related is how much is enough? Why is LeBron James still playing basketball? How much money is enough? I'm sure that for him the "otherwise" reward is as big or bigger than the money.
And then there's Bill Gates who is working hard giving his money away.
Posted by: Speed | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 10:29 AM
I'm glad you enjoy writing these articles because I enjoy reading them.
Posted by: Michael Kellough | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 10:50 AM
No. Not because of the hard work. Because of the hard work doing things that aren't fun. I work for a big company and get to specialize on what I went to school for, while other people handle human resources, finance, advertising, dealing with clients, etc. That fits my personality. If I could find a job that would pay me reasonably well to spend 40+ hours a week just doing the photography I enjoy, I'd probably pounce on it, but I don't think such a thing exists.
Posted by: Dennis | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 10:59 AM
Imagine being an accountant for 40 years. Who would want to do that?
Imagine writing computer software, surrounded by male pigs for 30 years who wouldn't know a decent place to eat if it hit them on the head, would you work in a place like that? (I did.)
Who would be a pro football player? You spend your days being hit on the head by other big guys that are trying to maim you.
Given my personality, I think the worst career choice for me would be wedding photography. Week after week of spoiled princesses throwing tantrums because they have invested so much of the past 5 years building up to the "most important day of their life", with a psycho-mother in tow, surrounded by drunken guests. And odds are 50/50, it'll all end in divorce by the end of the decade.
If people didn't have so much fun, they'd think that life was a misery.
Posted by: Robert Roaldi | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 11:02 AM
Wow, I really think this one depends on what sort of pro photographer. Because it's like pro drivers: there's bus drivers, long-distance truckers, limo drivers, school bus drivers, race car drivers....you get the picture. Each of these would have their own aptitude set.
I am doing fine arts repro and installation photography as part of my job. Love it. Could do it all the time instead of my other duties. I'd never tire of it (and now there's tons more variety to it, from copy stand to giant paintings to outdoor sculpture to video). I think I could easily do architecture and travel as well.
Wedding photographer? Events? Sports? Fashion? those are my footsteps you are hearing as I run away as fast as I can.
Posted by: tex andrews | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 11:17 AM
I have a friend that I met through photography. He's a highly educated guy with a very well paying job in finance, where as I left school at 15 and have no formal qualifications. One day he tells that he'd never become a pro photographer as there's no way he'd work for £20,000 a year.
I was working in a call centre at the time, earning £14,000. I warned him that he should not even think about going pro. At least not until he'd gained some tact
Posted by: Sean | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 11:25 AM
I like taking pictures, so I'd never turn pro. Same reason I am not opening a brewery, a hot sauce company, or a catering business.
Posted by: emptyspaces | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 11:49 AM
I made the decision not to turn pro in 1969- Woodstock weekend. I worked in the defense industry, abd was between jobs ('high priced migrant labor' in those days). A commercial photographer friend who I had assisted on occasion when i had time, offered me a partnership. In my work I sometimes had as many as four (4) 'bosses', all with different agendas. But I did photography for myself-what i wanted, when I wanted, how i wanted, or not at all. If I turned pro, I would have a boss or two, and not be doing my own photographic thing. I thought about it, said thanks, but no thanks, and have never regretted it. I'm the only boss my photos must satisfy, and that's hard enough.
Posted by: Richard Newman | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 12:02 PM
Right out of college-back in the day I was hired as a Police Crime Scene Photographer and Crime Scene Technician. This based on my Liberal Arts Degree that included lots of photography in both Journalism and Arts Department. Two years into this, I had completely lost my passion for photography-at least the practice of it. It was nearly eighteen years later-after a one year stint in Santa Fe, where there were a number of good photography galleries, that I cautiously dipped my toe back in the water. Went all-in after that. Most recently in my so called retirement-I got a license to sell Real Estate which I do kind of sort of-good reason to get out of the house and meet people. I was asked to do some of the photos for a fellow realtor, and I said sure. Didn't take long for me to realize that doing this as work is something I have zero interest in. Makes me realize I don't know how portrait, wedding photographers make it interesting for themselves-if they do. In any event, I'm only making photographs of things that actually interest me from here on out.
Posted by: Del Bomberger | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 12:05 PM
>>Would you want to do that, or would it drive you crazy?<<
It's the other way around: you already have to be crazy to start an endeavor like that.
Just kiddin'...
Posted by: Carsten Bockermann | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 12:10 PM
I toyed with being a local "pro" doing environmental damage photography as a result of 15 years of citizen activity documenting damage being done to Redwood National Park proposals in the sixties. I actually did some work for a few land owners who needed some documentation done.
However, doing all the film development work, providing proofs and test prints turned out to be a lot of un-fun work because now there was "pressure", both in time and results. Then "final" prints had to be made. The field work was great and my clients were happy. But I wasn't - I just didn't have the "grit" to do this on a daily basis. And by "this" I mean ALL the associated work necessary to finish a job with a client. And that doesn't even count the hustling to get more customers.
Mike's last two paragraphs of this blog ring precisely true! That's happy me there. Just add one more point: Show your "great print of an image you care about" to someone and then he or she asks, "how much do you want for it"?
Uh, Oh! Here we go again...:-)
Posted by: Dave Van de Mark | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 12:36 PM
At least pro golfers get to play on some beautiful courses that they would also enjoy as an amateur. Pro photographers, on the other hand, may be forced into taking the types of pictures that don't support their personal vision. Maybe that's better in a way, as private shooting can remain different...and enjoyable. [The same issue applies to photo amateurs who might occasionally exhibit work for sale, i.e., produce work to sell versus work for personal satisfaction; the two often don't coincide.]
Posted by: Jeff | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 12:52 PM
Do what you love. The power of love turns work into play.
Posted by: Ed Grossman | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 01:18 PM
40+ year photography career here, started in a studio during high-school, and now I'm 62!
There's a few big issues here. I had my own studio for about 10 of those years, and I liked it fine. What happened is the nature of the photography business changed, the people IN the photography business changed (both buyers and sellers), and the technology changed.
If I could go back to film, work with the type of people I was working with in 1982, get the same services I was getting in 1982, and work on the same jobs I was working on in 1982, for the same percentage of income as back in 1982, I'd be more than happy.
I've had to reinvent myself to stay employed, but it's a terrible life compared to what it once was, and there would be absolutely NO way I would become a photographer today, if I had the same feelings as I had then, and the business was presented to me as it is today.
I can tell you, managing a staff of disgruntled millennials, all mad about the money they make vs. what they paid to be in college, with very few options at all for a better reality, I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy!
The ad people I was working with at the beginning of my career were veritable geniuses compared to who you have to sell to, and interact with, today. We all understood the expenses and all agreed on a range of pricing. There were a ton of people eliminated from the industry because they could NOT get the technology of film and lighting down, or were not organized. You could buy equipment and use it forever (I still use it today!).
I learned a log time ago that the "best and the brightest" seem to filter through different job titles depending on the era. The type of people I was meeting in the late 60's and early 70's were those left-over mad-men-and-women. By the late 80's those "types" had moved on to investment banking, commercial real estate, whatever, but they weren't in my business anymore and I was horrified by who was...
Posted by: Crabby Umbo | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 01:42 PM
To answer your question - "Would you want to do that...:" It would drive me crazy! No offense. But I think that is due to the topic(s). I researched and wrote legal briefs and papers nearly every day for 30+ years and enjoyed it enormously, mostly. There was enjoyment in having the winning argument, of course, but a big part of the pleasure was organizing the ideas and bringing them together on paper to persuade other readers.
Posted by: cfw | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 01:46 PM
For me, doing something that I'm good at, but hate to do, isn't a good thing. I got A grades in college for my writing. In one script writing class, my work was often read, in-front-of-the-class, by the prof. But I'm loath to write for a living—too much effing trouble, for too little effing reward.
Working in Hollywood was enjoyable, but it cost me my marriage—and I didn't get to see my children grow-up. On one film I worked for three months, twelve hours-a-day, and only had one day-off each of those three months. Sorta hard to have much of a family life with that kind of schedule. If the writers/whoever went-on-strike, that put everybody out-of-work. Meh. People lose houses because of that. Double meh.
Since retiring from Hollywood, I've got some tear-sheets from my work—but a tear-sheet and two dollars won't buy you a cup of coffee.
If I had it to do all over again, I'd have stayed in school and got myself a PhD. And never have owned any lightmeters.
Posted by: c.d.embrey | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 01:53 PM
I studied biology and finished with a Ph.D. in 1998. At this time, I decided to leave this field and join a company which specialized in scientific software for chemists, as a software developer. This reason for this decision was that I loved to write to code; I even ran pet projects in my leisure. Looking back at the 18 years as software developer, I really had to learn that a being a professional (as in, working for clients) requires an emotional distance to my work. Mind you, I still enjoy going to work, but the love of the early days is gone.
Back to the original question: I really love taking pictures and visual arts, and I'd find it heartrending to attain an emotional distance to it. This would completely destroy it for me, and for this reason I'm glad that I am not a "pro".
Posted by: Thomas Rink | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 01:57 PM
I was just writing my thoughts on this the other day. Thinking about my own career track, and what I've told my students these last two years.
I spent two years in high school studying photography. During one of them, I skipped nearly all of my academic classes so that I could focus on a year long independent study. While in high school, I did every low hanging fruit photo job you can think of. Like--Sears portrait photography, one hour photo lab tech...etc.
I studied in college for two years until I was offered a paid internship with state government. Then immediately after that, I began working as an assistant for two local commercial/editorial photogs.
I spent two grueling years lugging their equipment around. Loading their cameras. Keeping their clients occupied while they worked. I learned more about photography and it's business end in these two years than I did in college.
Then at the ripe old age of 22, I stepped out and started my freelance career. It was 1997 and I spent a summer chasing toddlers to pay my rent. Talk about hard work! And no, not in a studio. Literally chasing them through back yards and parks! When I wasn't chasing kids, I was chasing stories for my city paper as a low paid stringer. Way too many boring evenings spent shooting field hockey. (I'm not a sports person- no offense to the field hockey athletes.)
I had a career break that fall which kicked off a career as a magazines feature photographer. I shot everything and anything. From travel to politicians to food, and cars and architecture. In between assignments for dozens of publications, I also shot advertising and produced several bodies of personal, artistic images which I exhibited.
Then after the GEC of '08, luck delivered a dream client to me. A major East Coast travel publication asked me to shoot for them on contract. What this entailed for the next several years was travelling extensively for assignments. Both domestically and abroad.
A typical assignment would look like this: Leave Philly for Dublin and land at 8:30 local time. Shoot first story at the airport (with no sleep and jet lag starting). Drop off bags at hotel. Shoot literally all day- my last frame was taken at about 11:45pm in a local pub as I shot very merry musicians. Wake up the next day, shoot at dawn. Eat. Pack. get in vehicle and travel to location two. Shoot all day again. Yes, past 10pm. We did this for 6 days as we drove across the country, spending each night in different accommodations.
Upon returning home, I spent days just sorting through the take to find a loose selection (about 600 from about 3500 frames) to show the art director. He would choose his favorite 150 or so images, then I would spend another several days editing the raw files.
Sometimes, these trips would come back to back. From one country and time zone to another.
And you know what? I loved every sleepless minute of it!
Now, I've been teaching college students. And although my classes are not about the business side, I discuss this very topic with them. I start out explaining the 10,000 hour concept. And add in 100,000 frames to that mix. (spent studying your failures, not using highspeed shutter). And then I tell them about my career and ask how many of them want to commit to a life like that. For only a modest, yet comfortable, income.
I usually wrap up that class by telling them that my career was on the low energy side of the game. Newspaper photographers, war photographers and some commercial photographers work much crazier hours with less sleep.
Posted by: Paul Emberger | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 02:00 PM
Thoughts on today's and yesterday's posts (both of which I'm reading for the first time today): Some years ago my wife gave me as a birthday present Ann Lamott's book Bird By Bird, her book on writing. She talks about going to writing seminars where she tells a group of wannabe writers that they'll probably never get published but that's OK because their writing is worthwhile and they should keep doing it for themselves. She describes their faces falling as she talks and then some timid soul raises a hand to ask if one needs an agent to be published. Lamott says yes, but tells them agents are busy and selective and they probably won't be picked up by an agent. Faces fall again and at last someone asks how to find an agent. And so it goes.
Do what you do for yourself first and don't worry about the money it might generate; most people who became rich or famous as writers or photographers or whatever didn't start out to become rich and/or famous, they were totally consumed with a passion for what they did.
My second thought is of Daniel Pinkwater who describes his beginning writing career as a solitary pursuit. He had friends who wanted to write who were out traveling the world to have "experiences" about which to write. Pinkwater stayed home in Hoboken, I think, and decided he had to sit at a table for one hour each day. The table held writing materials but he wasn't required to write; all he insisted of himself was that he sit at the table for an hour.
In the beginning all he did was sit. But eventually he began to write, and the hour turned into 90 minutes and then a couple of hours and then a chunk of the day. Pinkwater says this was how he developed the discipline to write every day. His friends who were out having experiences never became writers as I recall.
I see the same faults in my students, and one of the great disappointments of my early teaching career was the discovery my students weren't nearly as passionate about photography as I. It's still disappointing, at the end of a long career, to see a student who paid for a class sitting in the back of the room playing with his phone instead of doing the work necessary to get better. Nothing comes to us if we don't work at it, but when I was 20 I thought I knew a lot, too.
Posted by: Jay Pastelak | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 02:06 PM
Nothing ruins a hobby faster than turning it into a business.
Posted by: David Brown | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 02:06 PM
Pro versus Amateur is one of those shouty Internet memes which damages everything it touches. Is it a recent import from sport, which you rather hint at? Previous eras didn't make much if anything of the distinction so why should we. I don't see what good comes from having anything to do with it. Application and talent plus usually a dose of luck will out if you really want to go the distance. I guess the rest of us can enjoy a slow, easy-rolling, genial, tolerably good ride doing what we love from time to time. Was Caesar a Pro? Or Giotto or Newton? Is the Pope a Pro? I don't think he runs courses showing you how to Pray like the Pros, photography-style.The whole thing is ridiculous when one steps back a little.
Posted by: Mark | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 03:00 PM
I have a friend who is an elite swimmer. He is a gem of a human being, but swimming is his life. He literally eats, drinks and breaths swimming. If you enter into a conversation with him, you guessed it: you will be talking about swimming (and don't bother attempting to change the subject, haha). There is a mindset that people like my friend or Larry Bird or Serena Williams are born with, where shooting free throws for 3 hours or hitting a tennis ball all day long or swimming morning and evening is what they do, and with passion. For me? Get me out of the pool after a 30 minute lap swim! Please! I've read where there have been superior athletes to the guys and gals who win the gold medals, or make it in the major leagues or what not, but they don't apply themselves full throttle, they don't possess the "mental circuitry" of the guys like Michael Jordan or Michael Phelps. And well, that's okay! Not everyone can have one activity or vocation dominate their life, although clearly some can and as Mike noted, society rewards them monetarily. As to me, I like Mike's definition of an amateur photographer. Count me in! Let us each go as far with it as makes us happy. As to vocation and life, those things that I do that bring me energy, I keep on trucking with. Those things that empty my tank, I try to set aside best I can. Thanks Mike for a thought-provoking blog. I think you're batting at least .300 on your blog, you're definitely above the Mendoza Line!
Posted by: SteveW | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 03:18 PM
Real happy amateur here ! I love this freedom even taking it seriously.
robert
Posted by: robert quiet photographer | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 03:21 PM
Based upon my experience with high-end audio, when your hobby becomes your profession, it's time to find a new hobby!
Posted by: JG | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 03:36 PM
Yup, I've been a pro photographer since 1979. I've done all kinds of things, and have had to learn how to do them all well. There are many kinds of ways to be a photographer. When I graduated college, I worked on staff at Tiffany & Co. in NYC as one of their two staff photographers. I quickly learned that shoot stuff was not my passion and left to freelance, and find my way in the world.
I've been very fortunate to always find a way to make a living through photography. I've shot journalism, sports, magazines, annual reports, higher ed, weddings, bar mitzvahs, food, jewelry, architecture, interiors, and aerials. I decided that I prefer to shoot people, and that's been the mainstay for me since the mid 80's.
I work on staff at a mid sized university in NJ making images for advertising, marketing, media relations, the web site, and a large variety of editorial magazines. It's fun, and it's also draining as there can be many long days. There's a fair bit of office politics too. Just like any other job, it has it's ups and downs.
One thing that hasn't been affected over the years is my enthusiasm and commitment to making photographs. For clients I make sure that they are useful, and when I shoot for myself, it's all about how and what I see. I am more passionate about making photographs than I was when I was young.
The main thing about what I do when on assignment is to always find a way to make it interesting, no matter what the job is. I had a much harder time doing that when I was younger, but as I've gained a bit of wisdom I realized that to stay engaged takes work, and lots of it. So no matter what, even the most boring event, I try to challenge myself to go a bit further, look a little deeper.
That's what separates the pros from those that are not. The ability to keep it fresh and stay at the top of your game, and most importantly to be able to create on demand, and not only when the mood strikes you. It takes practice.
Posted by: mike | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 03:38 PM
I was a studio/wedding/portrait/craft photographer for twenty years in three separate towns in Vermont. I would not trade them for anything. But it was work. Besides the sexy part, shooting, printing and presenting there was all of the minutiae that take more time than one can imagine. Billing, following up on billing, taxes at both ends, advertising and re-doing prints (all darkroom). It's a commitment and involves much more than 8 hours a day. And every customer is your boss. Taught me more about lighting and printing and discipline than just swanning about with a Nikon.
Posted by: James Weekes | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 04:17 PM
Amateur photographers are judged by their best six photos of the year; professionals are judged by their worst six.
Posted by: Ivan Strahan | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 04:58 PM
Well you're not the 36th blog I check out each day...
Posted by: Nigel | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 05:03 PM
I was a “pro” photographer for 30 years - after which I became an ad agency creative director - and enjoyed almost every minute of it (book work and cash-flow not so much). Because I resisted the temptation to move to NYC and specialize (food photography), I was able to enjoy the challenge of working with a wide variety of clients (Fortune 500s or their ad agencies) - food, product, people, fashion, annual report reportage and some editorial work thrown in for good measure. So it never got boring or repetitive. Not to mention that, amongst many other things, I learned how to hypnotize a chicken or that I could safely put my arm (up to the elbow) into the mouth of an elephant and stroke their tongue while she purred like a cat. Good work if you can get it.
Posted by: Mark Hobson | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 06:13 PM
No, I certainly wouldn't want to be a pro photographer - I'm a happy snapper.
I wonder how many people have jobs they enjoy? In my last 20 years of work I was lucky - probably more than 50% of my time was enjoyable or satisfying - but I think I may have been fortunate.
(One of the things I''eve been musing on in this year of unexpected election results is - who actually wants to do all the jobs that are allegedly going to be repatriated to various countries as a result of political developments? Working on the track at Dearborn or Dagenham was always stressful and unsatisfying, surely. Picking peas (Lincolnshire) or grapes (California?) is always going to be poorly-paid and backbreaking. Who wants to do those things?)
Posted by: Tom Burke | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 06:44 PM
A pro I've been corresponding with in Britain is very talented, has won numerous "Societies" memberships and honors, and tells me she's presently working on average about 100 hours a week.
Many of the motorsports pros I've shot with for years that follow various racing series are also incredibly hard-working. I remember one year, Brian J Nelson, one of the most successful (and hard-working!) motorcycle racing pro photographers in the USA, told me he was "home" only 30 days for the entire year previous; rest of the time he was at some racetrack, sleeping out of his van.
Posted by: Stephen Scharf | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 07:08 PM
No.
Not unless the world beat a path to my door and begged to buy any art I felt like creating at my own pace at any any price I set.
That's so surreal it's almost funny.
Posted by: Kent | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 07:43 PM
I've read interviews with painters who have gone from amateur to full time artists; many of them have said that because of the extra time that pros spend traveling, selling, schmoozing, showing up at art openings, maintaining their online presence, etc., they don't spend any more time actually painting than when they were amateurs.
So why do it? I think that being a professional artist, photographer or musician is like joining the priesthood: you should only do it if you can't do anything else. Not necessarily out of incompetence - meaning that there's something in you won't be satisfied if you pick a different profession.
Posted by: Clay Olmstead | Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 08:06 PM
Reading this article was an amazing experience for me. It was as if I was proof reading what I would have loved to convey in words for many years. I've tried to explain this to others for a long time without much success. This article just put into words what I couldn't after all these years. A profound thank you to you Mike.
Posted by: Tom Kaszuba | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 02:07 AM
I very much agree with this. I find amateur photography often frustrating enough that I've never had a strong urge to turn it professional, quite apart from the horrors of running one's own business.
Similarly, I've always wanted to be able to play the guitar but somehow I've never wanted to actually play the guitar enough to become competent at it. In fact, I suspect I'd rather be seen (and feted) by others to be able to play it, rather than actually enjoying it as an activity in itself. This seems to be key for a lot of creative pursuits: if you can't subsist on the internal rewards alone, there are precious few external ones to compensate and they are usually hard-won.
I guess it's fortunate that I've been able to make a career in IT, a field I'm happy to tinker about in anyway on my own time. Now finally in a role where I get to work almost entirely on stuff I enjoy and avoid the tedious corporate ephemera that blighted previous jobs, I'd say the hard work finally paid off.
I now have similar arguments with my partner about the amount of time our children spend dodging activities they supposedly "enjoy" and "are good at". Apparently there are very few endeavours that can match the immediate rush of playing Minecraft.
Posted by: Ade | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 04:38 AM
Nope. Never, ever had the slightest interest. None at all. When I was a kid, the only professional photographer I ever met was the fellow who took our high school yearbook photos. Nice enough guy, though never thought that his job was anything interesting. In fact, never even thought much about his job at all. Then of course, there were the grainy black and white photos in our small newspaper. I suppose they were taken by a staff photographer, but I never imagined that that job would be interesting, at least in our very rural area. Never really gave it any thought either. Besides, to loosely paraphrase what Peter Turnley once said in an interview, such a job would have seemed a bit unmanly to many boys back then.
Later on, photographers I knew did portraits, or were those I knew from work: crime/accident scene photographers or photojournalists. My experience with journalists of any ilk was not something that would have inspired me to want to have anything to do with that career. And I most certainly would have never entertained the thought of doing product/commercial photography for someone else. No interest then, and even less now.
To me photography has always been a hobby. Over the last six or seven years, the time I spend actively doing photography---not including editing etc---has averaged between 10-15 hours per week. Photography of what I want, when and where I want. Wouldn't have it any other way.
Posted by: D. Hufford. | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 06:47 AM
I think it was Segovia who, coming on stage for a live recital when in his 80's, apologised in advance to his audience for illness forcing him to cut his practice to 12 hours a day, and his performance not meeting his standard.
!
Posted by: Arg | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 08:20 AM
For me, the question boils down to whether you can attain talent by dedication and practice.
For many years I believed if I had spent the time and money I spent in college on golf courses instead, I would have become a really good golfer and perhaps a pro. Golf, unlike most other sports, does not require any special physical attributes, and four years of working dillegently to correct one's mistakes should produce a positive outcome.
Now I'm not so sure.
(If an overweight slob like Babe Ruth showed up for tryouts today, would he even get past first base?)
As for me and photography, I spent three years in college pursuing a career in photo journalism. But in my junior year I compared my work with my fellow students. I considerd myself better and more consistent than 75 percent of my fellow students, but not even near the top 10 percent who captured A-1 images all the time.
So I switched from the one-picture career path to the 1,000-words career path and wound up with a 30-year newspaper career as a reporter, then an editor, then as a paginator when computers came on the scene. My photography was relegated to an asset, not my reason for being.
I'm still not sure whether I have any inate talent in either pictures or words, or whether I just got better with time and effort by correcting my failures.
Financially, I probably should have played golf.
Posted by: JAYoung | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 08:27 AM
She's a nice girl. You two have lots of fun when you go out. Why don't you marry her?
Posted by: Kenneth Tanaka | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 08:39 AM
I think it was Segovia who, coming on stage for a live recital when in his 80's, apologised in advance to his audience for illness forcing him to cut his practice to 12 hours a day, and his performance not meeting his standard.
!
Arg: I attended one of Segovia's last performances in Philadelphia and was happy to see your reference to the maestro.
Posted by: Darlene | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 10:07 AM
I've loved photography for over forty years and never even considered "turning pro." My response is, "Why take something I love to do and turn it into a job?" My work and photography complement each other and make each other better by filling the space in my life with vastly different activities.
My photo blog has been chugging along for almost seven years, so I made it past the four and quit. I've enjoyed that project as much as photography.
Posted by: Joe Lipka | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 11:50 AM
I can't even imagine not being a working photographer. I've tried to be responsible a couple of times when my daughter was born and I thought I needed to have "stability". Just made me miserable. Until I picked up the camera again. Sometimes I think I don't want to be a photographer. It's more like I need to be a photographer.
Working really hard is easy when you want to be there.
I've had the privilege of 25 years of standing in front of people who willingly give you a little piece of their soul. 1/100th of a second of pure honesty. Addictive as all get out, that is.
Gordon
Posted by: Gordon Cahill | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 04:16 PM
Kirk Tuck's (creator of the other thoughtful and well written photography blog) "The Lisbon Portfolio" is not only a fun read, but it clearly makes the point that a lot of professional photography-like a lot of professional anything-involves considerable routine, repetitive work.
Posted by: Bob Feugate | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 07:12 PM
What I think is absolutely amazing about TOP is the willingness of the pro community to mingle, participate and teach us amateurs who must be cutting into their lunch in the present cut throat environment - a special kudos and thank you to all the pro's (past and present) who comment.
Posted by: Bear. | Friday, 09 December 2016 at 11:04 PM
amateur (n.) "one who has a taste for (something)," from French amateur "lover of," from Latin amatorem (nominative amator) "lover," agent noun from amatus, past participle of amare "to love"
Posted by: David Lee | Saturday, 10 December 2016 at 02:27 AM
I don't enjoy photography, I have little interest in photographing. What I enjoy is landscape photography. Hence why I have zero interest in a career as a wedding photographer, product photographer, etc. However, I have for the past 2+ years been doing landscapes full time and selling them (or trying to sell them) in art markets. Hence, I now call myself a professional photographer but it's the landscape part that is what I do and what I enjoy. Just pressing buttons on a camera is not what I'm interested in. When well meaning people make suggestions about other ways I could make a living as a photographer I simply tell them that that's not what I want to do. Like the other commenter said about driving. For a racing driver, it isn't the driving, it's the racing.
Anthony
Posted by: Anthony Shaughnessy | Saturday, 10 December 2016 at 07:18 AM
I owned a small boutique winery for 14 years. I put my life and savings into it. I quit my career at a prestigious software company to pursue my passion and it almost wrecked my marriage. Making wine is a lot like photography and writing in the sense that so many people idolize the "lifestyle". I spent very little time making wine but the vast majority of it selling it. I hated the selling part. I've thought about going professional in photography, but getting out there and beating the bushes for new assignments or clients just makes me go cold. I've gone back to writing software for large companies. It's so much easier on me and my wife and kids. I do miss the freedom I had in those days running my winery, but god it was a lot of work.
I still get people asking me for advice about starting a winery and I say don't do it. Just enjoy wine as a hobby...
Posted by: Steve | Saturday, 10 December 2016 at 10:09 AM
A little late to the party, but I heard a motivational speaker at a technical conference who said "If you just read 7 books about a subject, you can be an expert." I felt that was a slap in the face to the *real* experts in the room - those with doctorates who had spent countless hours slaving way at a computer or in a wafer fab to learn their craft.
Posted by: KeithB | Monday, 12 December 2016 at 10:23 AM
To be or not to be; that's not really the question.
Unless you realise that you simply can't spend your life doing anything else, especially if you have actually been doing something else, then don't even think photography as career.
I spent most of my youth wondering how in hell to get into the business, and once I managed that, I spent more years trying to get into the single aspect of it that I wanted to do: fashion. Those pre-fashion years were not wasted entirely because I learned all I needed to know technically, but they did waste a lot of time that would have been better spent in developing the business side of it, and especially networking. From fashion I moved sideways, after a few years, to bespoke calendar design, photography and production and earned far better than I ever did as a straight photographer.
My working life as photographer started in '60 and I went solo in '66; the impression I have today is that the golden years were already in decline by the late 70s, but that I just managed to get the best out of what remained. I gave up around the late 80s early 90s when even my stock contribution was eroded when that market became flooded to the point of valuelessness. Bang went a pension plan.
I never wanted to be an employer, feel responsible to find work just in order to keep people in a job with me; it was work enough to keep my family going. I loved the process of analogue photography almost as much as the shooting. I often think that I would probably never have given photography a thought had I been born into the digital age. Worse, from younger guys active today, it seems that photography on its own will get you nowhere, that you also have to be very skilled in video just to exist, and that prices are not growing at all from several years ago, but clients expect twice as much from you for that same price...
The tight-if-brief team friendships that developed over a week or two's shoot abroad somewhere were beautiful - usually - and there was a huge sense of loss as we arrived back in the home airport. A group creative high is pretty strong medicine that brings powerful withdrawal symptoms when it's over. (Maybe that's what rock groups have too.) I would have hated teaching; I could never have pretended that anyone can teach anyone else to be a photographer, a great technician, yes, but not a photographer, which is about vision, which you have or do not have - it's not your choice. Work for the general public? Not on your life!
Today, I do photography to pass the time, fill my dotage with something other than depressing conversations with other relics. Irony is in that digital, which possibly more or less ended my business life, has also given me a neat way to keep photographing without going bankrupt. Divine justice?
Rob
Posted by: Rob Campbell | Monday, 12 December 2016 at 04:47 PM