Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/12/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The discussion on payment for photographs can never be "solved", but it does raise, for me, some interesting issues. When I was a kid, doctors in Australia worked pro-bono in public hospitals and made their income with private patients. It was seen as duty, it was 'expected'. They were treated like gods; again it was 'expected'. In 1972 Gough came to power and told them that this was not the way of the modern world: they would all be paid. For some, it has been downhill ever since. I don't want to make this a long diatribe, so here is my point. Times change. The 'free-market' and capitalism are winning at this point in history. The old 'feudalism' of Europe is lost to the success of the New world. I like the idea of amateur, not as inept, but in its original meaning of "love", people to did things for the love of it, and were often considered the best of class. To be an amateur was to be the top of your "profession", whereas now we use the term professional to encompass the excellence once attributed to the amateur. People give away their labor all the time: volunteers for church, FIFA, The Olympics etc. We are told they are invaluable, and they are. They do the work for nothing, usually receive nothing and 'make money' for the professionals who run these operations. There are plans to use the grey army of the baby boomers in this capacity more and more. I like being an amateur photographer, it has advantages, and I appreciate professional photographers and support their rights as well. There is plenty of room for both, but neither was meant to be 'easy'. Alastair