[Leica] Art vs. photography - who cares?

[lrzeitlin at aol.com (lrzeitlin at aol.com)]

 Art vs. Photography. Photographers should not obsess over whether they are 
artists or craftsmen. With few exceptions people do it for love, not for 
income. If a photographer wants to inflate his/her ego by claiming to be an 
artist so be it. Your garbageman probably makes more money practicing his 
profession.


There are more than twice as many professional photographers in the country 
as there are professional artists but economically speaking it is much 
better to be an artist than a photographer. Still, both groups would qualify 
for food stamps. The AVERAGE income for professional photographers is a 
shade over $13 per hour. That's less than the recently raised salary for 
workers at McDonalds. Even wannabe actors do better. An economist would tell 
a professional photographer to scrap his cameras and serve burgers instead.


Here are the relevant passages on the described occupations fro the 
Occupational Outlook Handbook from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:


http://www.bls.gov/ooh/media-and-communication/photographers.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/arts-and-design/craft-and-fine-artists.htm
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/entertainment-and-sports/actors.htm


Now we can get back to really important things like posting pictures of 
cats, babies, flowers, street scenes, and discussing the merits and demerits 
of Leica lenses.


Larry Z