Re: [Leica] Re: Definition of a Professional

[Byron Rakitzis <byron@rakitzis.com>]

> I define the amateur photographer as a photographer who does not make a
> living out of photography. Which inversely defines the professional. I
> know, personally, and from what is published, quite a few professional
> photographers who sell very very mediocre images. And quite a few
> amateurs who show fantastic talent. Check out the photomags: there is
> very high quality, in the rich sense of the word, in the world of
> amateurs.

Well, I guess we can just agree to agree, then.

In its strictest sense, a professional is someone who makes a living
at something. It says nothing about the quality of what they do. It's
simply their profession, what they do. But in our common parlance
"professional" is often conflated with quality: so you have professional
kitchen appliances, professional sports equipment, and so on. I think
that's what we've been dancing around in this thread.

I wasn't trying to equate professionalism with artistic accomplishment
(though they obviously often go hand-in-hand! I think because a
professional gets to practice his art on a daily basis). So I am not sure
that we disagree about anything at all, but we sure have a roundabout
way to talk about it...

Anyway, let me end with something more relevant to photography, then
I'll go to sleep (it's 2am here in California):

I've just finished processing 5 rolls of Tri-X, in two tanks, all in
one go. I guess I've been processing enough film lately, that I can
do it two-handed now. This is a new phase for me, I've certainly never
shot so much film before, but our son is just 5 mos. old and he is an
irresistable model: smiling at everything and everyone, etc. (some of
the recent prints can be seen on www.rakitzis.com). What I haven't made
enough time for is darkroom time. I have about 25 rolls or so of sleeved
negatives dying to be printed.

I've been shooting a mixture of everything: MF Nikon, AF Nikon, Leica M
and 6x6. Mostly the Leica, though, since it's with me all the time. It
turns out getting an AF Nikon was the thing that tipped my wife over
from being a spectator as opposed to participating actively in the
picture taking. I'm really thankful for that. For some reason, she is
also using the Nikon much more than she ever used a P&S. I think it's
because ultimately a good SLR is a pleasure to use, and a rinky-dink
P&S is no fun no matter how little you care about equipment.

I'm also impelled by the PAD imperative: although not a single day has
gone by where we haven't taken several pictures of the baby, I also
try to have my camera with me when I'm on the road. I'm something of
a travelling musician now and I've got some nice pictures from my last
trip to Portland, candid shots on stage during rehearsal. The Leica was
PERFECT for that, like nothing else could be.

Byron.