RE: [Leica] Thanks!! OT Nikon F5

[Michael Scarpitti <mikescarpitti@yahoo.com>]

- --- Paul Chefurka <Paul_Chefurka@pmc-sierra.com>
wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Scarpitti
> [mailto:mikescarpitti@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2000 8:18 PM
> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] Thanks!! OT Nikon F5
> > 
> > Let's take two groups of photographers who have
> "pro
> > equipment":
> > 
> > 1.) Amateurs (doctors, lawyers, dentists, business
> > owners)
> > 2.) Pros
> > 
> > Wanna think about that again?
> 
> Not really.  All you're saying is that members of
> high-income professions
> can afford top-of-the-line gear for their hobbies. 
> What else is new?  That
> fact doesn't relegate professional photographers to
> the bottom of the social
> barrel.
> 

I didn't say that. Where does that leave you and me,
who left photopgraphy as a "profession" to make MUCH
better money elsewhere? I've been there and done that.
I'm damned good with a camera. But I'm never ever
going to be a pro again.
But who does that leave in the profession? Those who
can stand to work for miserable pay. Those who are
self-employed (and use soft-focus filters and "do
weddings"). Need I say more? Many, many doctors and
dentists I know are damned good photographers. They
have the time, equipment, and resources to do so.

My opinions of pros and wannabe pros is based on YEARS
of experience meeting and talking to them. They're
often dedicated, hard-working, and loyal to their
clientele. The most successful are always ahead of the
pack, not followers of the latest fashion. One of the
most successful portrait/wedding photographers in my
area was a jazz saxophone player before he turned
"pro". He gets BIG bucks for weddings, and does such
things as scouting the locales a week before hand to
see where the shadows fall, etc. Nothing is left to
chance. 

On the other hand, many pros and semi-pros don't get
it. They buy F5's with their 80-200's, resting on a
Bogen tripod, and shoot Velvomita. That this is NOT
the way to go never dawns on them.

Then there are the nature guys. Tall, sometimes with
glasses, with their arms cradling on their F4 or F5
with a 600mm lens, wearing their photo vests, with
longish hair and a neatly trimmed beard.

In short, the typical pro is either someone who is so
gifted that he would be succesfull at anything he
tried, and is wildly sucessful because he knows where
the bucks are (maybe 5%), or is a hack with a Nikon
who earns a "living" following the latest trends
(95%). That my 2 cents worth.

> What I will grant you is that photography is an
> abysmally underpaid and
> undervalued profession.  This fact prompts many who
> would otherwise consider
> it as an interesting, fulfilling and meaningful
> career to look elsewhere.  I
> speak from experience here - I was a pro for about
> 10 years, and now manage
> software designers for a living.  I'm no smarter and
> have no more
> self-esteem now than I did then, but I make a heck
> of a lot more money.
> 
> Frankly, I consider professional photography to be
> one of the more demanding
> professions.  I have nothing but respect for those
> who are successful at it,
> and nothing but heartfelt sympathy for those who
> aren't.  I've met very few
> insecure dullards in the business.  So whose
> perceptions are right?
> 
> Paul Chefurka


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/