Noobs with fancy gear

ecphotoman

What does everyone think of people whom buy a fancy expensive DSLR and start calling themselves photographers. I'm not saying people can't start somewhere.

One of my wife's friends had her husband buy her a $2000 DSLR for Christmas. This lady has no photographic background whatsoever, and shoots in auto or in portrait mode. She keeps taking pictures of pregnant women belly's and kids. She has no idea how to shoot manual and calls her self a photographer every opportunity.

I'm no pro by any means. I have however been shooting for almost 4 years and still hesitate to call my self a photographer. I strive to learn everything I can about the craft and still consider my self a noob.

I'm just wondering what you guys think of people like this

Nikolai

Saw this on FB the other day ;-)

Nikolai

ecphotoman wrote: »

One of my wife's friends had her husband buy her a $2000 DSLR for Christmas. This lady has no photographic background whatsoever, and shoots in auto or in portrait mode. She keeps taking pictures of pregnant women belly's and kids. She has no idea how to shoot manual and calls her self a photographer every opportunity.

As they say, "P stands for professional"

OTOH, why do you care? If she's making her customers happy, it's more than enough. Running a successsful photography business doesn't mean you have be a photography expert, it means you have to be a business expert. Trade skills mean way less than business skills almost in every business (business, not trade!).

It's not about who calls him/herself what, or what kind of gear they use, or what level of skills they have. It's about a person's ability to satisfy his/her own (artistic/business/etc) needs and, if applicable, those of their customers. When in restaurant, I could care less what college chef graduated from and what brand of pots are used in the kitchen - as long as I like the food, the service and the atmosphere.

ecphotoman

Nikolai wrote: »

As they say, "P stands for professional"

OTOH, why do you care? If she's making her customers happy, it's more than enough. Running a successsful photography business doesn't mean you have be a photography expert, it means you have to be a business expert. Trade skills mean way less than business skills almost in every business (business, not trade!).

It's not about who calls him/herself what, or what kind of gear they use, or what level of skills they have. It's about a person's ability to satisfy his/her own (artistic/business/etc) needs and, if applicable, those of their customers. When in restaurant, I could care less what college chef graduated from and what brand of pots are used in the kitchen - as long as I like the food, the service and the atmosphere.

I'm asking what photographers think. I'm wondering what they think of people not earning their stripes so to speak and giving them selves a title most photographers spend years earning.

Moving Pictures

I'm going to slide in with an against-the grain comment, here.
My ex-wife did some pregnancy and portrait work, back in the day. I dare say she wasn't particularly adapt at the mechanics of the camera, but she was some kind of unholy gifted when it came to measuring light and creating, by intuition if nothing else, some very competent, if not oustanding work.

Drove me nuts, mind you, because she never could tell how she got the results she did. She just "fiddled wtih things until they felt right." But more often than not, she was able to create material that I, despite years of experience, couldn't have easily reproduced, if at all.

Again, truth be told, I am only just entering her realm of quality, in large part because I don't have her intuitive gift. But for goddsake, don't let her know I said this.

Nikolai

ecphotoman wrote: »

I'm asking what photographers think. I'm wondering what they think of people not earning their stripes so to speak and giving them selves a title most photographers spend years earning.

OK. I dare to consider myself a photographer, and I really don't give a rat's a$$ about what other people call themselves. For me it's all about the end results. I either like it or not. It is that simple. Was it a week hunt with MF camera + a week of postprocessing in LR/PS, or an instant frame from Smugmug's Camera Awesome - it doesn't matter as long as the result looks good. Or bad.
"Have a camera, will shoot - ergo, I'm a photographer!"

MarkR

ecphotoman wrote: »

What does everyone think of people whom buy a fancy expensive DSLR and start calling themselves photographers. I'm not saying people can't start somewhere.

One of my wife's friends had her husband buy her a $2000 DSLR for Christmas. This lady has no photographic background whatsoever, and shoots in auto or in portrait mode. She keeps taking pictures of pregnant women belly's and kids. She has no idea how to shoot manual and calls her self a photographer every opportunity.

I'm no pro by any means. I have however been shooting for almost 4 years and still hesitate to call my self a photographer. I strive to learn everything I can about the craft and still consider my self a noob.

I'm just wondering what you guys think of people like this

When I was in High School, one of my classmates got a new or maybe nearly new Chevy Corvette for his birthday. Some kids were jealous, some kids were dismissive, but no one thought, well, he must be a fantastic driver. But he had a nice car, and he probably had a lot of fun driving it, and no one was hurt.

I feel the above also applies to cameras, cars, musical instruments, and power tools.

Nikolai

MarkR wrote: »

I feel the above also applies to cameras, cars, musical instruments, and power tools.

Amen, brother!

zoomer

Lots of people with expensive cars can't drive.
What is wrong with buying the best tools you can afford?

johng

Count me in the "who cares" group. No one has to "pay their dues" to call themselves a photographer. Nor do they have to earn the right to buy expensive gear. As other people have posted, there are some people that don't understand a lick of the technical aspects but have a good eye for lighting or composition. Their results are often much better than technical gear-heads that know all the terminology and understand all the SCIENCE of photography.

In the end, it sounds like you need to differentiate the term "photographer" from "GOOD photographer". And "good" is always in the eye of the beholder. If her "clients" think she's good (clients could just be the family if she's the family photographer) that's all that matters.

ecphotoman

I guess it just bothers me then. I learned on a canon ae-1 with manual lenses and spent countless hours in a darkroom before I even purchased my first dslr.
Maybe I just see things different. I've always thought you have to cut your teeth and make your bones before you "earn" a title.

This person doesn't have good composition or artistic lighting. All she does is find cutsie things to take pictures of.

MarkR

ecphotoman wrote: »

I guess it just bothers me then. I learned on a canon ae-1 with manual lenses and spent countless hours in a darkroom before I even purchased my first dslr.
Maybe I just see things different. I've always thought you have to cut your teeth and make your bones before you "earn" a title.

This person doesn't have good composition or artistic lighting. All she does is find cutsie things to take pictures of.

Art is not (or shouldn't be) a competitive sport. Her taking "cutsie" pictures isn't interfering with you taking the pictures you want to take, is it?

Here's another lesson I learned while waiting in a Dojo for my son's Karate class to end:

A ten year old kid walked up to the owner of the dojo. The sensai is a small wiry man who smiles all the time.

Kid: you sell sais? [a kind of knife.]
Sensai: Yes.
Kid: Those are dangerous.
Sensai: No, they are not dangerous at all.
Kid: Yes they are! You could hurt someone with one.
Sensai (smiling): If my intent was to hurt someone, I would not need a sai. If my intention is to hurt, I could use anything at my disposal, even this pencil. [smiles, holds up pencil.] Anyone I would sell a sai to would be able to do the same. It is not the tool, but the intent of the user, that is important.

When a multiple-black belt instructor says stuff, I try to pay attention. While I like to play with the photographic equivelant of a sai, I'm ok using a pencil too. The woman you mentioned is not hurting anyone with her sai, so don't worry if all you have is a pencil.

pathfinder

One of the things you learn as you can afford better and better equipment, is that better equipment really does not matter as much as you think it does.

Better lighting, better composition, and general image awareness matter more than equipment. Lots of fine images are shot with the modern equivalent of a box camera if the lighting and the composition is good.... I have lovely images I shot with a 10D or a 20D, which compared to my 1DMk4 are quite primitive devices.

I want to buy Jay Maisel's color sense, and Ansel Adam's landscape composition ability, but I cannot find them on sale anywhere. Darn!

Dooginfif20

So I have to say I agree with everyone on here. I myself (semi-pro at best) and my friend (pro-runs his own business) dont shoot manual. The only time that happens is if its in the studio with lights. Even in that situation neither one of us use a light meter. Take a test shot and adjust to your liking. Because we havent taken any classes or use all the right tools and techniques does that make us lesser than what we are? If you have been into photography as long as you say you have then you should already know there are a ton of people out there that say they are photographers by trade. If they are good and their customers like them and they have a good business sense then they stay in business. If they arent good and their customers go somewhere else then they go bye bye via natural selection. Is she stealing business away from you? If not, then why do you care? Just enjoy photography and dont worry about the others.

MarkR

pathfinder wrote: »

One of the things you learn as you can afford better and better equipment, is that better equipment really does not matter as much as you think it does.

I want to buy Jay Maisel's color sense, and Ansel Adam's landscape composition ability, but I cannot find them on sale anywhere. Darn!

If you haven't seen it yet, Scott Kelby has two excellent interviews/walk-n-shoots with Jay Maisel on kelbytraining.com. They ended up being the only videos I watched every second of, and multiple times, before my account expired.

ecphotoman

MarkR wrote: »

Art is not (or shouldn't be) a competitive sport. Her taking "cutsie" pictures isn't interfering with you taking the pictures you want to take, is it?

Here's another lesson I learned while waiting in a Dojo for my son's Karate class to end:

A ten year old kid walked up to the owner of the dojo. The sensai is a small wiry man who smiles all the time.

Kid: you sell sais? [a kind of knife.]
Sensai: Yes.
Kid: Those are dangerous.
Sensai: No, they are not dangerous at all.
Kid: Yes they are! You could hurt someone with one.
Sensai (smiling): If my intent was to hurt someone, I would not need a sai. If my intention is to hurt, I could use anything at my disposal, even this pencil. [smiles, holds up pencil.] Anyone I would sell a sai to would be able to do the same. It is not the tool, but the intent of the user, that is important.

When a multiple-black belt instructor says stuff, I try to pay attention. While I like to play with the photographic equivelant of a sai, I'm ok using a pencil too. The woman you mentioned is not hurting anyone with her sai, so don't worry if all you have is a pencil.

I see you changed your post well after the fact

Its not the fact that I shoot with my Ticonderoga# 2 pencil and she got to start with a 5D Mark II. Its the fact that her composition is terrible and she uses the title that I've spent years working so hard to earn. In all honesty though I digress, I'm done beating a dead horse now.

Sam

I didn't bother to read all the reply's, but my take on it is simple. What do her images look like?

While I understand cringing when someone calls themselves a photographer the day after buying a camera and has no clue what an f stop is or color space or ppi / dpi raw, etc, etc.

But I will tell you this I have seen some awesome photographs done by this type of woman. How they do it is way beyond me, but they do! Their clients are happy, they are having fun. It's all good.

Sam

ecphotoman

Sam wrote: »

I didn't bother to read all the reply's, but my take on it is simple. What do her images look like?

While I understand cringing when someone calls themselves a photographer the day after buying a camera and has no clue what an f stop is or color space or ppi / dpi raw, etc, etc.

But I will tell you this I have seen some awesome photographs done by this type of woman. How they do it is way beyond me, but they do! Their clients are happy, they are having fun. It's all good.

Sam

Dooginfif20 wrote: »

So I have to say I agree with everyone on here. I myself (semi-pro at best) and my friend (pro-runs his own business) dont shoot manual. The only time that happens is if its in the studio with lights. Even in that situation neither one of us use a light meter. Take a test shot and adjust to your liking. Because we havent taken any classes or use all the right tools and techniques does that make us lesser than what we are? If you have been into photography as long as you say you have then you should already know there are a ton of people out there that say they are photographers by trade. If they are good and their customers like them and they have a good business sense then they stay in business. If they arent good and their customers go somewhere else then they go bye bye via natural selection. Is she stealing business away from you? If not, then why do you care? Just enjoy photography and dont worry about the others.

She doesn't have any paying customers to complain. She finds people on facebook that want free photos, but she goes around telling everyone shes a pro photographer. It pisses me off because she is friends with my wife and her sisters and I keep having to hear it over and over and over! I keep having to see her terrible pictures thrown in my face by them. The composition is always horrible, looks like a kid compose it and she goes way overboard with the computer generated "bokeh" effect no matter what type of picture it is. That's what bugs me!
It has nothing really to do with the gear... It also has nothing to do with her being a woman. One of my friends from high school has been doing photography about as long as me ans she can shoot circles around me.

Nikolai

ecphotoman wrote: »

It has nothing really to do with the gear...

Well, with all due respect, the very title of the Original Post was "Noobs with fancy gear"...

Now it looks like gear is out of the window and we're talking about a skill set (or lack of there of) and (maybe overblown) self-assessment. The latter, however, is an extremly moot point: one man's cr4p is another man's masterpiece (check this out if you haven't seen it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/8884829/Why-is-Andreas-Gurskys-Rhine-II-the-most-expensive-photograph.html)

MarkR

ecphotoman wrote: »

I see you changed your post well after the fact

Its not the fact that I shoot with my Ticonderoga# 2 pencil and she got to start with a 5D Mark II. Its the fact that her composition is terrible and she uses the title that I've spent years working so hard to earn. In all honesty though I digress, I'm done beating a dead horse now.

Yeah, sometimes I think about stuff and add it in later. It's better than stinking up the joint with multiple new posts, right?

ecphotoman

MarkR wrote: »

Yeah, sometimes I think about stuff and add it in later. It's better than stinking up the joint with multiple new posts, right?

Touche'! Lol

Dooginfif20

So I am confused of the actual reason for this thread. If the title is talking about a "noob" with fancy gear, but its not about the gear then really what is it about? Jelousy? Animosity? Personal dislike of this woman from something other than photography?

angevin1

ecphotoman wrote: »

She doesn't have any paying customers to complain. She finds people on facebook that want free photos, but she goes around telling everyone shes a pro photographer. It pisses me off because she is friends with my wife and her sisters and I keep having to hear it over and over and over! I keep having to see her terrible pictures thrown in my face by them. The composition is always horrible, looks like a kid compose it and she goes way overboard with the computer generated "bokeh" effect no matter what type of picture it is. That's what bugs me!
It has nothing really to do with the gear... It also has nothing to do with her being a woman. One of my friends from high school has been doing photography about as long as me ans she can shoot circles around me.

No offense intended, but is this the FIRST time you've run into this situation? if so, count your stars. This is common place. What they are most likely excited about is the fact that they, MS. Photographer actually captured an image. I mean, digital, it's like magic and all, right? not near the work of the past involved as a first stop measure. And surely you've noticed folks tend to like images of themselves too? even crappy images. No, it's an image, it's me, " look I'm on the computer", and I'm happy, clowning, etc. The fact that you have to face it over and over with your wife and her friends. Suckage~

I have to admit, I've not run into it in my house, but work and everywhere else, ad infinitum, oh yeah!

also: Keep it under your hat but in Europe at least at one time, Pro's were prostitutes; street walkers. Perhaps you can think of that next time you hear those words about "her". Just mumble to your inner self though!

Moving Pictures

ecphotoman wrote: »

She doesn't have any paying customers to complain. She finds people on facebook that want free photos, but she goes around telling everyone shes a pro photographer. It pisses me off because she is friends with my wife and her sisters and I keep having to hear it over and over and over! I keep having to see her terrible pictures thrown in my face by them. The composition is always horrible, looks like a kid compose it and she goes way overboard with the computer generated "bokeh" effect no matter what type of picture it is. That's what bugs me!
It has nothing really to do with the gear... It also has nothing to do with her being a woman. One of my friends from high school has been doing photography about as long as me ans she can shoot circles around me.

A little noblesse oblige would do you well.

David_S85

If it wasn't for all the n00b's who buy top notch gear (that I might not even consider for my own needs), that pro gear might be even more prohibitively priced for the rest of us. N00b's should buy more pro gear. Everybody wins.

pathfinder

MarkR wrote: »

If you haven't seen it yet, Scott Kelby has two excellent interviews/walk-n-shoots with Jay Maisel on kelbytraining.com. They ended up being the only videos I watched every second of, and multiple times, before my account expired.

Hi Mark,

I have followed Jay's work for years, and watch every video and interview of his I can find. I have seen those on Kelby training.

I met Jay in Toronto at a workshop in 2007. He is quite the character. He does have a great eye.

puzzledpaul

As I invariably buy used kit, there'd be even less choice if such ppl / early adopters / 'neck jewellery' types etc weren't around to buy gear - and presumably upgrade.

pp

RyanS

ecphotoman wrote: »

What does everyone think of people whom buy a fancy expensive DSLR and start calling themselves photographers.

...snip...

She has no idea how to shoot manual and calls her self a photographer every opportunity.

...snip...

I'm just wondering what you guys think of people like this

What is a photographer, exactly? A photographer is nothing more than someone who takes at least one picture. A professional photographer is someone who takes at least one picture to earn money. That's it. That's all the definition anyone gets. There is no requirement that a person has to know how to "shoot manual" before they call themselves a photographer. You simply have to take a picture, and congratulations... you are a photographer. Sell it and then you can call yourself a "pro." There are millions of photographers world wide. If you've ever used a cell phone cam, you are part of the club. This same thing goes for any other unlicensed industry, activity, or profession. If I get some finger paints and make you a picture, I am a painter. If I buy a guitar and pluck some notes for you before breaking all the strings, I am a musician. If I get you to pay me a nickel to play my broken guitar for you, I'm now a professional musician. That's because none of these titles actually mean anything at all. They simply refer to a certain activity.

By contrast... If I buy a plane, I'm NOT a pilot. If I buy a scalpel, I am NOT a surgeon. I need something more to call myself that. I need a license. Check your local laws to see if "photography" requires a license. There may be some place in the world that requires this, but I couldn't tell you where.

Just because someone calls themselves a photographer doesn't mean they are any good at it. Therefore, it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Why should it? Go buy a $100,000 Hasselblad setup and let me know if Vouge calls.... Mmmkay?

If any of this bothers you, then there is a problem with you. Not the person who is calling themselves a professional acrobat because they got a dime for doing a somersault.

Molotov Everything

This reminds me of a friend of mine (we'll call him Joe) who has a few thousand bucks worth of gear but no real knowledge. He takes what most of us would consider forgettable photos, no particular regard for composition.
On most levels it really doesn't bother me. I do my thing, he does his, whatever. It bugs me a bit though because I've been friends with Joe for years (way before he bought a camera) and it concerns me more as a friend than as 'competition'. For one thing, he does have an overinflated opinion of his work. He never really wants real critiques on his work, just wants to post them on facebook and get as many 'likes' as he can from his friends. But I KNOW he wants to think of himself as a really good photographer and this just isn't going to get him there.
Also, he's gotten too sucked in to the 'better gear = better photo' hype. Most of his gear is fairly new, some fancy lenses, but just keeps thinking "oh if I sell my $500 lens and buy this $1000 lens, my shots will be better." Again, if I didn't know the guy personally I wouldn't care but it just makes me think "dude, why are you burning cash like this? LEARN MORE FIRST."
I feel for you when you say you're getting sick of it being thrown in your face, it can be difficult when any type of objective criticism or advice you give might be taken as a personal jab or even jealousy.

Kikoprice

So tell her about the new 5DIII and how much better her shots would be with even more mega pixels and she could take even more GREAT pictures in less time with the faster frames per second. She could get even more "likes" on FB.

Then offer to take her "old" 5DII off her hands, so she can get the new hotness.

If I get dragged to Barstow on July 4th , is Calico worth shooting in the 115 degree heat?

Pat664422

What matters much more, in my opinion, than self awarded titles is whether you or her take pictures that other people enjoy or are willing to buy. Since you are confronted with it frequently it does sound annoying, but if her results are as bad as you say, no one will take the professional photographer stuff seriously. All due respect, it sounds like both you and her are a little bit wrapped up in the titles. Who cares... let your photography speak for you and hers speak for her. I'd much rather have acknowledged ability than an acknowledged title.