I do pay taxes on my work, at least, I keep a very close eye on how much money I make and when it comes time to file my taxes for my 9-5 summer job next year, I'll be reading very closely on the minimum income that needs to be reported. I am professional in the sense that I do business, deliver a product, and get paid for it, but I suppose in the sense that I don't make 100% of my income off of photography, I am not a professional.
Ok then no argument here.
This isn't true. Clients expect quality images, they do not expect the "highest quality" images, especially when the difference between an entry level DSLR and a pro DSLR is getting smaller and smaller. A D800 with great glass will deliver outstanding images and be a complete breeze to use. A D5100 with great glass will deliver very good images and be somewhat cumbersome to use. A D5100 with average glass will deliver good pictures and be just as cumbersome as with good glass.
Yeah today's entry level bodies are doing what pro bodies couldn't even do a few years ago. Entry level lenses on the other hand (with the exceptions of primes possibaly) are prone chromatic aberrations, fringing and flaring. Entry level lenses are also inferior in microcontrast and sharpness, but that isn't really as easily noticeable, even though it still makes a big difference in overall image quality.
For fine art photography, any lens can be utilized to make interesting pictures. But for commercial work using a kit lens is a good way to get laughed at by people who actually know the difference. It's like calling yourself a professional cleaner and showing up with a regular household vacuum. Sure, if you put enough effort into it you could do a good job but it still isn't as deep as clean as could be achieved with professional equipment.
I'm guessing for stuff were max quality really matter you probably use your 35mm, but you really should stop using a kit lens for other things, like your event lens, I'll elaborate later.
If the company I'm talking to sees my images and it isn't up their standards, then I don't get paid and they don't use my pictures. Simple as that. And, it should be said that I use the 18-55 in events, since it's a very, very handy range to have for working in crowds and the like. As I said, it's the cropped frame equivalent of the event photographer's workhorse, the 24-70. I don't use it for portraits if I can avoid it (I basically did an entire portrait session recently with the 35 1.8. Prime lenses work nicely for portraits).
There are lots of 24-70mm equivalent lenses. I'll say it again, you really should consider upgrading. Borrow some money from your parents and pay them back. There's the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8, for hardcore event photography this is what you need. There are cheaper alternatives like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR. I'm not that much of a gearcigarette, I only know this because I'm shopping for something in the normal range myself.
Professionals will always have their place, and competition is what keeps them honest. I've heard from various photographers in my area who are well established professionals that a good going price for a senior picture session is $400. I charge $100 for seniors, and I like to think that the established photographer's work is less than four times as good as mine. They may need to charge this to make it worth their time, and I'm fine with that as they've worked hard to get where they are and if people are willing to pay that, by all means go ahead, but if someone is willing to pay me to do my work, then that's that. I'll do it. And as I establish my name and professionalism, price goes up. I'm no less a person delivering a product and service because I have less of a name and less equipment, but like I said, if someone is willing to pay me for the work I do, I'm not going to turn them down. I don't understand how you're criticizing me for running a business.
Because you're running a business using inferior equipment. Well at least your using your good primes for portraits. Your friends give you business because they don't know the difference between you and an experienced. But maybe I am being a little harsh on you, it's not your fault people don't understand the concept "you get what you pay for".
And IF you do deiced to become a pro portrait photographer and charge $400, you probably won't be too happy with kit-lens weilding, inexperienced highschoolers shooting their friends for $100.
Also, I'm curious, do you offer prints?
And speaking of portraits, I've seen a lot of them on Facebook with really bright, sometimes blown out backgrounds and dark people. Is that the style, or is it just people don't realize putting your subject right in front go the sun is a bad idea?
Also, in general I'd just appreciate it if you were either honest about your age or stopped making comparisons to 10 years ago like you knew what was going on. If your profile is correct, you were 5 and I was 7, so I won't make things up if you don't.
I can't say I was there but that doesn't mean there weren't other accounts of it.
http://www.zarias.com/over-saturated-market-you-say-you-can-blame-me/tbh I don't know if I want to go into photography as a career. I don't want to turn into the photographer that ends up opening a studio and staffing out all the editing work and hell, the shooting. The more I find out about the jobs adults have, the more I realize that anything can degrade into a desk job if you let it, and I love photography too much to lose my passion for it by turning it into a career.
This is very true. But that doesn't mean you can't a little make money selling fine art prints and maybe even stock photos.
Assuming I did end up as a photographer, though, I actually don't agree with you on this one. It seems to me that you have this weird schism between amateur photographers and professional photographers where one is never the other. I mean, let me pick a better way of phrasing that. I haven't really read from you your understanding of how an amateur turns into a professional. Everyone has to start somewhere, you can't just buy a stuffton of professional gear and suddenly you're a professional. You have to work with what you have, maybe work another job, do some free work to start a portfolio, then start charging a bit and ratchet it up as you can afford more gear and your skills improve.
I know a guy, a couple years out of highschool, maybe ah, well probably around 22 or so. He's a very successful wedding cinematographer and moonlights as a photographer, basically does it on the side because he already has all the equipment. Anyway, I was talking to him about business and stuff and he basically told me his story, and it was the same thing I'm saying already. He started in high school, started with doing senior pictures for his friends, and just showed a lot of initiative and work and built his way up from very cheap gear, to now he runs several MKII's for cinematograph with a whole shelf of professional lenses, and two LEICAs for still photography, one film and one digital. He's a self made businessman, and that came from starting small with meager means.
Yeah today you can easily become a self made photographer because the equipment is very cheap. See the article I posted earlier, it explains it very well.
