The Amateur Photographer
I've been meaning to write this post for a while, especially since my position on it has changed in the past couple of months.
As an amateur soon (hopefully) turned professional photographer, I deal with and observe several amateur photographers on a daily basis. Obviously there's a difference between a person such as me who is pursuing photography as art and career and a person for whom photography never extends beyond a hobby. There are also a certain group of people stuck in between - the 'serious' amateurs, to whom I'll devote a special paragraph later on. How do I feel about amateur photographers? I'm quite neutral towards them actually, and probably will be going forward. There are things I love, and things I despise about them. Realize two things here 1) I was once an amateur photographer, each professional at sometime was and 2) Amateur photography today has been shaped almost completely by the advent of affordable digital photography. Here are the things I like about having this class of people around. For one, they give my corporations a great deal of funding to keep developing their professional line. Sony is the best example here. Without their compact camera division flourishing, their advent into the professional market would have been all the more risky. Amateurs are easily conned into spending large chunks of money (XYZ Megapixels!) which means that large corporations don't have to pay much attention to the technical aspect as much as the 'cosmetic' hype (hello Nikon D5000). More of that money can go towards their pro line. Here are the things I dislike about amateur photographers (honestly, most of these didn't apply to people like me during my first year, but some did, which I've expanded upon). For one they buy multi-thousand dollar DSLRs they use on Auto. It's frustrating to me when someone goes ahead and buys a camera worth that much money and end up not knowing a thing about it. Even worse, some assume that they have professional cameras and then compare it to mine, which is a modest setup, but that's the thing - they will never realize that you don't need to spend thousands of dollars to get great photos. It helps, when you know how to use it, but if you don't, it's just technical jargon that you can rant about not knowing what it all means. Next, some amateurs can be a bit stubborn at times. I can't blame them for this one though, its perfectly normal. When they get a "great shot" by their standards they get so pumped up and excited about it to the extent that they can compare it to a professional's work (yes, it happens). They aren't very down to earth sometimes. But you can't blame them here, they aren't exposed to great photography in the first place. A large part of them follow the misconception that photography is about the camera, and I'm no greater than them unless I have a better camera. Looking at my work, the first question is usually "What camera do you use?" Guess what, both my cameras are out of production, but I'm extremely happy with them and I can still make great pictures with them. Realizing that it takes the skill of a photographer and not the circuitry of a mass-produced digicam to accomplish a great photograph is a hurdle nearly every amateur (who dares proceed further than amateur) has to overcome. This one applies to me too - amateurs think film is dated, old and nothing compared to modern day digital. Like most amateurs today, I started out with digital, so I thought the same "Why would anyone use film?" Right? Well, wrong. Film has dynamic range and resolution that hasn't been achieved in the digital world as of yet is your straight and honest answer. And well, it is a lot more rewarding, fun and skillful but that's another story. Also, amateurs, please - just because one is a photographer does not mean we know every single model and make of camera out there - we know what we work with and that's it, Google a review for yourself, but if you need assistance comparing cameras with tech specs or image quality examples, we'd be glad to help, just don't rattle off DSC-PZ10 and expect us to know anything, it isn't our realm. Right, the 'serious' amateur. They form a minority of the amateur spectrum. And I'm glad most of the amateurs I interact with fall into this class. They are the ones who have an honest love for photography. They're down to earth people who pursue it as a passion only because their day job happens to be something a bit less adventurous (they might say otherwise, and they're right sometimes). They know their cameras and value them well. They don't make art, but they can make some damn fine pictures nevertheless. Always out to learn, very few amateurs progress to this stage, and these are the people who could turn professional if they push themselves hard enough. So as I said - I'm neutral. Photographers wouldn't be anything without amateurs, because that's where everyone has to start, there's no trickery to evading this stage. It's just that with digital photography, everyone thinks they are a photographer now (and some of them are, and move forward) - people seem to be pushing it a bit too far sometimes. End of thesis. Azhar Chougle | www.azharc.com
