Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]john (Shick) wrote: ><Snip> > Why do wedding photographers and portrait photographers seem to be on the > bottom of the photographic hierarchy? Are we confusing what a professional > photographer really is.><Snip> I think 1 in 4 commercial photographers are people whose work and way of doing business I admire. That's not a bad number. About the same for Photojournalists. 1 in 20 for the ones in the Portrait section, sorry but that's how many of them in my opinion produce anything better than shlock. And 1 in 100 Wedding photographers. Darn hard to find the good ones! They are mainly an insult to photographers and photography. But the good ones are out there! If you are lucky and live in a larger town. But there is no such thing as a "photographer." it has to be qualified. How similar is what an underwater photographers job is too a photographer of kids? Both shoot "schools" of...... Sorry this one just came flying off my keyboard!!!!!:):) Both use cameras. How similar is an 8x10 view camera in operation to a high tech autofocus SLR? But mainly the kind of stuff that one would shoot with these cameras and the job description that goes around it? Mark Rabiner darn hard to make generations about "photographers." It's Richard Avedons' birthday today, He does portraits!