Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Elitism and the PRO
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <>
Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 23:28:45 +0200

InterestingI And you are not even talking about photographers as artists?
- ----------
> From: Alan Hull <>
> To: LUG <>
> Subject: [Leica] Elitism and the PRO
> Date: 25. toukokuuta 1998 21:17
> As times are indeed a changing,  with fewer and fewer photographers
> able to earn a decent living with photography as their SOLE income, the
> hard and fast definition of a professional photographer is to say the
> least becoming blurred.  
> Which of the following is a modern definition of a professional today? 
> 1.  A photographer who sells a picture, even if it's only one.
> 2.  Or ... must earn enough to pay tax on the proceeds.
> 3.  Or ... must at least pay for his equipment from sales.
> 4.  Or ... has an agent.
> 5.  Or ... has stock photographs in place somewhere.
> Personally,  I like the label Working Photographer which covers more
> bases.  I mean lets face it, sad but true, a totally unskilled worker
> earns more money than a news freelancer.
> I bring this up because I've just noticed how many WP's have a second
> job.  And for those of you who are wondering what on earth this has to
> do with Leica then I will get to the crunch.  I doubt that many WP's
> today can justify a complete Leica system.  It is simply not economical
> to ignore the el cheepo brands out there. 
> Alan Hull