Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/24

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Definition of a Professional
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@ponyexpress.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 23:32:31 -0600

At 09:15 PM 2/24/99 +0100, you wrote:
>se' hierarchy supposing more quality on the pro side. More reliability,
>yes, more adaptability, a better sense of opportunity, more efficiency.
>But not necessarily more quality.

Well, at the risk of offending some fine amateurs here, I will go out on a 
limb and say that pros have a better chance of producing superior work, 
simply because they spend more waking hours making pictures. There are 
notable exceptions, but I'm not willing to get politically correct and say 
I see as many good amateurs. Some, for sure, but in the balance, I think 
there are a lot more "good" pros out there than "good" amateurs. There are 
also a whole lot more BAD pros out there than good amateurs (or good pros). 
We outnumber them on both sides of the equation. :-)

>Plenty ? Not on this side of the Atlantic anyway. A few, probably yes,
>in France, Italy or Germany. But not plenty. True, the PJ is certainly
>even less of a walking jackpot. Especially if he/she spends that little
>income on Leica equipment ;-/

Sure, lots of advertising and commercial photographers make big bucks. I 
guess I'm talking gross receipts. But then, money ain't worth what it used 
to be worth. A couple thousand here, and a couple thousand there and pretty 
soon it starts to add up.

Eric Welch
St. Joseph, MO
http://www.ponyexpress.net/~ewelch

Diplomacy: Say nice doggie until you find a *BIG* stick.