Everyones a photographer

big soft moose said:
I can't work out whether you are being naive or deliberately obtuse - if someone asked you what you do would you say "writer" on the basis that you sometimes write shopping lists ?

the issue the Op raised was about people pretending to be something they're not - okay everyone with a camera is techincally a photographer, but waremarking their shots as "walter mitty photography" implies that they are a proffesional, which is often not the case.

Now personally i don't much care , people can do what they like so long as it doesnt affect me, but before we start criticising the Op and those that agree with him its a good move to actually comprehend the spirit of what they are saying rather than being incredibly literal about it
Click to expand...

big soft moose said:
But most pros don't actually describe themselves as joe blogs proffesional photography

If someone says to me what do you do and I say I'm a photographer - the implication is that thats my proffesion, just as if i said lorry driver, teacher, assassin or whatever

as i said to alex if you say "i'm a writer" you arent saying that you occasional use a biro

Its not that too much is being read into the words by those discussing it here - its that it is not being appreciated by all that the public perception of the word is not the same as the litteral dictionary definition
Click to expand...

If I spent anything like as much time writing as I do taking and editing photographs then yes I would descibe myself as a writer.

If the issue here is people not being able to distinguish bettween an amature photographer and a professional photographer then maybe those with a vested interest in differentiation should do just that and differentiate!
 
a1ex2001 said:
If the issue here is people not being able to distinguish bettween an amature photographer and a professional photographer then maybe those with a vested interest in differentiation should do just that and differentiate!
Click to expand...

or may be the amateur photographers should stop pretending that they are proffesionals - which was the point of the thread originally

Theres no problem with amateurs having websites if thats what they want, but why have a business name if there isnt a business, why refer to clients when they mean 'freinds ive taken pictures for' , why refer to services when they mean interests and so forth.

I do a great deal of DIY and building work , but i wouldnt start a website purporting to be a builder
 
big soft moose said:
or may be the amateur photographers should stop pretending that they are proffesionals - which was the point of the thread originally

Theres no problem with amateurs having websites if thats what they want, but why have a business name if there isnt a business, why refer to clients when they mean 'freinds ive taken pictures for' , why refer to services when they mean interests and so forth.

I do a great deal of DIY and building work , but i wouldnt start a website purporting to be a builder
Click to expand...


This is what the OP said

"It seems everyone that owns a camera either has a "photography" Facebook page or at least watermarks the pictures with "xxxx photography"

I think that is very different to someone claiming that they are a professional photographer.
I also think that it is a wild exaggeration of the facts, because several people have contributed to this thread who do not watermark their images - me included. In fact, apart from one mate who does a bit of part time wedding photography, none of my photography friends watermark their images.
I would also say, that having looked through FB yesterday and today, I have yet to find ONE watermarked image from my friends (I don't have many:crying:) or their friends (they have loads of friends:thinking:).
So, to sum up, I think that this is a bit of a storm in a teacup and does not really represent the reality of the situation.
 
I have to say, I find it quite amusing that the thread has ended up this way. Weve gone from arguing about the meaning of the word 'photographer', to accusing the OP of being jealous :wacky:

Regardless of the photographers original intent when watermarking their photos 'xyzphotography' (which in itself isnt a problem), there will inevitably be a perception by the non photographer public, that this person is a professional photographer. In my experience, it is mainly (not exclusively), the first time DSLR owner that thinks that because they have a shiney new camera, that they are then experienced to offer someone Wedding photography services etc.

Before anyone says it, no, it doesnt affect me or my life in a negative way, and no, im not worried by it, but I can understand the OPs point of view/observation because ive seen it myself on numerous occasions.
 
I have recently started watermarking certain photos, firstly with my name and now instead with my business website.

I don't profess to be a photographer, but I do photograph events that I put on, and some to which I am invited by others to photograph, the photos of which are then used for promotional purposes.

As such, myself and others have a commercial interest in their use. My watermark doesn't mention photography, as my business is in sports coaching etc., but after seeing various shots cropping up in other places, I was keen to note my work as my own, and direct any traffic back to me, even if it's only to gain promotion of the core business.

This is somewhat a sidestep from the OP 'NameName Photography', more just pointing out the circles I went round in when deciding to add a watermark to my own photos.
 
E.M.P. said:
the sample pictures are watermarked up as "xxxxxxx photography" Surely if these people are novices and asking for advice on the absolute basics of how to operate a camera then they should not be calling themself a photographer?)
Click to expand...

I know I'm going to sound blunt here (and perhaps that's partly my intention), but why on earth does this bother you to the point of making a forum post about it? Who cares what people call themselves? If lesser experienced people are purporting to be pro and selling themselves as such then leave them to it, they'll find their own level - people like that always do in any profession.
 
PMN said:
I know I'm going to sound blunt here (and perhaps that's partly my intention), but why on earth does this bother you to the point of making a forum post about it? Who cares what people call themselves? If lesser experienced people are purporting to be pro and selling themselves as such then leave them to it, they'll find their own level - people like that always do in any profession.
Click to expand...

So are people not allowed to have an opinion on something theyve observed? I dont get why people are having a go at the OP for posting.

I dont think he at any point said that it was affecting his livelihood...:thinking: Maybe the mistake was thinking he could post a perfectly innocent (in my view) observation on a forum where, lets face it, some pretty dull things get discussed on a daily basis, without being accused of having an agenda.
 
Last edited:
PMN said:
Where did I say people couldn't have an opinion? :thinking:



Where did I say it was? :thinking:



Who's accusing him of having an agenda? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Where did I say, that you said any of that?? I quoted your post as it was the last one (by its tone), to suggest that the OP was in the wrong to post it.

As far as the agenda goes, look further back for the jealously/print sales post for suggestions that the original post was more than just an innocent observation.
 
Nikon_Nick said:
Where did I say, that you said any of that??
Click to expand...

You said that directly after quoting me so it's a fairly logical assumption it was aimed at me. Maybe wires are getting crossed here!

My point is that I get profoundly confused by people spending their time worrying about what others are doing, if the OP wants to post about it then fine but he has to accept not everyone will agree. You know, that whole having opinions thing... ;)
 
PMN said:
You said that directly after quoting me so it's a fairly logical assumption it was aimed at me. Maybe wires are getting crossed here!

My point is that I get profoundly confused by people spending their time worrying about what others are doing, if the OP wants to post about it then fine but he has to accept not everyone will agree. You know, that whole having opinions thing... ;)
Click to expand...

Apologies if it sounded like I was having a go at you.

I understand what you are saying, and yes, because everyone has an opinion, it will not always be the case that the original OP will be agreed with by everyone. BUT...I dont think the OP was assuming people were going to answer him with 'Oh yes, absolutely, you are of course 100% correct about all of this'. It was purely (in my opinion), something that struck him as an observation which he then decided to share. Remember, he did say that he didnt consider himself a photographer yet, so it couldnt possibly effect any business he might have had... Ive made the same observation myself in the past, but the only difference is that I didnt post on here about it afterwards.

I just dont think it is fair that people should jump down his throat for expressing his thoughts, thats all :shrug:
 
Wow, didnt quite expect it to turn into this! lol

To clarify, the original post was purely based on an observation of things I have seen on here (along with various other places) of a few people saying things like "I am new to photography. I have just bought my first camera. What settings do I need for xxxxx" there will then be reference to a website/FB/Flickr account of "first name, last name photography"

All the post was pointing out is if someone needs to be asking on a forum how to work the camera, are they classed as a photographer? Personally I was under the impression a photographer is someone that knows how to use a camera, is skilled enough to take a quality image and earns money from it and because DSLRs are more affordable these days it seems everyone is now a photographer, regardless of knowing how to get a good image or not.

To also clarify, I own a couple of cameras. I take pictures as a hobby, but as I dont attempt to earn money from it and think I still have a lot to learn so I dont class myself as a photographer and do not have a photography page or photography website. If people see me with the camera and ask if i`m a photographer I say no (because I am not) but I do enjoy taking pictures as a hobby.

As some people pointed out, it doesn't really matter as people obviously have different perception to things. To me it just seems strange that there's people that will buy a camera and set up a photography page/website with no idea how to use it and come on to forums like this and ask "what settings do I need to do xyz" or "what does ISO mean" To me that does not make a photographer, its just someone that owns a camera.

Anyway, it seems the dictionary definition wins on this one and everyone with a camera is infact a photographer lol
 
Last edited:
The youarenotaphotographer.com website lampoons these people. Or the 'fauxtographer' term that is widely known.
 
E.M.P. said:
To also clarify, I own a couple of cameras. I take pictures as a hobby, but as I dont attempt to earn money from it and think I still have a lot to learn so I dont class myself as a photographer
Click to expand...

Surely, if you use them to do photography with, you are a photographer.


Steve.
 
Lots of assumptions in this thread!

It doesn't bother me. If someone has taken a photo, they like it and are proud of it, they can stick whatever the heck they want on it for all I care. They can call themselves whatever they want whilst they're at it!

If you're that concerned about Joe Bloggs off the internet giving a false representation of "professional photographers" (neither of which everyone with a facebook page or watermarked image is alluding to btw), get out there with your camera and do better. What's moaning about it going to do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top