well, I take a weekend or so way from the forum and all hell breaks loose.
Starting with the OP, who it would seem has vanished into the ether again, there really isn't anything I can add to what has been said, it has taken
most of us who earn any money from photography many years of learning & practice to do that. Yes, there will be a few naturally talented people with huge drive and determination that can succeed much more quickly, but generally you have to walk before running [and in your case, possibly even crawling might be a good start]. I suspect this comment will either not be read, or will fall on deaf ears, but I can assure you that further threads of this nature posted by yourself are unlikely to be left 'live' so maybe you really should make the most of the advice offered in this one.
/mod hat off
As to the rest of it - a couple of points - the RPS don't claim to be a 'professional' body, they are open to all, of any ability, so I can understand them allowing all members to use their logo. However, and this brings me onto the others too, it is all very well for us, as photographers, to have knowledge of all this. A non-photographer looking for a professional will not know it, all they see is a fancy logo and that implies some kind of standards, which plainly don't exist unless that person does actually have a qualification with that body. Ask the average person on the street if they have heard of any photographic bodies, I would be prepared to bet that most would say no, those that say yes, will more than likely mention RPS - a tiny number may mention others if they have had to look for/use a professional photographer recently. I am an RPS member, but I don't display their logo, I am not qualified with them so feel I would be misleading any potential clients that saw it. That is my choice. I am not having a go at the RPS btw, just 'unqualified' photographers that use the logo, as the inference is there, like it or not.
However, when a body is describing itself as a 'professional' body, then like nearly everyone else here, I feel that only those that have reached a desired level should be able to display a logo to that effect.
Phil, FWIW, there are bodies out there that are doing pretty much exactly as you describe [just for example, ask the BIPP about their new criteria for wedding photographers, there will be no more panel of 20 images, you have to demonstrate the consistency in the work you are offering clients month in, month out, minimum 2 full albums, workflow and working practices, etc etc] where you can join, get training if you need it, no logo display until qualified, and no membership renewal if you are not working towards a qualification. Others use different methods, such as the ISPWP mentioned by Guy, which again, have a very strict criteria - such bodies are out there.
As I see it, the problem we have currently is persuading the client to look beyond the logo and do their research into what exactly that logo means......
Of course, the various bodies could accept that people won't do that and instead ensure that their logos are used wisely and not willy nilly by anyone with a few quid to hand over.
