What makes a photographer, a photographer?

[Loswr]

I certaily think there's a distinction between "photographer" and "professional photographer". IMO, that distinction is based on whether or not you derive significant income from photography. If you're paying taxes on what you earn from it, you're a pro. Gear and skill don't factor in (there are plenty of pros shooting great images with 20D bodies, and there are pro photographers with 1-series bodies who get paid a lot of money to take what are, IMO, crappy pictures).

 

[unfocused]

unfocused: In samthefish's situation about his friend's dad, would you have also said his friend's dad should've owned the photo?

Ownership isn't always easy to untangle. The "friend's dad" could have some legal claim to the picture (or more properly, to any profits from the picture), but it would have to be litigated and I doubt it would have been worth it. In your case, you certainly have some ownership interest in the photos since you provided the equipment and resources, but owning the photograph and claiming to be the photographer are two different things.

My unsolicited suggestion: call your friend. Tell her you were wrong and realize you shouldn't have tried to take credit for her work. Then discuss how you can work together so that she gets the credit due her and you can still make a profit. She may be perfectly happy to let you make some money so long as she gets credit.

 

[awinphoto]

unfocused: In samthefish's situation about his friend's dad, would you have also said his friend's dad should've owned the photo?

Ownership isn't always easy to untangle. The "friend's dad" could have some legal claim to the picture (or more properly, to any profits from the picture), but it would have to be litigated and I doubt it would have been worth it. In your case, you certainly have some ownership interest in the photos since you provided the equipment and resources, but owning the photograph and claiming to be the photographer are two different things.

My unsolicited suggestion: call your friend. Tell her you were wrong and realize you shouldn't have tried to take credit for her work. Then discuss how you can work together so that she gets the credit due her and you can still make a profit. She may be perfectly happy to let you make some money so long as she gets credit.

I think it all comes back into the implied relationship... Like with the friends dad shooting with/for the life photographer, it was implied he was shooting for him... I'm sure if he was to mention before he was handed the camera "hey, will i be given copyright/ownership/credit for all images I take", the life photographer would have a slight chuckle, say no, and find the next guy who would do it no questions asked. Like the wedding photographer, they dont claim to have been the photographer of the images taken by a second shooter, but it is owned by their photography and name and banner and if that image taken by the second shooter somehow made the photographer millions in sales, the second shooter still has no right or claim to that image/money even though they may or may not be given credit or recommendations.

As far as the professional/amateur distinction, given this is the second posting asking about the "photographer" terms in as many months, i would guess the distinction, while understood by people who regularly visit this forum and are avid photographers/sometimes rabid photographers, I dont think it is as easily understood to the common layman.

 

[Loswr]

As far as the professional/amateur distinction, given this is the second posting asking about the "photographer" terms in as many months, i would guess the distinction, while understood by people who regularly visit this forum and are avid photographers/sometimes rabid photographers, I dont think it is as easily understood to the common layman.

I'd agree, especially today. In the film era, many pros used MF cameras (our wedding - almost 19 years ago now - was shot by a husband and wife using Mamiya 645 Supers). You didn't see many consumers walking around with those. But today, to the casual eye there's not a lot of visual difference between a T3i/600D and a 5DII, or from a 1-series if there's a grip attached. I'm sure there are a lot of weddings/events/whatever where many guests have better gear than the pro contracted to do the shooting. Heck, we had a backyard party for my daughter last summer, and among the parents there were three 5DII's and a 1DsIII with a bunch of L-series lenses (and probably >50 years of combined post-graduate education). With all this gear in the hands of consumers, it's easy to see where the lines get blurred for the layman.

 

[cheeseheadsaint]

My unsolicited suggestion: call your friend. Tell her you were wrong and realize you shouldn't have tried to take credit for her work. Then discuss how you can work together so that she gets the credit due her and you can still make a profit. She may be perfectly happy to let you make some money so long as she gets credit.

I took down the retouched/watermarked photo already and uploaded the unedited original and credited her but that made her even more mad. :-[ Yeah, we originally scheduled to meet so I can apologize and resolve this mess except she misread the location and now I sure hope that didn't make her even more mad. I'll see her later today and get this resolved. Thanks unfocused.


And thanks to all who contributed to this thread! really interesting reading all these interpretations.

I sure hope I didn't offend anyone with any of my posts. finding that i got my first negative karma point. oops, sorry.

 

[Loswr]

finding that i got my first negative karma point. oops, sorry.

The 1st one might sting a bit; the 333rd, not so much...

 

[awinphoto]

My unsolicited suggestion: call your friend. Tell her you were wrong and realize you shouldn't have tried to take credit for her work. Then discuss how you can work together so that she gets the credit due her and you can still make a profit. She may be perfectly happy to let you make some money so long as she gets credit.

I took down the retouched/watermarked photo already and uploaded the unedited original and credited her but that made her even more mad. :-[ Yeah, we originally scheduled to meet so I can apologize and resolve this mess except she misread the location and now I sure hope that didn't make her even more mad. I'll see her later today and get this resolved. Thanks unfocused.


And thanks to all who contributed to this thread! really interesting reading all these interpretations.

I sure hope I didn't offend anyone with any of my posts. finding that i got my first negative karma point. oops, sorry.

If this was a close friend of yours, by all means and repair your relationship with them as that may be more important than any one photo. That being said, if it was me, I would take ownership of the image with a note near the photo saying "taken by:xxxx" Especially if you did the post on it and made it your own. The original implied relationship was she was helping YOU, and assuming you may have been shooting also with another camera and giving direction/pointers to the friend, then do what you feel like you need to do.

 

[bigblue1ca]

finding that i got my first negative karma point. oops, sorry.

The 1st one might sting a bit; the 333rd, not so much...

That's worth a +1 for the laugh.

 

[dolina]

A camera and an opinion. ;D

 

[spaced]

If you want to be a photographer in Iceland:

"Working as a photographer or calling oneself a photographer requires a masters degree in photography from the Reykjavík Technical College, or a similar degree from another industry-based school in Iceland"

Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law#cite_ref-50

 

[thepancakeman]

If you want to be a photographer in Iceland:

"Working as a photographer or calling oneself a photographer requires a masters degree in photography from the Reykjavík Technical College, or a similar degree from another industry-based school in Iceland"

Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law#cite_ref-50

Wow. That is nuts. What are the requirements for other hobbies e.g. cycling, gardening, fishing?

 

[Meh]

If you want to be a photographer in Iceland:

"Working as a photographer or calling oneself a photographer requires a masters degree in photography from the Reykjavík Technical College, or a similar degree from another industry-based school in Iceland"

Link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography_and_the_law#cite_ref-50

Wow. That is nuts. What are the requirements for other hobbies e.g. cycling, gardening, fishing?

I suppose in Iceland then you can only claim to be "a person who photographs, cycles, gardens, fishes, etc." but not a photographer, cyclist, gardener, or fisherman.

 

[AJ]

Let's say you have a person who just set his camera for a shoot. He fiddled with the settings and walked off to blow his nose. Then his kid/cat/dog/friend pushes the shutter button.

The person later post processes all the pictures including the one he didn't "take".

Who is the photographer of that photo?

IMHO...

There is no photographer. A real photographer sorts through his photos, tosses the duds, and only processes the best shots....

The "photo" in question is not a photo, just a file hogging space on the flash card....

Yes I avoided the question, it's a politician's answer, but it's my answer. So there

 

[keithfullermusic]

Someone with a 5D ii or better, 4 L lenses, 3 top-notch speedlites, lots of umbrellas and stands, a carbon-fiber tripod, and makes $80,000+ a year selling photographs.

If you don't meet those requirements you have no business owning a camera.

 

[wickidwombat]

Someone with a 5D ii or better, 4 L lenses, 3 top-notch speedlites, lots of umbrellas and stands, a carbon-fiber tripod, and makes $80,000+ a year selling photographs.

If you don't meet those requirements you have no business owning a camera.

you forgot to add a sarcasm disclaimer....

 

[MazV-L]

One time when I set out to do some light drawing/ painting photography I forgot my cable shutter release so I had to ask my sister to hold down the shutter button (needed the camera in bulb mode) while I did all the light art for the shot (It was impossible to do both without the cable shutter-release) and just told her when it was time to release the shutter. I still consider the photos taken that night,my photos although I did not physically press the shutter button, I set the camera settings, set-up the tripod and did all the light-painting in the shot, in fact my sister wouldn't have had a clue as to camera settings etc., but do give her credit for helping to take the shots, without her help, I'd have been unable to use the Bulb-setting and been limited to 30secs per shot.

 

[krisbell]

I got into a debate just recently with my upcoming wedding photographer. I asked if I could have a small handful of RAW files and they politely but firmly refused - stating they are the owners and it is their creative vision that makes the photo. HOWEVER, my fiance and I have chosen the time of day, the location, the venue, the clothing, hairstyling, makeup, props etc...in essence a huge proportion of the creative element that will go into each photo. I also plan on processing those RAWs myself - a further large creative input. Granted there is still a lot of creative scope on the part of the photographer but it felt kind of weird to be told that the photographer owns the RAW pictures of me and my partner and can use it anyway they see fit, citing the creative angle. I dont know how you measure who put more creativity into the photo but it isnt clear cut from my perspective.

 

[Don Haines]

I got into a debate just recently with my upcoming wedding photographer. I asked if I could have a small handful of RAW files and they politely but firmly refused - stating they are the owners and it is their creative vision that makes the photo. HOWEVER, my fiance and I have chosen the time of day, the location, the venue, the clothing, hairstyling, makeup, props etc...in essence a huge proportion of the creative element that will go into each photo. I also plan on processing those RAWs myself - a further large creative input. Granted there is still a lot of creative scope on the part of the photographer but it felt kind of weird to be told that the photographer owns the RAW pictures of me and my partner and can use it anyway they see fit, citing the creative angle. I dont know how you measure who put more creativity into the photo but it isnt clear cut from my perspective.

When I take pictures for where I work, they own them and control them. I do not even have the right to put them in a portfolio.... but that's what the job is defined as.... I am paid to produce a product. Photography is unusual because by convention, the photos belong to the photographer and you are paying them for use of the image. If you want the image to belong to you, put it in the contract and make sure the photographer signs.

As is said, "the devil is in the details", and when you hire someone for any job it needs to be made abundantly clear who does what, and in the case of photography, who owns the images.....

 

[Don Haines]

Same story if you setup a wildlife trigger and a wild animal trips the shutter. The deer or whatever is not the photographer!

Good example!

 

[Grumbaki]

There is no photographer. A real photographer sorts through his photos, tosses the duds, and only processes the best shots....

Film era at the rescue.
Cartier Bresson wasn't developping himself BUT working closely to have his view respected (the no crop millimeter)
Gary Winogarnd died with 2500 rolls undevelopped. Never sorted any.

For the rest the widlife trigger parabol does the trick.