• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Photography & Dating.... who do you consider a photographer...

The Stigenator

The Stigenator

Lifer
So I have my profile on several dating sites and I have my profile and I list photography as an interest.

I consider myself a semi-pro, though technically the moment I start getting more paid jobs I'll go pro. However I meet people who claim to be photographers but use either a point and shoot or worse yet a camera phone as their main device.

Now I am not refuting the abilities of the latter two since I own all of those and more. However I find that when a person's main hobby is photography I would think they would have gotten something more interesting than a camera phone to take pictures with.

Then of course comes the inevitable question of what kind of gear I got. Of course when I mention it they go 'oh you must have money'.

To me photography can be done with any equipment, but if you list your hobby as photography (like most of the people in here do), we arent taking self portraits in the bathroom as proof of our photography. Nor are we taking 'close ups'. Yeah some of them would rival the japanese tourist, but in the end its photography and yet I tend to think can they really call 'photography' as a hobby when they only take pictures with a point and shoot or a cell phone camera?

For reference my kit contains:
Canon EOS 40D + fixings, Canon S3IS (with sister in law), S1IS (hardly use), Canon A75 (hardly use), Casio EXSlim EX500 (i need to replace this), Canon Rebel Ti (film - hardly use).

 
If you like taking pictures and make an effort to do so then I can't see why you can't consider photography a hobby. Sounds to me like you're being a gear snob, no offense.
 
I am sure as not a gear snob, cause I use my gear. Yes I am a packrat, i should have gotten rid of the S1 IS years ago but I never did. Same with my A75. However I resent the term gear snob..
 
In my book, a photographer is one who understands the process of making pictures . actually an art as well as a science. A professional is one who derives income from that skill. An amateur is one who does it for the love of the art or science without needing to get paid. Ergo, in that sense, there are amateurs who can be better photographers than some profesionals.

Equipment is only part of the equation. A skilled photographer can often get better results with a cheap camera than one who is less skilled with the most expensive stuff available.

And, for those who love the feel and utility of fine gear, and can afford it, I don't consider them "gear snobs." They are no different than the person who dotes on fine autombobiles, or art.

In order to be a snob, in my world, one must belittle those who have less costly gear.




 
Originally posted by: The Stigenator
can they really call 'photography' as a hobby when they only take pictures with a point and shoot or a cell phone camera?
Click to expand...

Why not? You're free to use any equipment you like, and if that happens to be disc cameras, plastic MF / lomo, grainy B&W film, infra-red, pinhole, contacts without any cameras, etc., etc., it's your choice and nobody has any business telling you that what you're doing doesn't fit their definition of "photography".

Digicams are probably by far the most common type of camera in use, and it should be no surprise that there are many people using just them, and are hesitant to get into more complex gear, especially if they've been satisfied with their own images.

There are even some people around who deliberately shoot with equipment the typical camera snob would consider inadequate, yet often produce results better than many camera snobs do in their lifetime.

As to what's listed on dating sites.. well I think anything there should be understood to be open to some interpretation.
 
I'm a photographer. And I'm going to Magic Mountain with my P&S S45. Neener neener.

Seriously though, does it really matter what other people call themselves? Is there anything to be gained by judging them on equipment and their work, to assign worth?

Photography is bigger than that. I say move on.
 
I think I understand the perspective the OP is coming from. For example, until fairly recently, a "poet" was a term for an individual who composed what was generally considered to be *good* poetry. Persons who wrote poor poetry, simple verse or rhymes were called "rhymesters" or "versifiers". And, a person was referred to as a "poet" by acclaim, not by self-description. If someone describes himself as a "photographer", I would expect something more than simple snapshots. Of course, a "snapshooter" could use an SLR just as a "photographer" can use a P&S.

Aside from all that blather, I've found that teh wimmenz :heart: men with cameras.
 
I'd agree with the assessment of someone with only a cellphone camera as not being a serious photographer. If you care enough about something to call it a hobby, then you wouldn't be relying on a gimmicky miniature-sensor-as-an-afterthought on a communication device.

Now, if someone simply has a point and shoot, I wouldn't begrudge them the photographer moniker. I started with a P&S, and you can certainly achieve good results with one in a variety of situations. It does limit your capabilities (low light, long or short range, etc.), but one can easily produce excellent results.
 
it all really depends on what they have to show you. I'd be skeptical of someone who only had a cameraphone, but if they show me something to back it up, it's all good. Hobbies vary widely, and I've seen some pretty interesting shots from the good ol' cameraphone.

Now, if it's just a bunch of self portraits or group shots, then yeah...

and to the OP, you do sound a bit gear snob-ish with the focus on gear pretty much in the post.
 
I can sort of see where you're coming from OP; I've encountered a lot of people who call themselves photographers and don't have anything to really back up the claim beyond some horrid self-portraits featuring an overuse of makeup.

However, at the same time, if it's something they're into, more power to them. You don't necessarily have to be *good* to call yourself a photographer. I've had my XSi for 7 months now, and before that a Powershot a710IS. I still can't produce images anywhere close to the quality that most of the people here can, and I'm still learning a lot about photography, but that doesn't stop me from calling myself an amateur photographer, and listing photography as a hobby on social networking sites.

So, regardless of the gear a person has, even if it is a shoddy camera phone, if they're into it, and are actively taking pictures, I don't see why they shouldn't call themselves a photographer, or list photography as an interest. For every person with a crappy camera calling themselves a photographer there's another person whose rich parents bought them an expensive camera that sits around collecting dust, still calling themselves a photographer.
 
Originally posted by: corkyg
In my book, a photographer is one who understands the process of making pictures . actually an art as well as a science. A professional is one who derives income from that skill. An amateur is one who does it for the love of the art or science without needing to get paid. Ergo, in that sense, there are amateurs who can be better photographers than some profesionals.

Equipment is only part of the equation. A skilled photographer can often get better results with a cheap camera than one who is less skilled with the most expensive stuff available.

And, for those who love the feel and utility of fine gear, and can afford it, I don't consider them "gear snobs." They are no different than the person who dotes on fine autombobiles, or art.

In order to be a snob, in my world, one must belittle those who have less costly gear.
Click to expand...

This.

I consider myself a photographer, even though currently the only photo gear I own is my Sony P&S. Luckily my gf has a 5D and lenses, so I can use that but before we started dating I didn't have anything outside of that P&S. Her and I actually had our first convo about photography 😛

I agree with corkey that being a photographer isn't about the equipment, but about the knowledge and skills to be able to take great pictures regardless of the equipment. Obviously my gf's 5D will take much better pictures than my Sony, but that doesn't mean I can't take good pics with my Sony.

I will also say (having been there in the dating realm talking to "photographers") that a lot of people who put that are the consumer type, not the pro-sumer/professional type. I.E. they can take a picture, and understand maybe some base fundamentals (lower ISO vs higher ISO's). Once you get past some basics though, they are lost and don't care why you would use a F2.0 lens instead of a F4.0 apature. You, the camera forum, and I fall into the pro-sumer category. That means we might not be professionally taking pictures (or even getting paid), but we are very similar to professional photogs. The difference is that pro-sumers don't *usually* have the $ to spend as professionals, and do it more for the hobby than for revenue generation.
 
People who enjoy taking photographs without intent to sell/market are photography hobbyists or amateurs. Photography professionals are those who take photographs with the intention to print and sell, with that being their primary source of income.


Both are photographers.
 
Originally posted by: The Stigenator
Then of course comes the inevitable question of what kind of gear I got. Of course when I mention it they go 'oh you must have money'.
Click to expand...


Are you serious? A 40D, a few point and shoots and a $30 film camera impresses them? What kind of low rent people are you dating?

I wouldn't call you a gear snob..... you have nothing to be snobby about.
 
I would like to see some of the images you produce before you look down on other people. Do you use your 40D without lenses?
 
Originally posted by: dnuggett
Originally posted by: The Stigenator
Then of course comes the inevitable question of what kind of gear I got. Of course when I mention it they go 'oh you must have money'.
Click to expand...


Are you serious? A 40D, a few point and shoots and a $30 film camera impresses them? What kind of low rent people are you dating?

I wouldn't call you a gear snob..... you have nothing to be snobby about.
Click to expand...

How do you equate people who have no sense of camera value with "low rent"?

Or is my sarcasm meter broken...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top