What's really disturbing was the organizer's response to the photographer's bringing the matter up. I don't think the PA should support such values and condone such public behavior as it may encourage discrimination and devalue the worth of an honest occupation in the eyes of our future generation. All the more so if it was a CC event.
Someone should write in to the head of the PA.
Last edited by Dream Merchant; 7th October 2009 at 07:48 PM.
if you had pride in the job, you won't give a rat's ass what others thought of the job, said of it. showing that it is something you love, that is far more important than what some random person says to kids.
let's be objective here, one statement in a kid's life, especially during an emcee session where most kids are likely to be half comatose.. it isn't going to suddenly demonise photographers, or photography as a job or career.
what is going to demonise that? bad behaviour of photographers in public. challenging people rudely when they're trying to do their job. taking blatant photos of zao gengs. taking blatant photos of girls in the street stalker style. talking openly about girls like they're objects.
i guess you could reprimand the mc for being insensitive, that's about it. there is no need to turn this into something much bigger than it is.
how many people tell their kids, "better study hard, otherwise become roadsweeper"
are you going to allow or encourage that?
Last edited by Wai; 7th October 2009 at 08:52 PM.
We are HDD of PC & FT are MB add to storage;
so PC never hangs with enormous storage capacity - LKY
The question here is....What is a photographer?
In today's context, anyone with a DSLR is considered a photographer. To the really the ignorant, as long as you are carrying a DSLR, they think that you are "pro". We all know this issue with regard to ignorant security people at certain events who try to stop people from taking photos with DSLR.
But WE know, that person carrying DSLR, is 80-90% of the time amateurs or hobbyists nowadays. They are not professional. Even if we call it professional, how do you define professional photographer? Someone who gets paid to do a job? Is that alone to be considered a professional photographer? Or how about someone who has a photographic company? Or owns a photographic studio? Is that a criteria to be called a professional photographer? Or, earns his living as a photographer? As far as I know, there is no official definition but many well accepted ones as listed above. U can know nothing about photography, but as long as you own and use a DSLR, anyone can slink by with being called a photographer, and if u manage to get a paid job, hey...pro photographer. But does that mean that if someone who has been paid to do a shoot is necessarily a good or competent photographer?
Perhaps one way to really elevate the status of photographer instead of just GWC or Guy With Camera, is to have some kind of licensing or examination. In that way, at least when someone is called a photographer, we know he understands things about aperture, shutter speed, lighting, and how to use a DSLR or camera effectively. Everyone else should basically be Guy or Gal with Camera. At least, when finally we are called photographers, in a way, it has been earned and people with these titles should have been known to have achieved a certain minimum standard and knowledge in photography.
But whatever the case, photography is not really one of those things that is do or die situation. No building is gonna collapse, no people are going to die, so really, this is all just plain musings unless enough people feel strongly enough about it.
But in a way, the emcee is not exactly wrong. In Singapore, dun study also can become photographer. So long got DSLR, can already. Maybe it was not meant to be insulting. But of course, we also know, if the photographer markets himself or herself well, monthly income of 4-5 figures are common. Afterall local wedding shoot already around 1-2 K, overseas shoot (which are more and more common now), average 8k for 2 days??!! So why you care what people call you as long as u are making the money.
But I'm afraid I stand by my belief that looking down on a person via his or her profession should not be encouraged, anytime in life, but especially at a public and PA organized event where a totally boh-chap response by the organizer was evident.
You may brush it off as nothing, and use extraneous examples of GWCs to confuse the argument (and which to me, has absolutely nothing to do with the profession of photography), as well as to exonerate the MC's actions and stance, but if you've been around people at ground level enough, you'll know that an amazing number of normal people take such displays as truths or reinforcement (of a belief or preference).
All the more so when they can say "Look, even the Government say one!" viz a viz the endorsement of such discrimination by the PA's non-response.
Let one slide, another goes by, another goes by, in no time a hundred pass through ...
What you wrote is easier said then done. Then I can also say that if you have pride in your job, you will not allow others to insult your profession.
You might disagree my statement, but I'm sure there are others that will agree with me.
We're are humans, not Saints. It's human nature to be affected by what others say about you, nothing wrong with that, nothing amusing too.
i didn't raise gwc point to exonerate anyone. just pointing out that there are far more effective ways to throw bad light on photographers..
and there are bad sheep in any crowd. you can think that there's nothing, i can tell you that that's not true!