Everyone quarrels in this thread.
Very exciting to read.
If you are a pro that earn big bucks you still have to be careful with purchases. Why ? It is not because you do not earn enough, it is because as a business person you need to justify purchases. It most definitely not doable to buy the latest version of a body or lens just because it is the latest. If what you have still works for 90% of what you do, there is no justification in buying. That is a key difference between a photo business run as a business and one run as a person hobby. One will generate and retain profits making the owner richer, the other generates to fuel the owners spending sprees leaving no or little profits, owner could even run into situations where nothing was catered for living expenses aka salary since there is always some money coming in. Running a business in the early day (first 3 to 5 years) would see many times the famine/feast cycle until one learns to store the excess from the feast cycle to help make it thru the famine. It is never just about being able to shoot plus PP till **** shines like gold - its about staying alive long enough till things stabilize, being able to PR like mad to be assured of the next call for a job.
Everyone bitches about things - it just wether you are in the circle that hears it.
What's the difference between "low-charging" photographers and budget airlines?
What's the difference between "low-charging" photographers and budget airlines?
What's the difference between "low-charging" photographers and budget airlines?
What's the difference between "low-charging" photographers and budget airlines?
I think Money is not always a consideration for a pro not to buy another piece of equipment.
It is familiarity of what you used to. Just an example, Sony A99 was indeed a very good camera, but it doesn't fit my usage so I didn't buy it. Money and depreciation is one thing, familiarity is another.
There are a lot of reason why we choose what we buy.
-------
To be honest and being selfish, I should encourage the low charging "photographers" because by itself, it create the "barriers" so people don't want to be in this trade. It is actually a better situation for establish pro.
We try to give our views so people who want to make a living can benefit from it.
Worry about people charging lower is just a waste of time, I would rather use it to advance further. You either have the mindset to be a pro or you don't, but the question is, if you don't have the mindset, can you change to become one? It is a choice and I have made mine by having 2 successful photography company doing a genre people say it isn't possible when I started 5 years ago. It is about having to see the possibility and work darn hard for it. My challenge to you see differently... not about me.
Regards,
Hart
I imagine that those who make a lot of money are not event or wedding photographers. More likely commercial product or fashion magazine photographers who got a steady and growing list of big company clients.
Any businessman is cost conscious and watch the bottom line.
now so easy for even the common masses aka dumb hobbyist, to get in on the act.
Me poor hobbyist.
Agree with most things you mentioned HART. I only respect PROS in any business if they can face any competition.
Afraid of any competition, get out of the business.
Photography is well known for its snob and poser attributes, that is why many here are getting hot with rants since it is
now so easy for even the common masses aka dumb hobbyist, to get in on the act.
you might be surprised how much a hobbyist can make. one of my buddy is a great shooter and shoots weddings every alternate weekend part time, works as engineer full time
i think his take home is not a small sum .
What's the difference between "low-charging" photographers and budget airlines?
I think TS isn't treating hobbyists fairly by labeling them as 'dumb'. Coz in his initial post it's all about professional photographers who take photos for business, never about hobbyists. Making hobbyists look 'dumb' doesn't necessarily make professional photographers 'smarter', it would only make photography a 'dumb' industry to pursue (both as hobbyist and professionals).
In the first place, hobbyists aren't concerned about depreciation. The reason why they call themselves 'hobbyists' is already because they anticipate depreciation. They know that they can't earn in the photography industry, yet are keen on pursuing their passion for photography, hence deciding to stay on as 'hobbyists' so that they can work in a different profession and pursue photography as a side passion.
Depreciation also doesn't work against hobbyists; it works for hobbyists. Unlike professionals that depend on photos as their rice bowl, hobbyists treasure that sense of 'pride' in acquiring new hardware. Besides taking good shots that they can show off to their friends about this hobby that they have, they can also 'show off' their newest camera hardware. Just like how some of us work our socks off to buy the latest electronic gadgets or latest trending fashion-wear, camera equipment and accessories are the 'pride' of their hard-earned monthly income. So why can't I buy the latest Nikon D4 or Canon 5DMkIII when others can splurge on Samsung Galaxy S4, Asus Zenbook and 4k-resolution TVs? This is something that hobbyists have that professionals lack due to the possibility of depreciation that works against any possible profits.
Lastly, hobbyists are well aware of depreciation more than professionals do. They also have their own 'accounting' to do, like the depreciation accounting mentioned in this thread. In the minds of hobbyists, they are like: "Ok, I have a D7000. D7100 just came out, but not worth buying coz it looks almost the same as the D7000. I shall buy the D600 instead, since many of my friends are also jumping to the FX bandwagon. Which means that I need to work for 2-3 months more to upgrade to D600. Either that or I will skip this D7100 update, wait for the next D7200 update before I upgrade my D7000." Such a consideration does not apply to professional photographers, since cost, durability and versatility comes into play for them.
Think about this: if people are aware that placing money in the bank would lead to depreciation since inflation is higher than the interest rates the banks pay, then why are so many people around the world still placing their money in their banks?
With this, I hope that discussions stay away from hobbyists vs professionals on this topic. Generating more meaningful discussion would require a change of thread title, or TS to declare his intentions of this thread. Else this thread's discussion would misleadingly continue to be about hobbyists and depreciation.