How true is this....


Status
Not open for further replies.

excelglsi

Deregistered
Oct 11, 2005
1,693
0
0
CCK-Yew Tee
#1
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:

Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:
 

sORe-EyEz

Senior Member
Jun 28, 2005
1,572
0
0
SGee
#2
IMO, that'll be unfair to say the least. as an art trends, in photography do shift over time, there's more genre as to wad kind of photo category a pic may belong to.

there's a tinge of bitterness in that statement as well, like seeing an exclusive hobby going mass market- like club membership? enjoyed by a privileged few in the past... its likely in the past only those who were serious would & could afford this hobby, thereby the standards were proportionally higher than what it is now.

good pisc bad pics aside, its 1 to be enjoyed. as time goes by most do improve, so just hang loose & enjoy.
 

leejay

Deregistered
Sep 18, 2006
4,622
0
0
#3
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:

Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:
Both are photographers, BUT
the difference is making a living or hobby. Hobbyists shoot at one's own pace and time. You don't have the pressure to deliver. I went to Malaysia for a group shoot recently. The senior people (in their 50s and they own their own studios/shops) said the same thing, but they are referring to the people in the profession. I was also surprised that they know people like Leslie, Chuando, etc.
 

azul123

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2004
2,776
0
0
Eastern Bloc
#4
My conclusion is, whether you are a professional photographer or hobbyist... it really depends on the individual. I have seen some hobbyist who are close to perfectionist, they won't stop till they achieve their desired results.

So, whether a few photographers before and many now, makes no difference... but the quality of that individual is what counts.

../azul123
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#6
what is a photographer?

any person with a camera taking a photo is a photographer. therefore, no, standards have been the way they have been.
the people in the past with p&s camera have no idea of composition. the people today with p&s camera mostly still do not have idea of composition or exposure.

but one thing has changed - living standards have gone up, and more people can afford cameras, and with the introduction of consumer dslr where the cost isn't prohibitively high to try to "up" the ante.. more people are getting dslrs.

so it does appear as if "photographers" are lousier these days, but that's not true, standards have remained constant - just that the number of people getting equipment that they do not know how to harness properly, that has increased - i suppose people are going to give me flak on making this statement, as always in clubsnap, but it is true.
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#7
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:

Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:
Yes, last time when people don't anyhow call themself a photographer, but when they do, they really produce quality photos.

How about now? I don't know, but I think everyone have the answer.
 

excelglsi

Deregistered
Oct 11, 2005
1,693
0
0
CCK-Yew Tee
#8
what about yourself? are you a good photographer? ;p
To be frank no... I got 2 DSLR n various of lenses, but I stil lose out to a friend tat using a D200 with a 18-70 n a 50f1.8. His photo can beat mi anytime.. Which I came to koe the way I shoot is wrong. Shoot like a few hundreds n hope to get a few good 1. From there I try to pay more attention about the exposure, Lighting, position of Sun, composition n F16 rule...

Trying film now, cant anyhow waste film.. Back to he basic.. Hope can learn from the beginning...:cry:
 

mystudio

New Member
Mar 24, 2006
89
0
0
#10
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:

Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:
Haha, this is same as saying last time there were very few models, but they are those with quality. Today got lots of models but not many can made it.;p

Yes, last time when people don't anyhow call themself a photographer, but when they do, they really produce quality photos.

How about now? I don't know, but I think everyone have the answer.
Same right, last time people don't anyhow call themselves models. How about now?:angel:


Oops, sorry for the OT:embrass:
 

xiaotinggg

New Member
Mar 9, 2008
260
0
0
#11
Haha, this is same as saying last time there were very few models, but they are those with quality. Today got lots of models but not many can made it.;p



Same right, last time people don't anyhow call themselves models. How about now?:angel:


Oops, sorry for the OT:embrass:


ya i need to agree on this :) those models requesting for shoots has only a back up portfolio of few TFCD photos,
but u knwo what, yet there are still photographers willing to angage them,
and it is like photogrphers,
u dont have skill, but people are still willing to engage u for service.
what to do? the world is ignorant.
welll, i pity those models who has been attending courses over time, because now there is existence of XMM
and those full time photographers, because now everyone who holds a DSLR can shoot too :)
 

LittleWolf

New Member
Jan 23, 2005
1,095
0
0
Singapore
#12
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:
"Last time", there were some good photographers whose pictures got published/exhibited, and lots of crappy ones whose pictures disappeared in old shoeboxes.

Nowadays, the crappy ones get published online at negligible cost. I don't think there's a difference in quality, just in visibility.
 

weishengg

New Member
Jan 6, 2008
561
0
0
Eastern Singalalapore
#13
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:

Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:

well, if no one has any idea what this old-timer mean by the term "photographer", this discussion is going to be pretty much pointless with people just throwing out ideas about what makes a photographer a photographer.

BUT, since this is Kopitiam-talk, i'm gonna join in too with my own interpretation :b

Is it true? well, i guess so, if you define photographer as just anyone holding on to a camera, dslr or p&s. Like night86mare said, general population is just getting more affluent and photographic equipment is no longer such prohibitive nor exquisite to own. Most families in developed countries would be able to own at least a digital camera of some sort these days (please correct me if I'm wrong), naturally we'll have a greater pool of "photographers" who are not into photography as a profession or serious hobby that they pursue. (i'm ignoring the minority who somehow just have the eye for photography without actually any interest in learning it)
Of course quality drops if you factor in all these products of digital cameras.

But personally, i dont think anyone holding a digital camera (dslr, p&s, film, whatever) is a photographer. They're just someone engaging in photography.
The line is pretty blur these days.
An engineer by profession who does his virgin wedding photoshoot for his sister.
A rich retired man who goes to every model photoshoot to take pictures.
Photographer or not photographer?
(personally, i dont think so. But i have to admit that photographer is a very convenient term to use to describe them. Com'on i don't wanna always be caught saying: "hi mum, i just met someone today. he is a per-son-in-te-res-ted-in-pho-to-gra-phy" Hmm.. maybe photo-hobbyist might do the trick :b)

Photographer or not photographer?
Some would say yes and some would say no (well, correct me again if i'm wrong), but the point is this line is not as distinct as it used to be back in old-time. The boundary of this term has expanded and blurred, so naturally exposure to works that has of sub-standard quality is pretty much more frequent.


Just my one cents worth.
Disclaimer: I am not a old-timer nor have a deep and rich background in photography. However, i do have an interest in it and would be happy to learn. I am NOT a photographer.
 

TMC

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2004
6,321
0
0
Beyond Space-Time Continuum
#14
Yes, last time when people don't anyhow call themself a photographer, but when they do, they really produce quality photos.

How about now? I don't know, but I think everyone have the answer.
LOL agree with you.

Nowadays "photographer" is a term that a lot of camera whores/camera owners/hobbyists/cameraman use to beautify themselves.
 

#15
What do I care? You can call me a roadsweeper if you want. ..;)

Its just a convenient term. Personally, I would consider those who take photography as a profession or for a living to be called photographer. Anyone else is just engaging in the act of photography is just doing it as a hobby. If they want to be called photographer, that's their problem. Photo quality aside.
 

Leong23

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2007
3,186
5
0
within myself
#16
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers
but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but not many can made it... :dunno:
Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:
To me, photographer is a person whom earn a living from it. Like me, i'm a engineer but having photography as one of my hobby.

But lots of people like to tell others (especially to XMM) that they are photographer, maybe because is sound good.

There are still lots of very high quality photo now a days, i could say that there are more due to digitial where many dare to experiment and push their limits.

But at the same time, there amazing a lot more CIM photo.
 

Leong23

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2007
3,186
5
0
within myself
#18
LOL agree with you.

Nowadays "photographer" is a term that a lot of camera whores/camera owners/hobbyists/cameraman use to beautify themselves.
:bsmilie: because GWC thought that XMM :heart: photographer, so they like to brand themselves as............Photographer or Professional Photographer. :bsmilie:
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#19
:bsmilie: because GWC thought that XMM :heart: photographer, so they like to brand themselves as............Photographer or Professional Photographer. :bsmilie:
initially the gwcs thought that

xmm like "yandaos"

but then when they called themselves that and appeared, all the xmms ran away in shock or keeled over and died :bsmilie:
 

#20
Heard from 1 of the Old timer Photographer... :" Last time there were very few photographers

but they are those with quality". But now is just the opposite. Got Lots of photographers but

not many can made it... :dunno:

Is this true? Is it those with a DSLR is consider a photographer? :think:
An old model also told me:

"Last time got very few models.
But they were those with real beauty.
But now is jut the opposite.
Got lots of XMMs
But not many can make it"


Here's the old model who said it:

 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom