There a lots of differences between professionals and hobbyists at anything, but there's one thing that crops up time and again, and it appears to be particularly true of those in creative professions.
There are undoubtedly a plethora of differences between amateurs and professionals in photography or any other field for that matter. If you ask people which ones are the key disparities between the two, you'll get as many answers as there are cameras. You'd be hard pushed to find anyone who would claim it comes down to gear. You'd be equally hard pushed to find a professional who believes it comes down to talent; there are spectacularly talented hobbyists and highly underwhelming professionals. The real difference is something that every professional I've ever met in any creative career has and that hobbyists do not: a specific mindset.
The mindset has been expressed in lots of different ways, but I believe the clearest way is by two quotes. The first is Stephen King: "Amateurs sit and wait for inspiration, the rest of us just get up and go to work." The second is Henri Matisse: "Don’t wait for inspiration. It comes while one is working." The bulk of the information you need is from King's words of wisdom, and his equally wise actions. It is said that King writes 10 pages per day, every day. When he's working on a project, he'll write around 180,000 words in 3 months. He doesn't sit around and wait until he's in the mood to write or feeling inspired. He gets up and goes to work. It sounds simple, but it's very easy to not notice you're doing this.
Both shots in the article are from a 3 day long shoot at a festival where waiting for inspiration was not an option.
At this stage it's important to say there's nothing wrong with grabbing your camera only when you feel inspired to take some photographs; if I recall correctly back when I was just taking pictures for fun, there were few sweeter feelings! This sort of philosophy towards your craft only becomes a problem in any of the following three ways: you want to transition from amateur to professional, you want to want to be the best photographer you can be, or you're frustrated that you are stagnating. If any of those three apply to you and you still only practice your craft when you feel like it, you're more likely than not doomed to remain in that state.
So, practically speaking, how can a hobbyist looking to improve, shoot when they don't feel like it? After all, professionals are given projects and jobs to complete by certain deadlines, so it's hard for them to shoot only when they feel like. Amateurs however, are doing it for fun and tend not to have projects with deadlines. Well, the answer is as simple as you can imagine: set or find projects. There are, for all intents and purposes, unlimited themes, challenges, and ideas for setting yourself a project. Then just add a deadline and you're set. Alternatively, start entering online photography competitions. We have one here at Fstoppers, but there are plenty dotted about all over the place. Forcing yourself to practice your craft outside of periods of inspiration or desire will raise your lowest standard of work as well as your average.
But this problem doesn't just affect amateurs. It can affect professionals in periods of jadedness or even at times of success. How it affects us in times of jadedness is again rather obvious. You get stuck in a routine and you allow enough time to shoot for jobs when you feel like it and still easily make deadline. The one I didn't expect is the latter: during times of success. When you're doing well, it's hard to keep pushing yourself to work on your craft everyday. When you're struggling, you'll be full of motivation to improve, but when you're getting the sort of clients you want and your work does well, that motivation can disappear.
Whether you're an amateur or professional, it's always worth checking that you're "turning up to work". Waiting for inspiration to strike is a luxury only amateurs can indulge.
Over the years some people have suggested I should consider becoming a professional photographer. Ignoring the question of whether I am a good enough photographer to be a pro(which I doubt, many others including pros don't), I always reply why would I want to do that. At the moment I shoot what I want when I want to. Professionals often have to shoot what others want when they want to, not something I am normally prepared to do. The only time I take on commissions is from a couple of small local charities I support to help, donating my time rather than them needing to raise money to pay for another person to take the photos. That being said I do sell a few photos, but they are usually because someone has seen one and asked to buy a copy rather than a commission. For me, the difference between is down to; that I can choose when to do it, whilst a professional often has to do it when others choose. I admire professionals who can find the inspiration to shoot a range of work, much of which they probably do not find totally enthralling.
There are many levels of both amateur and professional photographers. To be a pro means to be paid for the work you produce. But in no way does being paid mean that the work produced is ever any good. A lot of professional photography is consumed and discarded. Think about every circular, and most illustrated images for news or editorial. It is all part of an endless stream of pixelated rectangles that are taken for granted, and do not contribute whatsoever to what it means to be a photographer. Sure if you’re a studio pro doing circulars, you have to learn better lighting, but let’s face it: After shooting cans of beans or the heads of lettuce for a number of years, you might as well consign those shots to an assistant, and go see the kids. The more important aspect of being a studio circular photographer is billing your clients.
Conversely, you have amateur photographers who do not make their income from full-time photography, but have engaged the practice of being a photographer more seriously, as seen In their dedication to making unique images or studies of subjects that may actually contribute to a particular genre.
Through the study of a subject, the importance of a body of work often reveals itself over time.
Lastly, being a full time Pro often diminishes the artfulness, or the original inspiration of why one makes photos in the first place. For many, that inspiration is lost forever.
Why is it that these photo media sites spend so much time talking about the pro vs. amateur issue? You see it all the time. Personally I don't know ANY enthusiasts who are sitting in their room waiting for inspiration to strike. If they have the time, they go out and shoot even if there's no money involved. And many enthusiasts do paying jobs that come along.
So what value is there in pigeon holing someone one way or another? Does knowing what label to stick on someone's forehead help me get better images? Not a chance.
The important thing is doing good work. And yes, that means shooting a lot. It means knowing how to get the most out of your tools and getting the best images out of the shoot. All these qualities are open to pro or enthusiast.
But this harping on whether someone is a pro or not ends up being more of a put down than anything that moves the photography community forward. The media and companies push that whole we-know-more-than-you approach for their own reasons and it leaves a bad taste and it's divisive.
20+ years ago as I was considering a career in photography I met a local pro who gave me the best advice I could have received…
"The difference between an amateur and a professional photographer is simple. Every time an amateur goes out they have the potential of coming back with a great shot. The pro MUST come back with a great shot!"
i dont care about amateur vs pro. the line is too thin, i care about average vs unique or exceptional ....
when i teached in a movie school, i used to say that difference between average pro and exceptional one - is amaount of private time spend working on their craft. becoming average professional in something is easy...
and its not far from being good amateur. but becoming exceptional pro is hard.
Having to go to work doesn't mean you strive to improve.
Most pro photographers hit a plateau and stay very much in the comfort zone.
Working for working is not the solution.
Working on improving your skills is the solution.
To work on improving, no need to be a pro.
Actually, it might be an advantage to be able to work on your photography, without the pressure of making money.
I've talked to several full-time professional wildlife photographers who have told me that the biggest difference is that the hobbyist gets to spend most of their time shooting, while the pro has limited shooting time, because they need to spend the majority of their time and effort marketing themselves, preparing submissions, cold-calling potential image buyers, etc, etc, etc. So the biggest difference is that the hobbyist is primarily concerned with getting enjoyment out of photography, and spends a lot of time shooting, whereas the professional is primarily concerned with getting an income out of photography, and spends a lot of time doing business type stuff instead of shooting.
Pro Tip, most professional photographers are shooting right now not debating nonsense.
Some good points but I would say there is one that is overlooked:
A professional can repeat their results whether in the mood or not.
Most times a hobbyist can't repeat them even if they're in the mood.
And I'm not putting down the hobbyist. I envy them - to be able to only shoot when they're 'inspired'.
Too many 'Professionals' tell me, “The only thing that makes a 'Professional Photographer' a Professional Photographer is the fact that he is paid.". Their work is garbage, they can't get consistent results, their images are never as great as mine are even after they spend an hour or more 'fixing' their photo in the computer while mine is almost great straight out of the camera, theirs' is still not as good quality-wise as mine, most don't use, know how to use or even know what a light-meter looks like and a lot of them even shoot on Auto/Auto more often than not but they are the 'Professional Photographer' because the photos quality has little to no bearing on how much of a 'Professional' one is, only the fact that you can convince someone to pay you for your images.
My take on what makes a ‘Professional Photographer’: First Skill and Talent go a long, long way to getting you started. General Knowledge and Knowledge about the gear you are using, your familiarity and ease at which you use your gear. Getting Professional Quality consistently even with little to no retouching in the computer I think would be expected as well as a Totally Professional demeanor and Professionalism across the board and then yes it is nice to get paid for your work.
I love to Photograph and do Photography always and will do it at any chance I can whether or not I an currently 'in the mood' or not, generally once I start 'readying my gear' for a shoot it is then all I can think about and I'm more than eager for the event to start.
But does just the simple fact that you are paid or have convinced anyone that your work is worth being paid for even though your work is not all the great, good or even at a level another ‘Professional’ would generally expect it should be?
A hobbies I think is all the Photographers who like to copy off of other photographers work, seeing the same old stuff all the time, as to where a professional; they have their own ideas and are original to what their work is.....
And here I am thinking it was money which defined one and not the other. Oh well.
Was a hobbyist from 1965 to 1973 then was professional. Now I'm retired so I'm back to being a hobbyist again. I've come full-circle.