I totally understand what you're saying. Like others here, I tend to use the word hobbyist to qualify the photographer part. I have a different view, though. For a long time, I felt that identifying as a "photographer" was presumptuous. I think this is an extension of imposter syndrome. For me, the moment I decided I would embrace the title "Photographer," it allowed me to occupy the role mentally. My profession is not photography, but identifying as a photographer puts me in a different psychological state that lets me own the craft and imparts some confidence in placing myself in situations to get the shot. Showing up to a place with a camera and camera bag slung already makes me stand out from others, and placing myself in the role of "photographer" allows me to perform.
I like how Susan Sontag said it, "Like language [photography], it is a medium in which works of art (among other things) are made. Out of language, one can make scientific discourse, bureaucratic memoranda, love letters, grocery lists, and Balszac's Paris. Out of photography, one can make passport pictures, weather photographs, pornographic pictures, X-rays, wedding pictures, and Atget's Paris." I welcome anyone who takes photos to call themselves a photographer and give themselves the permission to go out there and take photos. We have the choice what we create. Calling oneself a photographer means something different to everyone, and that is the beauty of it.
I’ve thought about this a fair bit too. So I actually find that it’s helpful for me to label myself as a photographer, even though it’s a hobby. It helps me have the confidence to take the camera everywhere with me. People have started expecting me to take it places because I’m a ‘photographer’
Well, I do other stuff for living but like to call me a street photographer. There are few, if any, professional street photographers, so we are all enthusiasts by default 😂
People often ask "Are you a Pro?" when they see the gear or strobes. "No. I think of myself as an Advanced Hobbyist, doing pro level work."
I believe the word 'professional' has been adopted by far too many people with cameras who have little experience, and little understanding of what 'professional' really means, or should mean.
and, regarding the question of whether I call myself a photographer, I'm planning to ditch that word on my next batch of cards and use the term 'lens-based image maker.'
If you play any instrument in a local band, and we all know that most local bands are amateur, they mostly even pay from their own pockets to get gigs (trust me I went that road), you are still a musician.
You are a musician in an amateur band or a professional band.
Same goes for photography. If you take pictures intentionally and know what you are doing, you are a photographer.
You are an amateur photographer, or you are a professional photographer.
Now what I understood from my music world is that as soon as you start making pictures instead of taking pictures.. You are an artist.
Everyone can play an instrument. But not every musician can release a song.
Everyone can take pictures, but not every photographer can tell stories. (An example among so many scenarios).
Everyone can be a tailor, but not every tailor can create a dress.
You make a great point. I promote the notion that because of the iPhone we have all become photographers, for lack of a better term. But the better term might be "photo takers" or "image makers" because there are all manner of images we take for all kinds of reasons. "Photographer" does set up a lot of expectations that have nothing to do with why people take photos. Have to think about that.
I enjoy the term Memory Manager. I manage the past memories of things, people, and places around me for all to see at a later date. Great post, really enjoyed it.
The only issue with this title is there is almost zero memory of myself because I am the one the captures these memories, slices of time.
I like the word “hobbyist”; the connotation being I don’t photograph for money. Rather I do it because I love the process and the results make me happy. Great discussion, Mike.
I actually really like the root meaning of the word amateur. I do some paid work and when I'm on the clock I'd probably offer that I'm a professional photographer to anyone that asks. Any other time I'm out photographing I'm doing it for the love of it though - and admittedly sometimes making mistakes and learning. Hence I'm kind of happy to use the word amateur despite the fact that folk usually assign the word a negative connotation.
Thinking about your conundrum here though I might offer the simple word "witness". At the end of the day no matter the context we're all participating in witnessing what life and our world has to experience. Something I'll gladly keep being an amateur at the rest of my life.
Great point—embracing the word “amateur” can ease the pressure we put on ourselves and lets us experiment and create freely without the fear of judgment or mistakes.
Witness, observer, seer, seeker… all sound fitting to me. But if you’re there to witness, why do you need a camera in your hand? 🙃
This is exactly what came to my mind when i‘ve red the text. I would describe myself as an amateur. Learning by doing and having crazy fun in the meantime. 😆
I totally agree with what you say. And it also made me think a lot about how I call myself: “amateur photographer”. I realize I shouldn't define myself that way. Thank you for this reflection. I would say enlightening. It's something I've never given proper weight to.
Ah yes, the dilemma of how to define yourself if you're not a professional, but find the word amateur not entirely positive. I consider myself a casual photographer in that I do this for my own personal pleasure, and I don't get too crazy about the technical side of things. I am not very motivated to become a technical photgraphy wizard. You might even call me a lazy photographer. I shoot hand held exclusively, and prefer to use one telephoto lens on whatever camera body I happen to be using when I'm out & about. I like to keep it simple, and a telephoto covers a lot of bases. Sometimes I get some very special shots that bring me joy every time I look back on them. At the moment I call myself a hobbyist photographer as it doesn't feel like I'm being too pretentious, or short changing myself.
I totally understand what you're saying. Like others here, I tend to use the word hobbyist to qualify the photographer part. I have a different view, though. For a long time, I felt that identifying as a "photographer" was presumptuous. I think this is an extension of imposter syndrome. For me, the moment I decided I would embrace the title "Photographer," it allowed me to occupy the role mentally. My profession is not photography, but identifying as a photographer puts me in a different psychological state that lets me own the craft and imparts some confidence in placing myself in situations to get the shot. Showing up to a place with a camera and camera bag slung already makes me stand out from others, and placing myself in the role of "photographer" allows me to perform.
That’s an interesting take! A mindset shift similar to the old “dressing like the person you want to become” rather than like the person you are.
I truly believe if you take pictures you are a photographer. Whether you are a good one is up to you and public perception.
But I do like your point of redefining what type of photographer you are to optimize the style of photos you take.
I like to think of myself as an artist.
I like how Susan Sontag said it, "Like language [photography], it is a medium in which works of art (among other things) are made. Out of language, one can make scientific discourse, bureaucratic memoranda, love letters, grocery lists, and Balszac's Paris. Out of photography, one can make passport pictures, weather photographs, pornographic pictures, X-rays, wedding pictures, and Atget's Paris." I welcome anyone who takes photos to call themselves a photographer and give themselves the permission to go out there and take photos. We have the choice what we create. Calling oneself a photographer means something different to everyone, and that is the beauty of it.
I’ve thought about this a fair bit too. So I actually find that it’s helpful for me to label myself as a photographer, even though it’s a hobby. It helps me have the confidence to take the camera everywhere with me. People have started expecting me to take it places because I’m a ‘photographer’
Well, I do other stuff for living but like to call me a street photographer. There are few, if any, professional street photographers, so we are all enthusiasts by default 😂
People often ask "Are you a Pro?" when they see the gear or strobes. "No. I think of myself as an Advanced Hobbyist, doing pro level work."
I believe the word 'professional' has been adopted by far too many people with cameras who have little experience, and little understanding of what 'professional' really means, or should mean.
and, regarding the question of whether I call myself a photographer, I'm planning to ditch that word on my next batch of cards and use the term 'lens-based image maker.'
If you play any instrument in a local band, and we all know that most local bands are amateur, they mostly even pay from their own pockets to get gigs (trust me I went that road), you are still a musician.
You are a musician in an amateur band or a professional band.
Same goes for photography. If you take pictures intentionally and know what you are doing, you are a photographer.
You are an amateur photographer, or you are a professional photographer.
Now what I understood from my music world is that as soon as you start making pictures instead of taking pictures.. You are an artist.
Everyone can play an instrument. But not every musician can release a song.
Everyone can take pictures, but not every photographer can tell stories. (An example among so many scenarios).
Everyone can be a tailor, but not every tailor can create a dress.
You make a great point. I promote the notion that because of the iPhone we have all become photographers, for lack of a better term. But the better term might be "photo takers" or "image makers" because there are all manner of images we take for all kinds of reasons. "Photographer" does set up a lot of expectations that have nothing to do with why people take photos. Have to think about that.
I enjoy the term Memory Manager. I manage the past memories of things, people, and places around me for all to see at a later date. Great post, really enjoyed it.
The only issue with this title is there is almost zero memory of myself because I am the one the captures these memories, slices of time.
I like the word “hobbyist”; the connotation being I don’t photograph for money. Rather I do it because I love the process and the results make me happy. Great discussion, Mike.
That’s a great one too!
I actually really like the root meaning of the word amateur. I do some paid work and when I'm on the clock I'd probably offer that I'm a professional photographer to anyone that asks. Any other time I'm out photographing I'm doing it for the love of it though - and admittedly sometimes making mistakes and learning. Hence I'm kind of happy to use the word amateur despite the fact that folk usually assign the word a negative connotation.
Thinking about your conundrum here though I might offer the simple word "witness". At the end of the day no matter the context we're all participating in witnessing what life and our world has to experience. Something I'll gladly keep being an amateur at the rest of my life.
Great point—embracing the word “amateur” can ease the pressure we put on ourselves and lets us experiment and create freely without the fear of judgment or mistakes.
Witness, observer, seer, seeker… all sound fitting to me. But if you’re there to witness, why do you need a camera in your hand? 🙃
Yes, seer & observer...witness
This is exactly what came to my mind when i‘ve red the text. I would describe myself as an amateur. Learning by doing and having crazy fun in the meantime. 😆
I totally agree with what you say. And it also made me think a lot about how I call myself: “amateur photographer”. I realize I shouldn't define myself that way. Thank you for this reflection. I would say enlightening. It's something I've never given proper weight to.
Really good read. I absolutely identify
Love this. Never claimed myself to be a photographer. I just say I'm a film camera historian and an analog tinkerer.
Ah yes, the dilemma of how to define yourself if you're not a professional, but find the word amateur not entirely positive. I consider myself a casual photographer in that I do this for my own personal pleasure, and I don't get too crazy about the technical side of things. I am not very motivated to become a technical photgraphy wizard. You might even call me a lazy photographer. I shoot hand held exclusively, and prefer to use one telephoto lens on whatever camera body I happen to be using when I'm out & about. I like to keep it simple, and a telephoto covers a lot of bases. Sometimes I get some very special shots that bring me joy every time I look back on them. At the moment I call myself a hobbyist photographer as it doesn't feel like I'm being too pretentious, or short changing myself.