What is an amateur?
^Tems^
full time by a photographer as a second shooter.
Got me wondering what exactly is an amateur photographer? I would have
thought it was someone that made no or little money from their hobby.
Atheist Chaplain
news:7pbrtq...@mid.individual.net...
So Douggie could enter it then ;-)
--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ." Gandhi
Robert Coe
: On the weekend I saw a guy win an amateur photo comp. He is employed
:
: Got me wondering what exactly is an amateur photographer? I would have
: thought it was someone that made no or little money from their hobby.
If someone is employed full time as a photographer (even if he's just a
lackey), I say he's a professional.
But didn't we just have a lengthy debate on this topic in this or one of its
sibling newsgroups? (OTOH, things are pretty slow in the NGs just now, so I
suppose we might as well have at it again.) In that exchange, or one of its
predecessors, someone opined that anyone whose day job ever has him taking
pictures is a professional. But that would make me a professional, which is
silly. So I guess the boundary between amateur and professional lies somewhere
between those two extremes.
Bob
Robert Coe
: "^Tems^" <steveb...@live.com> wrote in message
: > On the weekend I saw a guy win an amateur photo comp. He is employed full
: > time by a photographer as a second shooter.
: >
: > Got me wondering what exactly is an amateur photographer? I would have
: > thought it was someone that made no or little money from their hobby.
:
: So Douggie could enter it then ;-)
Where is Doug these days? One hopes (at least I think one does) that he isn't
back in the hospital on account of his bad back.
Bob
Savageduck
Your thoughts seem to be in agreement with what most believe an amateur
to be (a snap shot shooter, or hobbiest.) However the definition in
this case seems to have been arbitarily changed to mean somebody with
professional aspirations, or a failed pro.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
tony cooper
wrote:
>On the weekend I saw a guy win an amateur photo comp. He is employed
I would say that an amateur is one who does not sell his work. If
this guy is paid a salary by the photographer, then he's technically
an amateur. Ethically, though, I think he's wrong to enter contests
as an amateur.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Frank ess
The easy way is to go with the IRS: if you can deduct your photography
expenditures, you must be a pro.
I've paid taxes on money received from sales of a few photos; not
nearly enough to justify any kind of deductions, though.
Philosophically, I'm an amateur, because it's all for the love of the
"sport".
--
Frank ess
Annika1980
I agree.
When someone asks me if I'm a professional photographer my standard
reply is, "Heck no, I'm much better than that." This is more a
comment on the sorry work of many other so-called pros in my area than
it is a comment on my work.
JimKramer
In the US (and in most of the photo competitions I've ever bothered to read
the rules) the IRS considers you a professional photographer if more than
half of your yearly income is related to photography. I was, technically, a
professional photographer one year; it was not a good year. :-(
So I would assume that an amateur is someone whose photographic income is
less than half of his or her total income.
I would think that the winner didn't win by the rules, but I haven't read
the rules. :-)
-Jim
Troy Piggins
In my humble opinion, if you're employed and paid as a
photographer (whether it's a salary, wages, contract, or per
photo) such that it's significant enough to have to declare it as
part of your income, you aren't an amatuer. This guy clearly
isn't. Apprentice maybe, but not amatuer.
Whether or not you are professional is a completely different
issue.
--
Troy Piggins
Stefan Patric
As a pro photographer for 30+ years, I regard as amateur someone who
doesn't make the majority of their income (or no income) from a
particular trade. Now, I've known a lot of amateur shooters who produced
professional quality work, but their primary source of income was
something other than photography. So, they were still "amateurs" whether
they "hired out" occasionally, or were solely a no-income-from-
photography hobbiest.
A professional photographer is someone who makes their living at
photography, and when they file their income taxes, on the line for
Occupation," it says "Photographer."
Stef
Stefan Patric
As a pro photographer for 30+ years, I regard as amateur someone who
Stefan Patric
As a pro photographer for 30+ years, I regard as amateur someone who
Stefan Patric
As a pro photographer for 30+ years, I regard as amateur someone who
John McWilliams
O.K. Once is enough!
Atheist Chaplain
news:anh1j5l9usrl65uep...@4ax.com...
yep I hope he is well too, regardless of what I may think of him otherwise.
Mr.T
In this case it simply depends on how the competition defined it.
He would not be classified as an amateur by most people though.
MrT.
Mr.T
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:j1p1j59i255svie5j...@4ax.com...
> I would say that an amateur is one who does not sell his work. If
> this guy is paid a salary by the photographer, then he's technically
> an amateur.
Can't see it, you are still considered a professional if you are normally
paid by someone who sells your work. Many, if not most professionals fall
into that category. (I'm not talking just about photography here)
However the competition rules define what THEY mean by amateur, or indeed if
the word amateur was even used?
MrT.
Bill Graham
"Frank ess" <fr...@fshe2fs.com> wrote in message
news:LJ-dnePX4_soeq3W...@giganews.com...
Yes. - As an amateur musician, this question has occasionally come up in our
discussions, too. I have occasionally been paid for gigs, but there is a big
difference between a few bucks now and then, and actually making one's
living from the art. If the IRS ever asked me to pay income taxes on the few
dollars I got from some gig, I would be overjoyed. I would immediately file
an amended return listing the cost of all my horns, suits, sheet music, and
transportation to and from all my gigs all year. The amount of, "income" I
would have to pay taxes on would be something like minus $5,000. There is no
question but they would say that what I do is just a hobby, and anything I
get from it is all mine to keep, because it doesn't even begin to offset my
costs.
Bill Graham
"John McWilliams" <jp...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hgrb78$por$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Four times is enough!
^Tems^
This is the comp
http://www.internationalapertureawards.com/CategoryPlacings09.php
A friend was another finalist and said the winner Naomi Frost is a well
know photographer and a little search shows she has Naomi Frost Photography
http://au.linkedin.com/in/naomifrost
The comp doesn't explain what a pro is in the terms but I know Canon
puts in it's terms a pro is one that earns $XXX from their photos.
Seems she has been working as a tog for a while so I really can't see
her as amateur.
Second shooter - Naomi Frost
A second shooter has the opportunity to capture moments
behind-the-scenes, fleeting glances, alternate angles - all of the
events that take place away from the main attraction. Naomi has been
shooting weddings with Renee since 2008 and her images will complement
those of Renee's.
* Ask about Renee's optional Second shooter Naomi Frost - $550 includes
up to 200 images.
I can see why the other finalists are pissed off may as well let a first
grade footy player go and play under 16's
Stefan Patric
>> [snip]
>> O.K. Once is enough!
>
> Four times is enough!
I didn't do it. Sent on one reply once.
Stef
Paul Furman
> Mr.T wrote:
>> ^Tems^ wrote
>>> On the weekend I saw a guy win an amateur photo comp. He is employed
>>> full time by a photographer as a second shooter.
>>>
>>> Got me wondering what exactly is an amateur photographer? I would have
>>> thought it was someone that made no or little money from their hobby.
>>
>> In this case it simply depends on how the competition defined it.
>> He would not be classified as an amateur by most people though.
>
> http://www.internationalapertureawards.com/CategoryPlacings09.php
Almost all the finalists are listed with a professional photography
studio in their title and often include very elaborate staged scenes,
costumes, stage makeup & professional lighting. The only thing that
makes this competition amateur is that amateurs are allowed to pay $39
to enter :-)
> A friend was another finalist and said the winner Naomi Frost is a well
> know photographer and a little search shows she has Naomi Frost Photography
> http://au.linkedin.com/in/naomifrost
>
> ...
> I can see why the other finalists are pissed off may as well let a first
> grade footy player go and play under 16's
If you look at past submissions, it's pretty clear most of the winners
are shown with pro titles.
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
John McWilliams
Of course. It'd be Cox or Pan's fault.
--
lsfmt
Bill Graham
"Stefan Patric" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
news:H%iYm.45726$DC2....@newsfe02.iad...
You have a stuttering server......Mine sometimes has the same problem.
Stefan Patric
Never happened before. And I haven't changed anything on my system in
months. And, so far, I can't recreate the fault. A one time glitch?
I'll be the first to verify that Pan has its problems, but posting
duplicate messages/replies is not one of them. However, Cox's West news
server has been squirrely the past few weeks. Was even down for a couple
days a few months ago.
Oh, well.
Stef
K W Hart
> time by a photographer as a second shooter.
>
> Got me wondering what exactly is an amateur photographer? I would have
> thought it was someone that made no or little money from their hobby.
In my opinion, if he is employed "full-time" as a photographer
('second-shooter' or not), then he is disqualified from an amatuer photo
competition. Employment in the capacity of photographer would imply a
certain level of skill. On the other hand, maybe he isn't a very good
'second-shooter'!
K W Hart
"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ErydnZ67ltWN7KzW...@giganews.com...
(Disclaimer: I am not a tax accountant, nor do I play one on TV)
If you made a profit in three out of five years, you could deduct the losses
you had in the other two years (or do I have that backwards?). So, let's say
in year one, you buy all your equipment, clothing (with must be specific to
the job- if you buy a tux with the words "Horn Man" across the back, it's
deductable). sheet music, etc., and because of these expenses you have a 5K
lose. If you made an effort to actually run a business- separate checking
account, keeping records- it's deductable. In year two- since you made all
these long term expenditures in year one, you show a profit. You can carry
back the profit (or carry forward the loses), and again pay little or no
taxes.
Technically, you can show a negative income, as long as you show a positive
income within a five year period.
Then there is the issue of gross profits versus net profits, not likely to
be applicable to a musician, but very applicable to me as a photographer who
prints his own work in a conventional darkroom. If I make $10K selling
portraits, and I spend $2K on film, paper, and chemicals, I've made a gross
profit of $8K. If I spend an additional $13K on business insurance, phone,
electricity, etc, I have a net loss of $5K, and no tax liability.
(Please re=read the disclaimer)
Bill Graham
"K W Hart" <kwh...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:hguj2k$62p$1...@aioe.org...
hobby is the fact that I only play what I want to play, and only when I want
to play it......And I know that if I had to play what other people want when
they wanted to hear it, I wouldn't be enjoying myself near as much as I do,
and at my age, enjoying myself it job #1. IOW, I am a born amateur....:^)
Mr.T
> In my opinion, if he is employed "full-time" as a photographer
> ('second-shooter' or not), then he is disqualified from an amatuer photo
> competition. Employment in the capacity of photographer would imply a
> certain level of skill. On the other hand, maybe he isn't a very good
> 'second-shooter'!
Lot's of professionals are not very good, doesn't mean they are not
professionals. That is not an absolute requirement of being a professional
in any field.
However it seems the competition was not just for amateurs, regardless of
what some entrants expected.
MrT.
Stefan Patric
Most likely Cox. news.west.cox.net server has been slow responding for
several days.
Stef
Stefan Patric
Most likely Cox. news.west.cox.net server has been slow responding for
several days.
Stef
Stefan Patric
Most likely Cox. news.west.cox.net server has been slow responding for
several days.
Stef
Eric Miller
I think the five year requirement (in the US) is no more. However, you
may not deduct the depreciation of equipment that is used outside of the
business, i.e., if you also use the stuff for personal enjoyment, then
its not deductible.
However, I too am neither an accountant nor do I play one on TV and the
above is quite likely incorrect.
Eric Miller
www.dyesscreek.com
Harold Gough
'^Tems^[_3_ Wrote:
> ;851703']Mr.T wrote:-> news:7pbrtq...@mid.individual.net...-
> On the weekend I saw a guy win an amateur photo comp. He is employed
> full time by a photographer as a second shooter.
>
> Got me wondering what exactly is an amateur photographer? I would have
>
> In this case it simply depends on how the competition defined it.
> He would not be classified as an amateur by most people though.
>
> MrT.
>
>
>
> This is the comp
> http://www.internationalapertureawards.com/CategoryPlacings09.php
>
> A friend was another finalist and said the winner Naomi Frost is a well
>
> know photographer and a little search shows she has Naomi Frost
> Photography
> http://au.linkedin.com/in/naomifrost
>
> The comp doesn't explain what a pro is in the terms but I know Canon
> puts in it's terms a pro is one that earns $XXX from their photos.
>
> Seems she has been working as a tog for a while so I really can't see
> her as amateur.
>
> Second shooter - Naomi Frost
>
> A second shooter has the opportunity to capture moments
> behind-the-scenes, fleeting glances, alternate angles - all of the
> events that take place away from the main attraction. Naomi has been
> shooting weddings with Renee since 2008 and her images will complement
> those of Renee's.
>
> * Ask about Renee's optional Second shooter Naomi Frost - $550 includes
>
> up to 200 images.
>
>
> grade footy player go and play under 16's
The UK Amateur Photographer Magazine, for the purpose of entering its
competitions, says the upper income limit is 10%.
--
Harold Gough