I like what Jim Gilley said.  I suppose Lucas will think that by this post
I am off the meaning of this list, but I want to say this anyway.  I'll
start by saying that I have learned a lot by simply reading and absorbing
what many of the well-known photographers on this list have offered, and I
usually keep quiet about it because I would rather just absorb the
information.

But what Gilley says rings true with me.  Since photography is personal to
every person on this list, let me offer an analogy in support of his
thesis.  The analogy has nothing to do with photography and everything to
do with his point of view.

I am (among other things) a professional musician.  I have been one for
nearly 40 years.  As a professional musician, I don't "give it away."  I
will play any engagement that pays "scale or better."  (That's Union scale,
for the labor-challenged here).  I don't turn down any kind of job, even
though the bulk of my playing income is from symphony orchestra work.

Now, if someone (even an acquaintance) asks me to play without pay for his
wedding, I want to know if the florist, the caterer, the church, the
officiant, the photographer, the limousine driver, etc., are donating their
services.  If they are, I may consider it.  I've never had to consider it. 
You all know that none of these other people donate their services.  Why
should I?  On the other hand, if my acquaintance has a friend who performs
music as a hobby (and that is NOT someone I would call a musician, but that
is another object of discussion) and that friend is willing to play for his
wedding without pay, should I become a one-man informational picket line in
protest?  I think not.  Win some and lose some, then move on.  I don't even
think for a minute that I should be angry at my acquaintance.

Now, knowing that I have an avocational interest in photography (as
generally expressed in railroad photography), that same acquaintance asks
me to photograph his wedding.  Do I have a dilemma?  Again, I think not. 
After all, he takes what he gets, he accepts the work of a hobbyist, and in
this example the professional photographer wins some and loses some.

While we can't control other people's choices, we can try to influence
them.  Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose.  That's the way it is.  If my
acquaintance wants me to photograph his wedding, I'm flattered (no shame
there) and willing to do my best for him.  If he doesn't like it, see the
above paragraph.

Our own personal feeling is that what we offer in our field is the best in
that field.  I am the best violist for the job.  Any amateur violist
couldn't possibly do as well by my acquaintance at his wedding.  The
violist says the photographer couldn't possibly do as well with the music. 
The photographer says that the violist couldn't possibly do as well with
the pictures.   Maybe, and on both counts.

There are very few people who know the product of my photographic efforts. 
Save for one program of steam in Turkey, I have never shown publicly beyond
my old model railroad club.  I think it follows that people like us really
are genuinely flattered by attention given to our efforts.  I also know
that there are a lot of amateur musicians who are genuinely flattered by
the attention given to their efforts.  They are not really competing with
me, and even if they are, so what?  I think we ought not to begrudge either
the professional or amateur approach.  And, someday, even if after my
death, my slides will be seen as important.  Or they won't.

Ken Harrison
--> SPORRS: Serious Photographers of Railroad Related Subjects


Reply via email to