Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Work versus Nature & Nurture: Becoming a Pro Photographer! What exactly does it take?
This might be a European concept, but from my own perspective, I find this like many shared aphorisms, too much of an unexamined statement. To put things in perspective, 3 years at 8 hours per day would mean only 2,920 hours.
Commercial Pilot's license (see learning-to-fly.com) is merely 190-250 hours! Not at all shabby!
Airlines might require 1,500 hours of flight time to get a job. Fighter pilots OTOH are lucky if they do 100 hours a year as they can be limited to about 20 minutes of flight per sortie
I have seen photographers who are trained in far less than a year. That would be about 2,000 hours and I think a talented artist could be trained in far less time. One son of mine shot for Elite and had maybe 100 hours under his belt as a photographer. However, he's grown up in world of photography. His grandfather was a very talented LF practitioner. My boys and I spent hours together walking around the streets doing photography. The cameras? Each had a rectangle with our thumbs and index fingers up to our eyes. It's that developed ability to see that's the beginning an end of photography. In between it's just a matter of easily learned technic and craft, no different than the master chef teaching low paid workers to cook up his recipes, perfectly, each time!
For some unfortunate folk, 10,000 hours would not get them anywhere since they lack vision or are closed to openness to new experience. As much as 10,000 hours sounds impressive to the extent that it really sounds true, I think it is a mistaken concept. It sends people off to too many false tracks.
One can learn as weddding photographer assisting a Pro. Gradually s/he does more and more significant work. If after 40 weddings (8 hours each and that time in editing) plus an extra 400 hours on one's own, ie ~1,000hours, one cannot do a wedding shoot as an independent pro, then one should do something else! I know for a fact that a lot of Wedding Pros started with far less. Now in Europe the rules may be more rigid, but I doubt anyone needs anything like 10,000 hours.
To learn Russian with a Kiev accent would take a person who has an aptitude and full immersion maybe 14 months. That would be 12 hours a day, 30 days a month X 14 months= 5,040 hours.
I just walked around town with an accomplished portrait and glamor photographer. He's never done or even considered architecture or street work. He was so thrilled to be challenged to frame in ways not even contemplated. That made me believe that learning to see is even different going from one field of photography to another. I guess it's because the esthetics and the related cultural imperatives change. This "seeing" might be something that can readily be brought out in a person with artistic gifts. We just need need to be awakened, even for such talented folk.
Then the person would not need much time at all. Maybe 10-300 hours.
Of course, one could go to an art school, then take photography courses, work for an established photographer and end up clocking 10,000 hours, but, like walking from LA to Boston, it's, IMHO, entirely unnecessary!
Asher
Well, Alain,One thing that you may want to take away from this is that you can't go from beginner to pro overnight. It takes time to develop the necessary experience. I wrote elsewhere that researchers say it takes 10,0000 hours to develop mastery in any field. That's about 20 years at 2 hrs a day and 5 days a week. How often do you practice? They use to say "shoot a roll a day every day". Now it's more difficult to count because flash cards vary in capacity, yet you should work at this everyday, keeping in mind that the more you practice the better you will get. Also, getting advice from from people who are where you want to be is a good idea. And work work work. That's what I do. I work on average 12 to 16 hrs a day on the creative aspects of photography and on marketing my business. It takes that much to succeed. Anything less would let me out cold! THe other pros I know work just as much. It's not specific to me.
This might be a European concept, but from my own perspective, I find this like many shared aphorisms, too much of an unexamined statement. To put things in perspective, 3 years at 8 hours per day would mean only 2,920 hours.
Commercial Pilot's license (see learning-to-fly.com) is merely 190-250 hours! Not at all shabby!
Airlines might require 1,500 hours of flight time to get a job. Fighter pilots OTOH are lucky if they do 100 hours a year as they can be limited to about 20 minutes of flight per sortie
I have seen photographers who are trained in far less than a year. That would be about 2,000 hours and I think a talented artist could be trained in far less time. One son of mine shot for Elite and had maybe 100 hours under his belt as a photographer. However, he's grown up in world of photography. His grandfather was a very talented LF practitioner. My boys and I spent hours together walking around the streets doing photography. The cameras? Each had a rectangle with our thumbs and index fingers up to our eyes. It's that developed ability to see that's the beginning an end of photography. In between it's just a matter of easily learned technic and craft, no different than the master chef teaching low paid workers to cook up his recipes, perfectly, each time!
For some unfortunate folk, 10,000 hours would not get them anywhere since they lack vision or are closed to openness to new experience. As much as 10,000 hours sounds impressive to the extent that it really sounds true, I think it is a mistaken concept. It sends people off to too many false tracks.
One can learn as weddding photographer assisting a Pro. Gradually s/he does more and more significant work. If after 40 weddings (8 hours each and that time in editing) plus an extra 400 hours on one's own, ie ~1,000hours, one cannot do a wedding shoot as an independent pro, then one should do something else! I know for a fact that a lot of Wedding Pros started with far less. Now in Europe the rules may be more rigid, but I doubt anyone needs anything like 10,000 hours.
To learn Russian with a Kiev accent would take a person who has an aptitude and full immersion maybe 14 months. That would be 12 hours a day, 30 days a month X 14 months= 5,040 hours.
I just walked around town with an accomplished portrait and glamor photographer. He's never done or even considered architecture or street work. He was so thrilled to be challenged to frame in ways not even contemplated. That made me believe that learning to see is even different going from one field of photography to another. I guess it's because the esthetics and the related cultural imperatives change. This "seeing" might be something that can readily be brought out in a person with artistic gifts. We just need need to be awakened, even for such talented folk.
Then the person would not need much time at all. Maybe 10-300 hours.
Of course, one could go to an art school, then take photography courses, work for an established photographer and end up clocking 10,000 hours, but, like walking from LA to Boston, it's, IMHO, entirely unnecessary!
Asher
Last edited: