Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Amateur/Profesional ?
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
Another of those golden oldie bones of contention that get dragged out for discussion with regular monotony ...turn off now if you've heard it all before.
The competition / exhibition scene is looming and the question always asked is what category are you ? .
So how do YOU answer? And how is it defined.
Posted
I don't do exhibitions in any form but I do exhibit quite widely.
Sometimes the question is accompanied by a definition in which case you simply answer in accordance with the rules. Where it isn't or where the definition is vague I refer to the simple question: Is art your primary source of income? If it isn't: amateur. If it is: professional.
I know of many who call themselves semi-professional but in compliance with the question I would still class them as amateurs for the purposes of the entry requirements.
Edited
by MichaelEdwards
Posted
Painting and very occasional freelance journalism are my only forms of earned income, therefore it would be unfair to describe myself as anything other than 'professional', on those rare occasions when I need to describe myself at all. I don't think it's right for those who have sold paintings on any kind of frequent or regular basis to put their work into amateur exhibitions - it's not fair on those who only paint occasionally and do it just for the pleasure of painting, without, generally, any thought of selling. But - art clubs and groups are another matter: it's generally accepted that these may show a mix of amateur and professional work, probably separated from each other by price (if not necessarily by accomplishment). And if there's any kind of catalogue, which there should be, these distinctions ought to be spelled out so that people know what they're being offered.
This doesn't mean that one's equivalent to an art factory, churning the stuff out by the crate-load, and we all know that few artists make a living out of their work; but it's a matter of standards, too. There's nothing wrong with amateurs, but a professional produces work to a definite standard, uses reliable media, lightfast paints, sound surfaces: a professional should be able to guarantee that their work isn't going to fade or fall off the canvas or warp horribly; you can't necessarily expect the same from an amateur because they probably don't have the training or the experience to be able to guarantee it.
If you buy a painting from me (go on, you know you want to....) I can promise that it won't fade, and I offer you very good odds that it won't crack: although by the time it's likely to, both of us will be long dead, I can promise that much; oil paint is a living thing though, that may change over the centuries. Anyone who buys an oil painting should know that. But I can undertake to have used the best materials I could lay hands on, and the best means of applying them that is currently known to be best practice.
So these terms need thinking about: a professional offers a service backed by reputation and in some cases qualifications; an amateur doesn't have to. This needs to be borne in mind as well as how much of one's income derives from art.
What has annoyed me in the past is artists who think they can swap easily between categories and do so opportunistically, entering amateur competitions when they're not amateurs at all, for instance. The amateur deserves respect - and that's not respecting them; and I don't believe we should do it.
http://www.isleofwightlandscapes.net
http://www.wightpaint.blogspot.co.uk
Posted
The word "professional" is the main problem, I think, as it implies a skillset above that enjoyed by the rest of us as well as being used to define our status when we make most or all of our income from "art". It's the same in music - the "semi-pro" band are quite often just making some cash-in-hand extra money from a Saturday gig down the pub without giving up their day job and not telling the taxman about very much of it.
I would like to make some money from Art. Until then I'll happily call myself an amateur
Posted
I think that's the point Dermot and I agree with you fully. The general perception of the public at large is that a professional is someone who earns a living at what he does. It is this simple definition that generally determines the difference in nearly all walks of life and it seems to me to be a good rule of thumb to adopt when declaring your status as an artist.
Posted
I know a couple of artists who describe themselves as professional but do not earn enough from their artistic work to support themselves. One relies on her husband to pay the bills while another retired early from a senior teaching post and has a healthy pension to pay the bills. So, do you have to support yourself from your artistic efforts before you can term yourself 'professional'? I think I agree with Robert that the true criteria is a matter of standards. A true professional has a greater depth of understanding of the processes behind his/her work. The difficulty in question here is the vexed question of categories for exhibitions and that can only be addressed by standard of work if there is a selection process. Where the category is self selected there is room for ambiguity. I have looked at the criteria for the Patchings entries for next year and, to enter in the 'Leisure Painter' category, the artist must indicate that they only exhibit/sell work through art club exhibitions and events and do not promote their work through other media. That seem to me to be a practical means of distinguishing the 'amateur' from both the professional and 'semi-professional'.
Posted
Can't answer for Patchings Michael but I doubt that posting in the POL Gallery would make you a professional but I suspect having your own website to showcase and sell your art would. The problem with the 'earning a living' definition is, as I set out above, that can be blurred by other non earned income or support from others (e.g. spouse or partner).
Posted
At least when it comes to competitions there are usually clear guidelines as to the different categories.
I've just judged an online international competition called 'Art Muse Contest'.
There are three categories in this competition - budding, emerging and master class. So not 'amateur' and 'professional', but I thought you might be interested in the definitions of those categories - so I'll attach it here ...
"In the spirit of all that is fair and good in the world, we realize that the qualifications for each category aren’t perfect, they should serve as guidelines for you to gauge where your work would fit best in this contest. We are not the painting police and submission to this competition is on the honor system. (We do however, reserve the right to move your artwork into another category should we feel that you have submitted work in a category below your skill level.)
Our goal is to give artists in each category a level playing field where they are competing against peers of their approximate skill level. We offer awards that help budding artists continue on their journey to becoming professionals, help emerging artists gain recognition to grow their careers and offer master class artists prestige and an award(s) that will enable them to continue to build on their success.
To qualify as a Budding/Apprentice artist you meet most of the criteria
Are currently taking art classes or workshops frequently
Are not actively trying to sell your artwork
Are not represented by a gallery
Do not participate in juried art shows or events
To qualify as an Emerging artist you meet most of the criteria
Are not actively taking painting classes or workshops (with the exception of drop-in model sessions and the occasional workshop every few years)
May or may not be actively trying to sell your artwork
May or may not be represented by a gallery
May or may not participate in juried art shows and events
May or may not have won an award(s) at a local art show
Feel that your work is good but cannot compete with professional artists who have more than 15 years of painting experience.
To qualify as a Master Class artist you meet most of the criteria
Are not actively taking painting classes or workshops (with the exception of drop-in model sessions and the occasional workshop every few years)
Are actively trying to sell your artwork
Are represented by a gallery(s)
Have participated or are currently participating in juried art shows and events
Are a signature member of one or more art groups
Have won an award(s) in a national show or have won first place at a Plein Air event
Know your artwork is strong and is a cut above most other artists"
There isn't any mention in the masterclass category here of painting being your sole or main income.
Posted
The question of tax status has been raised in some of the comments above and I think deserves some clarification. Your are liable to pay tax on your profit (i.e. sales less expenses) if you are carrying on a trade (i.e. a business), but not it its only a hobby. What is the difference?
It really comes down to motive and how you carry out the activities. In determining whether you are 'in business', the authorities will look at such things as; whether you carry them on with a view to making a profit, whether you actively market your work (via a website or gallery etc.) and, probably, the number of works produced. So an intention to produce works for sale and active steps to generate sales will lead you to be regarded as in business and therefore taxable on any profit. Conversely if you are unsuccessful and realise a loss in any tax year, you will be able to claim that loss against any other income.
On the other hand, if you are painting for your own enjoyment and just happen to sell the odd unwanted painting, say, via an exhibition of a local art group, that would be a hobby. The amount you receive for the sale would simply go to subsidise the cost of the hobby and help pay for you next purchase of paper, canvas, paints etc. Because a hobby is not intended to generate profits it is not within the scope of tax - but by the same token, you cannot claim tax relief on the costs you are incurring.
I realise this has gone a little off topic but, there seems to be a view that 'professional' for exhibition purposes means gaining all or most of your income from your art. However for tax purposes, you are 'in business' (i.e. 'professional') if any part of your income comprises profit from your artistic activities. Hope this helps.
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2