Selective rigor we require doctors to treat their profession as a job while. Almost none of us do so for ours. We thus consider that the obvious and legal enrichment of doctors is reprehensible while. Forget that they too live in a society that has set money as a general measure of valuing the quality of goods and services. It would be preferable to demand a high level of professionalism commensurate with justifiably high salaries. Fourth There are two points that can provoke my own anger. However these also refer to every manifestation of bad professionalism wherever it comes from. It is about financial extortion and the display of indifference indifference and emotional analgesia. The second as antisocial and unprofessional behavior that overshadows even good scientific training. These phenomena however worry me much more deeply about the responsibility and dignity of the members of our society since. I believe that the morbid phenomena do not characterize professions but individuals.
The editor refers pejoratively and vaguely
Apart from the fact that such a thing is useless it is also dangerous when it is included in a text that will constitute a policy direction. After all no criterion can be applied in general Illustrator Art Work much more so when. The criterion set by the author of the opinion is as nebulous as the following Artistic or visual photographic work Intentional identification. I assume is in principle that which puts forward certain claims of an has. The virtue of parsimony it immediately excludes what has not been done with artistic intent. Fellow photographers by the way boldly state the artistic intent of each of your photos. You may need it. However it seems that the author of this long pain especially likes. The distinctions because a little further down he tries to distinguish between artists professionals and artists amateurs. Please note not professional or amateur photographers is professional or not. Such a thing would also be useless arbitrary and wrong but logically understandable.
The working group that drew up the considered
The degree of seriousness of a creator is judged by his work alone. Submitting it to a committee without further qualification would suffice. Needless to say we do not propose safe criteria for who is an amateur. The distinction is enough to allow Bold Data whoever wants to exclude whoever they want. The selfinterested logic of the conclusion however goes further. Unwilling or unable to ignore the private agencies around the country involved in artistic photography although I fear he would like to abolish them immediately or gradually as he seems to be trying so that all power falls to the state or semistate and controlled bodies proceeds with further unjustified and suspicious discrimination. It creates two classes of entities. In the first he places the serious artistic bodies and in the second their others. In the second he classifies the arbitrarily characterized associations of amateurs.