On photography as profession and the question of charging

(Lifted from a reply I made to Sir Darius's post on Facebook.)

Gear should NEVER be used as basis for pricing. Gear is investment, but it's not necessarily reflected in (i.e. it does not necessarily improve) the output.

Considering the fact that photography has been democratized due to the "affordability" of the medium, many can now get into the business. The only reason why some of us are saying that gears are expensive is because our salaries are relatively low compared to the rest of the world. Anyway, we've already seen the recent mushrooming of photographers. Perhaps we can even say we're fragments of that mushroom. Some can afford more than we can, and so they have better gears (but maybe we also just happen to have afforded more than the other professional photographers). So does it now mean those who have better gears can charge higher prices than we? Or that we can charge higher than professionals with fewer, lesser gears?

I don't think so. In fact, I'll reiterate the idea that gear should not be used as basis for charges. Instead, it should be CAPABILITY and TALENT. If we abide by this, it will educate the photographer, and educate the clients, too! It will educate the photographer because it will teach him that the client, looking only at the picture, will NOT KNOW what camera or lens was used in taking that picture. Equipment, therefore, has no DIRECT link to the quality of photos taken. I've seen a good number of stunning photos taken by the cheapest rebel XT and a good lens (not necessarily that cheap but not that expensive also). Does it deprive the photographer the right to charge high for the stunning photo taken by his cheap gears?

It will also educate the clients (Oh, I look forward to the day!) because they will then understand that, on the day of the wedding, the better photographer is not necessarily the one carrying the biggest and heaviest camera, lens, and tripod. It takes looking at the photographer's portfolio to properly judge the photographer's capability and talent.

On a related note, this "undereducatedness" of the client has actually been exploited by quite a number of photographers. They buy high-end gears to get into the business WITHOUT first checking if they're truly ready for business. It's sad for the clients. It's sad for the professionals, too. But this is a fact of life now. Because photography is democratic. And, in a democracy, the loudest are usually the ones heard by the people.

(So, just for trivia purposes, which of the two photos above do you think is taken by the more expensive camera-and-lens setup? Can you know by looking at the photo? Does the quality of the photo give away the gear used? First photo was taken using a Nikon D40 plus Tokina 11-16. Second using a Nikon D7000.)