Originally posted by lurchlarson Pro Photography is dying but I still believe that people still want to hold on to the "pro" designation.
Ok, after this is the second mention of dying pro photography, I have two cents to add too
I think that pro photography is not dying. It's only in sharp transformation. Away from artistic photography (gallery photography, photo books, travel books etc.) Towards contract work.
To hire a good photographer for the "not-to-be-missed" photos (fashion, corporate event, wedding, article portrait, product shot, advertisement, restricted area photography) is still expensive exceeding the $1000/day threshold. But it is increasingly difficult to be regarded good enough to be hired.
Artistic photography can actually pay off to be regarded good enough, i.e., pays off indirectly.
But everything not on demand is covered by stock agency photography and a flood of amateur photographers. So far, with the noteworthy exception of erotic photography which, if done with high quality, can pay off directly via pay web sites. But there aren't pay web sites for other kinds of photography. Which is not that understandable as photo books used to be expensive.
Anyway, I don't see pro photography die. A professional photo still clearly stands out from the flood of amateur work. There are exceptions. But to pick the exceptional amateur is just as expensive as to hire a pro.