By [Kevin Lock]
I make 100% of my income from photography. So why would I write a post regarding “Managing Multiple Income Streams?” Because I support our members who do. Some of those members happen to be General Members and amongst my peers, there is some resentment about being more than just a photographer. A few would even argue that they are less of a photographer. I find that troubling and somewhat short sighted so I want to address this issue.
Our Constitution currently states that to be a General Member (GM) one must be, amongst other things, a “photographer(s) for whom the majority of their earned income comes from publication of their images.” Some of our GM’s currently make less than 51% of their income in this way and would not qualify to become a GM today. For those who did qualify and find themselves adjusting their careers in such a way that they no longer meet this requirement, what should they do? Well there is no system in place that forces them to re-apply for General Membership at any time. Once a GM, always a GM. So seriously, what should they do?
In my opinion they should “carry on” being General Members. Who are we to judge? If they qualified as a GM and their business has evolved into teaching, lecturing, writing, or getting involved in motion are they not still photographers?
The larger issue here is who qualifies to be a GM. Our constitution could use a bit of tweaking in this regard. Times have changed. We must evolve to survive. I, for one, look forward to the discussions regarding membership qualifications and the evolution of our profession.
Kevin Lock was recently re-elected to the National Board of Directors and thanks you for the opportunity to serve the ASMP membership for another three years. This includes the majority of those whom do not make 51% of their income from publication of their images. Kevin has high hopes that we won’t look back and say “woulda, coulda, shoulda.”
5 Responses to 'Less Than 51% Could Qualify, If We Would Allow Them to and We Should.'