I believe the various business plans explain why forums have lost traction. Forums are essentially a flat hierarchy and that is important to their correct functioning. Forums are also dependent of a steady influx of new members and they don't have that any more because other venues are more attractive opportunities to the "new pros". Forums are dependent on people "giving back", as Guy noted. The business plans of the new types of photographers prevent them from "giving back". These new business practices are dependent on a strict separation between "pros" and "followers". One does not "give back" to one "followers", one manages them as a resource.
Ask yourself why everyone on "photo feeds" appears to be a "professional". Maybe you don't know about it, but there is a whole industry of fake magazines, vanity galleries, fake diplomas, fake internet storefronts and fake followers sold by the thousands. Now, these cost money. Ask yourself how that investment is supposed to repay itself.
While some of the descriptions you have given of various types of "Pros" may be true in a populist manner, I feel the conclusions you draw are at best cynical, even somewhat naive.
Rather than parse each one, I would just comment on one I know something about, and say that a "Photographic Fine Artist" faces the same path any Fine Artist working in medium may face: to consistently explore a visual philosophy. How successful one may be at that impacts whether they become recognized.
Cindy Sherman is a successful Fine Artist whose medium is photography. She followed the path of any fine artists with an artist's intent, execution, and showing work to get exposure with the right curators and critics. The "Gallery Curator" you mention is right about mixing with non-artist. Cindy Sherman did not "arrive" in the Art world via photo forum postings, or "exhibiting" work at art fairs.
Uninformed populist opinion, and the masses do not determine Art, and Art cannot be confused with artful decoration. It is Elitist with a defined purpose, which has always irritated the populist observer.
RE Forum participation:
I don't find the notion that it must be so called "Pros" giving back to be an underlying reason that forum participation thrives or declines.
Rather than tag folks as Amateurs verses Pros, I think "Enthusiasts" the better term.
IMO, GetDpi is primarily an "Enthusiasts" forum made up of varying degrees of experience and talent … from beginners to pros and everything in-between.
Placing "work first" is simple on GetDpi … subscribe to the fun with threads and get e-mail notifications … or go straight to "What's New" and scroll for the image posts. I do not care what was used to do it, I'm interested in content and artistic execution.
GetDpi may fluctuate, but it keeps on truckin' … for example, just when you think it is getting stale, along comes an exuberant personality like Lucille, who lives her be-bop passion and makes it the subject of her photographic affection.
Like Guy, I subscribe to the "Pay It Forward" notion and try to help when I can based on experience. However, there are other ways to do this, like seminars, taking on apprentices, sponsoring an emerging talent, and so on. There need not be a reward for these efforts other than … paying it forward out of respect to those who helped me along the way.
Also, like Guy, I cannot show a vast majority of current pro work due to non-disclosure agreements. I'm shooting 2018 accessories for GM, and nothing I ever shot for Unilever could be made public by me because they control exposure, not vendors. I had 4 spreads in Fortune Magazine for a national client I've never been allowed to make public because it was a buy-out and the client doesn't want it plastered all over the web out of their control.
BTW, previous work I did was lifted by a foreign photographer and used on their web-site … so Guy's caution regarding theft is a real one.
- Marc