I think this comes down to two different views, in reference to wedding photography. There are people who want to document the moments of that day, but do not care if the shots are artistic or perfect, they do not care if there is a beautiful bokeh in the shot giving a wonderful sense of life or movement. They just want pictures, and lots of them. The other side of this is the people that want that beautiful artistic compilation. Basically one artists talent used to document the wedding with as much emotion as was felt by those involved. To me these are the two sides, with various degrees of grey in between.

What will happen is the casual photographer will always charge a few hundred dollars to show up and spray'n'pray your wedding. The people that pay for this service are happy with the documentation and that is all. The other group, the ones who want beauty and perfection, and expression, will start paying more. No matter how much technology advances, there will always be a consumer class and professional class of cameras. This means in 20 years you can have the guy shoot your wedding with a single 100 megapixel Canon with 1,280,000 ISO for $500 or you can have the pro use his fleet of 5000 megapixel Canons with 6,000,000,000 iso, with 14 different lenses, 5 flashes, 4 softboxes, and a partridge in a pear tree. The bridezilla who demands the best will pay more for it, especially if less people become professionals. If this move towards casual-pro photogs means fewer true-pros then the true-pros will eventually have a monopoly on their hands.

Another thing to note, is that maybe in some fields of photography could someone learn how to use a camera in a few short months. But it takes way more than that to become a true photographer. Photography is an art not a science. It also involves and understanding and ability to control light. An amazing wedding photographer will use a series of soft boxes and reflectors to create the perfect moment. Where as a casual one will take a picture with his device. Perhaps as an editorial photographer you can break it down to the science and get nice looking pictures. I am a concert photographer, and have been for about 3 years. I still am just a guppy in a big pond. I am learning every day, and getting better with every click. Like many people have said on here, if you are just about the money then you sir are not doing it for the right reasons. I make no money shooting concerts, but I do get free access to close to 100 shows a year, I do get to capture moments that could very well be important pieces of music history.

In regards to people editing there photos and then submitting them on assignments for papers, magazines and other media outlets. This is not new, it is just slipping through the cracks more often, as the industry slowly cuts itself back to an appropriate size. As long as people are not using Photoshop to add or subtract from the originals, then it all falls into the realm of art. There are those who believe a true photographer does not need to edit in Lightroom or Photoshop to bring out the beautiful hues or darken up those blacks. That is an archaic way of thinking. People are shooting without having to worry about those things, they are worrying about focus and composition more and getting even greater shots. Then spending a little time later to enrich the originals. I myself shoot very flat pictures with the expectation of saturating them later on. It all comes down to the business they are going to, and if that business accepts these practices. By no means is it wrong or even taboo, it is just two different approaches. Those who stay with the it-has-to-be-done-all-with-the-camera way tend to be older people, while the shoot-now-finesse-later tends to be the younger crowd. I am more impressed by someone who can shoot amazing rich shots without computer enhancement. It is a sign of talent and experience. But this does not make it more right then doing it the other way.

Anyways I think this is a very good topic and I am sure many people will rip me apart on some of my points. This is just one humble photogs opinion. Cheers.