> Photography comes to mind.
According to the BLS, you are mistaken. Most professional photographers have a degree or about 3.5 years towards one:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos264.htm > Most photographers, even ones who do photography for pay, do not have degrees in photography.
I agree that most people with a camera don’t have a degree. Yet there is a vast difference between a hobbyist and a professional. A hobbyist may be a great talent, but a professional, by definition, does it for a living. If they don’t do it for a living, they are not professional.
> And how many professional musicians have music degrees? Some, but certainly not the majority...
Well played, sir. This is a good observation on your part and one that proves my point about the need for extensive training and culture even if not in a university setting. If someone is going make a living as a musician, such as teaching, working in a symphony, in a studio, and so on, according to the BLS, they probably have degrees. And also, good musicians share a commonality of many years, even most of a life, devoted practice; and most have had many years of lessons. Once again, according to the BLS, about half of all performing musicians don’t fit the criteria of being professional. They are hobbyists.
Don’t get me wrong in any of this. I'm not discrediting the value of talent, motivation, good luck, or any combination of these. I could share stories that echo and endorse the comments of others here, so you’re not going to get me to criticize that approach.
But the fact remains that talent will go only so far by itself. Without formal education and sadly, yes, official certification, you are choosing to handicap yourself by not getting a degree. But don’t fret too much. As I illustrated with my buddy as an example, talent will always be successful......................................................................
.................................. Eventually.
After all, what’s is 15 years out of a life?
