So much this!
I have wandered around some of the best art galleries in the world, and the number of images that can only be described as "rich entitled old white cunt" literally makes me cry.
Artists have to live and pay rent, and it's those old cunts who can pay. So the story is: the guy paid for a portrait.
I have the mind of a 12 year old so I called mine photosofart.
It all depends on your style and audience. If you're all about empty photo frames as props, everyone dressed in white linen and editing using selective colouring, then it's perfect.
If you can't hand your camera to a novice and have them shoot on your gear and be confident that you will take a better image than them, then you are a shit photographer and should not be charging money for it.
A good example is look at how many Michelin star chefs host cooking shows where they freely give away their methods and processes. Yet their food still tastes better than yours. In this situation everyone gains knowledge, the overall skillset of cooking improves and nobody loses money either.
So take up shooting something they won't want associated with their brand.
For example, try shooting at some fetish clubs.
Then allow them to make the distinction between your personal work and what you do when employed by them.
It's called selective colouring.