Being a professional is usually morally inferior to being an amateur; because of the very powerful distortions involved in making a living.
Nowadays especially, the immorality of making a living - especially the mandatory dishonesty - is more powerful than it used to be - but it has always been a factor.
Professionals usually have the advantage of devoting more time and effort to what they do (because they don't have to break off every day, and make a living doing something else), and there is usually a 'minimum standard' of professionals, which does not apply to amateurs.
But all modern professionals do less of their profession and more bureaucracy than they used to do - and the trend is everywhere increasing; indeed, the disproportion in favour of bureaucracy may be total.
And bureaucracy means, always, doing 'what other people say' - so your autonomy is lost. And it may well be the hope of making a personal contribution that drew you into that work in the first place.
In sum, here-and-now, it is likely to be better to do what you most care about as an amateur; rather than trying to make it also your livelihood.
Note: The example of science:
https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2012/05/doing-real-science-after-corruption-of.html
https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2010/05/doing-science-after-death-of-real.html
https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2010/05/medieval-science-rediscovered-and.html
