File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Should I persue photography? In school or for a future job?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A460Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:01:16 21:30:55Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/8.0ISO Speed Rating80Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length5.40 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width337Image Height600RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Vincent
>>114247
I was more suggesting that you Go to university / college and take some electives in Photography.
Aka Major in something ELSE.
>> Anonymous
>>114247
While most photography schools like to carry on about how selective and cutting edge they are, ultimately they'll pretty much take anyone who can come up with tuition.
>> Anonymous
Take it from someone who has been in the game for a while and knows others:

Think of rock stars and pop stars. Cool? I agree, but then think now of how many one hit wonders there are for every lasting talent. Then think how many bands play in bars every night hoping to one day "make it". Then think of those who are sweating just to get a few gigs here and there or never make it at all, dreams formed in mom's garage rocking out with school friends slowly fading away.

Chances are you'll be at the bottom. Even if you do good you'll likely only be at that level of bar gigs at best and working your ass off every night to keep going for the rest of your life. Those are the odds. Even if your mom says you are a wonderful and unique flower - and you are - she is biased and a terrible source of opinion on what you can do and how far you can go. Play the odds, my friend.

Same for sports with all the wannabes, no-name players and the handful of multi-million players, same for photography.
>> DB
>>114252

This is DAMN true, but to the OP.

Don't listen to these folks, do what you want to do in life. Just because people don't think that you should doesn't mean that you should.

You don't want to go through life doing something that someone told you could do while always wondering what could have been.

Even if you fail, at least you can say you tried.
>> Anonymous
Don't go to school for it. No major great photographer I can think of went to school for photography. Koudelka majored in aeronautical engineering, James Nachtwey double majored in art history and political science, David Alan Harvey majored in normal journalism.

The best degree you could get for it is an art history degree, because you'll be spending four years pouring over the greatest visual art in history. Looking at Nachtwey's photographs, you can definitely see the influence of all sorts of great painters on him.

And remember that most artists never make a living off their art; do it because you have to, not for the money. Working eight hours a day won't stop you from taking photographs. Work the night shift if you want to shoot during the day. Working as an insurance clerk for his entire adult life didn't stop Franz Kafka from being a writer; he worked hard during the day, came home, and worked hard at writing. He actually got high up enough in the company to be responsible for preparing all its annual financial statements, and invented the hard hat as a way to cut down on on-the-job injuries. Actually got a medal from his government for it because it saved so many lives.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>114275
Actually, a bunch of the big names did go to school specifically for photography.

(I researched this for a flame war I was involved in the other day. I was arguing that a photography education wasn't strictly required, so I was just posting people who didn't have one, but there was also a significant number who did)

Other than that, though, I agree with your post.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Photography school teaches gear, composition and stuff like that normally. Art teaches colour theory, art history and other things.

Depending on what you want to do with photography, studying fine art is generally a better waste of time and when you burn out of photography you have a semi-worthwile degree to get a proper job with.

Lovingly, an engineer.
>> Anonymous
>>114383
>gear
Can be learned from anywhere. Wikipedia, your camera's manual, and if you need to learn to work a view camera, Ansel Adams.

>composition
A) Can't be "taught."
B) Can only be learned through experience and studying other visual art.

(Come on, you ought to be bragging you're majoring in the same thing as Koudelka did.)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>114415
I know, i was pointing out that learning photography is a waste of time, thankyou for being to dumb to realise that.

I dont need to brag about being an engineer, im awesome by default.
>> Anonymous
>>114418
Engineer, meet physicist. Your goose is cooked.
>> Anonymous
>>114419

Physicist, meet mathematician. Stick a fork in your goose, it's done. Awwww yeah.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>114419
>>114423
Jobless underpaid scientists, meet my porsche.
>> Anonymous
>>114432

I thought you were unemployed? I remember you complaining before.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>114436
Yes but im a student, im unemployed due to some fagotory occuring with me *ahem* failing a module last year and having to retake it (today, it went awesomly thanks) and I'll be employed asap doing something shit for 6 months till next year starts.

However engineering has a 99% employment out of uni which is what i was refering too.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>114413
The argument that the guy was trying to make was basically "The only way to learn about photography is to take a class on it". Which was especially hilarious since he also displayed a deep and fundamental failure to understand at least one basic photographic concept.

From the most reliable source ever, Wikipedia (lol internet):

"Philip-Lorca diCorcia [...] got a Master of Fine Arts in Photography."

"Lange learned photography in New York City in a class taught by Clarence H. White and informally apprenticed her to several New York photography studios, including that of the famed Arnold Genthe"

"Though [Cindy Sherman] had failed a required photography class as a freshman, she took the course again with Barbara Jo Revelle, who she credits with introducing her to conceptual art and other contemporary trends"

"[Garry] Winogrand studied painting at City College of New York and painting and photography at Columbia University in New York City in 1948"
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>114450

i'm glad that you're supporting this side of the argument ac, because i was rearin' to jump down our throat the next time you argued that photo school wasn't necessary. it's not just a "significant" number of contemporary photographers who went to photo school, it's the vast, vast majority. The self-made genius is exceptionally rare.

OP: how many photographs do you take a week? do you carry a camera everywhere with you? who's your favorite photographer? do you know any professional photographers in real life? do you know anyone who's currently going through photo school? what sort of photos do you like to make? portraits? macros? landscapes? something with a thematic focus? what sort of photos would you like to make for a living?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>114500
I sort of take a middle view on it. On the one hand, going to school specifically for a photography education certainly can't *hurt*, and will probably help. On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with teaching yourself.

(And, of course, I offer up my own self-taught photos as evidence. Whether they are evidence for or against the idea that you can learn on your own is left for the viewer to decide)
>> Anonymous
>>114500

What you've got to ask there though is whether there truly is a cause and effect. Are the people who were good and succeeded after photo school the ones who would have survived without it? Are they the ones who could have self-taught anyway and they just so happened to go through photo school because of the obvious interest they had to start with?

It could just be a case of talent shining through regardless.
>> Atomic
ac makes some good points, and I'd like to make the opposite points, because I think they merit saying.

There's nothing wrong with going to school for photography, and nothing wrong with doing it yourself. However, there are 2 things to consider.
On one hand, photography is a job, and like any job, it matters a lot who you know. The best way to meet people may be to take photography courses and buddy up with professors and so forth.
On the other, most people couldn't make ends meet as a photographer, which would make your degree in photography fairly useless except as "a bachelors degree" which will get you fairly crappy jobs. If you had another hobby or interest, you should investigate making money with that and do photography if you're able.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>114509

well, now you're getting down to the idea of why go to college in the first place. you can argue that unless you're going for science or law, college is entirely useless. you can teach yourself to write, you can teach yourself to paint, you can teach yourself to write for a newspaper, you can certainly teach yourself to make photos.

but you don't go to college because you can't teach yourself. if anything, learning on your own is the entry requirement for college. you're expected to bridge the gap between a professor's sparse, cryptic comments and his or her expectations with your own erudition. college, at its most basic, is a deep pool of resources that would otherwise be out of reach. it's the professors (good photo schools typically have famous, pro photographers teaching the higher level courses), it's the battery of books in the library at your discretion, it's the peer interaction, it's the connections you make while a student with, say, gallery owners (or publishers or whoever the hell), it's equipment you can borrow. most of all, though, it's having someone else push you. college is having someone else make you write 40-page essays in two weeks, or having someone make you take 2000 photos a week, develop them on your own, then print them. that sort of environment would help even the most naturally gifted photographer.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>114518
Very good points. 99% of photography-as-a-job is marketing yourself, and having photographer contacts will help that a lot.
>> Anonymous
>>11452399% of photography-as-a-job is marketing yourself

hi guys, i'm gary fong, inventor of the lightsphere

PATENT PENDING
>> Anonymous
You can always make money being a paparazzi
>> Anonymous
>>114993

That'd be like dreaming of working in the top end financial sector and ending up as a loan shark though.