Any good undergrad schools with dedicated photo programs?

I've been looking at Columbia College in Chicago(really expensive)

and didnt know if there are any other good schools for photography

(leading to either a BFA or BA) I just think 15 grand a year is a

bit much to handle.....

Where do you live... because that might dictate some of the options. A lot of the big name schools, like RIT and the one you mention are pricy.

 

RIT is ranked number 1 (i think) FWIW, but that doesn't really mean much if you ask me. There are a lot of other very good schools, Pasadena Arts Center and I think Ohio University may have a fairly strong program. Ellis Veener has some good thoughts on this so hopefully he'll chime in.

I'm about to start my last quarter at Ohio University in their School of Visual

Communications. The program there is very good and the staff is fantastic. They're

often ranked #1 in photojournalism and usually within the top 5 for their commercial

photography sequence, which is what I'm in. The web site for the program can be

found <a href="http://www.viscom.ohiou.edu">here</a>. Cost-wise I feel that it's

still an excellent value, particularly compared to some other photo programs in the

nation. OU also offers a fine art photography degree through the art department, but

if you're end goal is to do photo-j or photo ill professionally, the VisCom program is

head and shoulders above the fine art sequence. If you have any specific questions

about the VisCom program or about Ohio University in general, please feel free to

drop me a <a href="mailto:david@davidrmunson.com">note</a>. Good luck with

your decision.

Check out Brooks Institute - Santa Barbara, California.

Sorry, that's Vener, not Veener.

 

Sorry Ellis!

I would suggest you try Brooks as well, as I'm a student there, and am very happy with what I'm learning (very stressed much of the time, but it goes with the territory). But if 15k is too much per year, he's not going to like the Brooks price tag much, tution per session if you started now (7 week sessions) is between 3-4k. Per year, my total fin. aid comes in around 30k, which is pretty inclusive. It's an awesome school, and I do recomend it, but it is expensive. Jay, feel free to email me if you have any questions about Brooks, the website is helpful if a little bit limited. I'd be glad to help. If you do want to come to Brooks, you will almost cerntainly get the aid you to need to do so, it just won't be too cheap. They are trying to build the student body, so now wouldn't be a bad time to apply either.

 

Peter

The big question is not which school is best, but rather: what the hell are you going to do for a job after graduation?

 

A photo studio is a small business. Small businesses are becoming passe in the 21st century. The local hardware stores here (Massachusetts) have all been put out of business by Home Depot. The department stores by Wal-Mart. The portrait studios by Sears and JCPenney. The opticians, corner food markets, drug stores, barber shops have all been replaced by national strip-mall chains who pay minimum wage with no benefits to part-time school kids. Downtown Springfield is all boarded-up. It looks like the ghost-town at Bodie.

 

The PC and the digital point-and-shoot (in the hands of secretaries) have eliminated 75% of the commercial industrial/advertising photography assignments across the US. Fierce competition for what little photography is left has bid prices near or below the cost of production.

 

Everyone whom I knew who ran a successful photography studio in the 1970's and 1980's is either dead, retired, on welfare, or working for $6 an hour in a camera (chain) store. And I mean EVERYONE!

 

Trying to break into photography today is definitely NOT a wise career choice. You may as well try to break into modeling or movie acting. Your chances of survival are little better.

 

Don�t be a fool! Get a REAL job like grownups have. And do photography as a delightful hobby.

 

Just a kind word from your Dutch Uncle...

 

John Cook, Art Center College of Design, Los Angeles, 1970

Assuming it's a "commercial" (as opposed to a "fine art") program in which you're interested, you might check out the program at Daytona Beach Community College in Florida. It has an excellent local reputation. I know several successful commercial photographers who learned there. I believe it's a two year program. Being a community college it should be a lot less expensive than a private school.

Jay,

 

My advice is don't listen to your Dutch Uncle John. If he heard the same advice he just gave you when he was starting out, he probably would have gone ahead and made his mark in photography anyway...so should you.

 

To be sure the business of photography has changed. Small studios have fallen by the wayside, but so have large corporations who didn't manage their business well either.

 

Take this time in your life to explore all the opportunities photography has to offer and don't be discouraged by those bent on doom and gloom. If the passion is there then nothing should prevent you from furthering your knowledge in photography and even making a living from it.

 

Take the good advice from the other students responding to your question. Maybe you'll have to dig a little deeper, or borrow a little more, or take a bit longer to complete your studies, but go for it...you'll regret it if you don't.

Try the Maine Photographic Workshops; they have undergrad and graduate programs as Rockport College.

Mass Art. Such master photographers as Nick Nixon and Abelardo Morell are teachers there (I believe they are still there). And, since it's a state school, prices aren't all that high. Plus you're in Boston... so many museums and galleries and other students who are very eager to share and learn new ideas etc.etc.

 

Another school (I'm not too informed on it though) is the Rhode Island School of Design. Definately look into it. I have a feeling they aren't cheap though.

I suggest you pay attention to what John Cook said -- commercial photography is in the pits and I doubt that it'll get better soon. Fees are down, work is scarce even for the experienced. I cannot imagine starting out fresh from school unless you enjoy living in someone's garage and eating Ramen noodles 3 times a day for years.

 

If you MUST pursue photography as a career, get a business degree from a state run school (much cheaper tuition) maybe a minor in art history, then assist a sucessful photographer to learn the business from the inside out. Later on use the $60,000 to $100,000 you would have spent on photo school to start your own business. The current supply of photographers far outstrips the demand - the world needs more "properly educated, trained and degreed" commercial photographers as much as it needs more wooden wagon wheel makers. Good luck.

John and Henry have the facts straight!

 

To give you a few examples:

 

 

In Los Angeles 10% of the commercial photographers do 90% of the work.

It costs $50 - 100,000 to set up a commercial studio today (minimum).

Rates for most assignments are the same (or lower) than what they were in 1978.

The "golden era" of commercial photography was in the late 'sixties.

 

 

My advice: If you love photography with a passion you should still pursue a career in the field. Don't let these facts scare you. BUT, get yourself a great all-round education first, major in English, Business or Art History.

As a well educated photographer, who understands more than "just' film, Pyro, cameras and light, you may have an edge...

Jay,

35 some years ago I faced some of the things that John Cook said. I had the Photo school training but not the true talent to make it big. Rather that starve for my art, I got a real job, with real benefits and a great pension. I kept photography as a "delightful hobby". I've since retired on said pension and am now a full time amateur photographer and part-time house husband. I can shoot whatever I want, wherever I want and not starve or worry about the client stiffing me. It's a question of Art vs. Business. I've met a lot of big name photogs doing the workshop circut. They teach workshops to make ends meet.

 

BTW $15,000. a year is not much money. Here in N.J. the taxpayers average $9,000. a year just to send each kid to school. That's to babysit future high school dropouts. Some don't even learn anything.

Check into how much it cost to put you through four years of high school. Now $15,000 won't seem like so much. That's the real world. History will teach you that artists suffer and starve for their art. Bummer huh?

Wow some scary advice here guys...also some very helpful. Im not really into commercial or advertising more concered with photo as a fine art medium understanding artist are called starving for a reason. I guess i'm just going to have to weigh the facts.... anymore feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Not that any of the above posts are wrong... but look up in Edward Weston's Daybooks vol.2 about his student/compatriot Willard Van Dyke, who was faced with a career choice in the depths of thr Depression, c.1933.

"Trying to break into photography today is definitely NOT a wise career choice."

<p>

With all due respect John, I think you're talking out of your ass. No, it's not easy to

break

into

commercial photography. It never was and never will be. It's been a bitch of a career

choice from day one. And yes, things have

changed, but that doesn't mean that someone who is a talented photographer and

who is motivated should give up their dream. Sounds like you've already had your

shot at your dreams - don't crush someone else's before they even get the chance. If

everyone listened to what you say,

we'd have no commercial photographers at all. There will always be room for

talented shooters with new ideas and a good work ethic. This has never been a

profession for the faint hearted - it has a habit of weeding out the unworthy

undedicated in its own special ways. Let Jay pursue things as he pleases and decide

for himself whether or not he should get a "real job" (as though photography isn't a

real job). If he goes to school for photography, he'll see 90% of his original

classmates stray away from shooting by graduation anyway. That alone should hint

at the reality of this field.

<p>

Again, no offense John (or Henry), but please don't go around declaring the situation

to be hopeless when it's not. I see no reason to hide the fact that this is about as

hard an industry to break into successfully nowadays as any other, but to blow it out

of proportion and say tha photography is a dead end is ridiculous.

David,

 

Don�t be too hard on John. He, like a few of us old timers, probably remembers when there was a demand for someone who could come back with a saleable picture in fairly predictable fashion; when you could find a decent job in the want ads. Photographers then, were an obscure bunch who had their own language, their own peculiar habits and quirks and this obsession usually referred to as the �Photo Bug.� There wasn�t much competition then, because photography didn�t have the romantic appeal that it has today. �Photographer� wasn�t a profession that was aspired to on the academic level to any extent. The GI bill was in full swing, turning out engineers.

 

That changed in the sixties with Antonioni�s film, Blowup. The lead character, modeled after fashion photographer David Bailey and played by David Hemmings, struck a chord with the growing counterculture and photography has never been the same

Jay, since you're interested in photography as fine art, I say go to school and enjoy your time. No sense in taking a "real" job without even trying to do what you love - you can always take that "real" job later if you want/need to.

 

My experience was similar, although with music. Getting a music degree is probably even less valuable in the "real world" than a photography degree. I did it anyway, and have no regrets.

 

When I got out, I took a day job and started getting established playing and teaching. I did well enough that I could have quit my day job, but by that time I was so sick of playing cheesy music for weddings (not to mention the fact that a four-hour gig was usually closer to eight with travling and set up/tear down). The music I love (jazz) just doesn't pay.

 

So, I quit the wedding band and worked my way up the ladder at work. I was able to play just the music I wanted to since I didn't need to make money from it.

 

Even though I wasn't "using my degree" or "living my dream" I was *much* happier.

 

Yeah, sometimes I hate my job, but it's better than hating anything related to music - it's still my passion, and not tainted by having to play "When A Man Loves A Woman" and "Wind Beneath My Wings" every weekend. Maybe I should have toughed it out, but I made my choices, and I'm happier now - I get to play the music I love as much as if not more than I was before.

 

So, since I ended up working outside of music (software development), would I have been better off if I had just studied it in school rather than having to work my butt off learning on the job?

 

Not on your life! I would have HATED every minute of being in a computer science program. Bleh!!

 

That's my story - YMMV...

Jay, since you asked for more advice, let me take just one more turn �at bat� to say some things I wish I had heard years ago.

 

Work can be defined as an unpleasant task which you do only because people pay you to do it. Recreation is a pleasant task you pay money to do because it is fun. To search for a pleasant, fun task as your life�s method of earning a living represents a stunning example of naivete. There is no such thing. As soon as they figure out you enjoying it, they will stop paying you and impose a fee. I don't care what it is. Any time you do something for a living, it takes all the fun out of it.

 

Search the marketplace for some unpleasant task which (1) is in demand and (2) for which you have the natural talent to do well.

 

My wife is an RN with barely two years of nursing school after high school. She has a paid retirement plan, paid healthcare plan, paid dental care plan and a salary of $65,000. And she is in demand and can work anywhere. Next door are two 25-year-old Physician�s Assistants with college plus two years of study. Each has all of the above plus a salary of $125,000 per year. They can afford to travel anywhere in the world, three or four times a year, with brand new Ebony outfits each time, to make personal happy-snaps. The average local professional photographer is beating his brains out, pulling "all-nighters" to clear $16,000 per year.

 

If you insist on doing photography for a living, you will learn more from an old pro in a few months than from a four-year school. Sid Avery in Hollywood taught me far more than I learned at Art Center for zillions in tuition. And HE paid ME.

 

Next, get a weird, unique, niche-market speciality. Prize bulls and draft horses are really big business. Did you grow up on a Texas ranch or Kentucky horse farm? Were you active in 4H as a child? If so, you may have some talents with big, stubborn animals which a more talented, artistic kid from a Manhattan apartment may not even begin to know.

 

Were your Dad and Grandfather both cops? Can you get into the police academy? Put that together with some medical training and you have the beginnings of an outstanding forensic photographer. I have a photographer-friend who is also a Registered Pharmacist. He has parlayed these two skills into being one of the country�s leading makers of training films for large drug companies. Very lucrative.

 

Were you one of ten children? Are you used to handling ornery kids? Take some courses in child psychology and you may be ready to do custom location portraits of millionaire�s spoiled children. Move to Beverly Hills.

 

Is your father Al Gore or Ted Kennedy? If so, you probably have all the contacts you need to do formal portraiture of the Washington elite.

 

Finally, think about getting an MBA, so unlike most photographers, you can tell when you are losing money. I am reminded of the old joke about the guys with the truckload of watermelons who were selling them at the farmer�s market for the same price they had paid. They were puzzled because at the end of the day they had not made a profit and concluded that what they needed was a larger truck. That joke never gets a laugh at photography seminars and conventions. No one understands the punch line.

 

Do you get my point? A knowledge of how to read a light meter and develop film does not pay the bills any more. Even if you are sensitive and poetic...

Jay, to directly answer your question, another possibility to consider could be the Academy of Art College in San Francisco. Additionally, I have shopped the photo schools in California, including Brooks and the Art Center in Pasadena. Each has strengths and focus areas. You might even look into the Navy School of Photography at Pensacola, although that carries with it a certain obligation. Perhaps the best thing to do, if your budget will allow it, is to visit some of your candidate schools, and, if possible, get in touch with some graduates of each to conduct informational interviews. Then make a choice based on which you feel best meets whatever internal criteria you might have (including cost). Whichever you choose, the school will not ultimately and finally determine where you take your life or whether you are "successful"; that is more a function of your own will and determination. "To thine own self be true."

 

The replies you have gotten from others in the community are diverse, perhaps even conflicting, yet reflect experiences from which one can learn. I would second, though, what Frank Petronio recommends, to make sure that you get a good liberal arts education.

 

If I may make an off-topic recommendation, there is a book by Michael Gelb that could be interesting to you. My copy is entitled, "Das Leonardo Prinzip, die sieben Schritte zum Erfolg," which is the German translation of the American original, "How to think like Leonardo da Vinci, Seven steps to genius every day."

Jay, your response sounds thoughtful. Please keep in mind that you may still have to make a living after you graduate. Perhaps you have means and this is not an issue, otherwise do pay attention to the practical side and remember that you'll want a place to live and a car and food and to be able to buy film! A good liberal arts education and some business courses will come in mighty handy no matter what you choose to do for a living.

 

David Munson - you may not like what we said but you can't tell someone they're "talking out their ass" and then later on say you meant no offense. It sounds pretty smart-assed to me. Your current experiences in academia are not representative of what the real world is like, you'll discover this all too soon. Best of luck to you too.

Sam Houston in Conroe Texas offers up to Masters in FA (photography).

They have a vey good program for fine arts but also teach the bread and butter stuff, if you dont mind doing weddings to support yur fine art, then this school would be a good choice.

 

Pursuing your dream is all fine and good, but it does not put food on the table. In my case I got a chemistry degree, worked my ass off doing jobs nobody else wanted to do but paid well. Now at 45 I am doing photography full time and dont have to do weddings to support the habit. If I had to do it over, knowing what I do now, I would not change a thing, learn a career or trade that will pay the bills and learn photography on your own, most of us have done it, so it is not impossible.

New Mexico and Minnesota are two fine state university programs that offer BA, BFA and MFA degrees with an outstanding faculty.

John and Henry - a partial opology to you. My use of the term 'talking out of your

ass' was indeed a bit harsh, but I'm just sick and tired of people talking shit and

discouraging young people in things that they're passionate about. Call me a smart

ass if you like, but too many times I've had people who consider themselves in the

know (whether they actually are or not - I'm not making any judgement on you here)

tell me that my plans (or the plans of my contemporaries) are stupid, that I'd be

better off doing something else, etc. It's depressing, it's unwarranted, and I

personally feel that people at early stages in their careers should be left to learn these

things for themselves. If you think commercial photography is a dead end, fine. All I

ask is that you let me go out and fail on my own. If I'm going to self destruct

pursuing a dream, that's fine by me so long as I f*ck up on my own. All I'm saying is

don't shoot someone down before they ever get off the ground.