Does education matter

[david brown]

After reading quite a few threads lately it is apparent that there are a lot of

photographers with a degree in this field ( Arts or specifically Photography )

and a lot like me who are self taught.

 

I have read so many books on our craft or hobby or career, and am under no

illusion that I will always be just OK. That is my plot in life to be average

at most things and I can for the most part live with that.

 

For those of you who excel at photography does the diploma make that much

difference or do some people just have IT?

If you did not do a diploma do you think it would have fast tracked your

progress at all?

 

Just curious.

[lex_jenkins]

If you plan to teach, get an MFA. No question about it. I know several folks who are talented artists and excellent teachers who couldn't get tenure because they didn't have the correct letters attached to their educational resume.

 

Otherwise, you're probably better off investing in a good seminar with a respected mentor once or twice a year than going through a formal education system.

 

The main advantage to the university/academy system for *some* folks in creative and artistic fields is networking. While that's valid for folks in the music, movie and TV industry, I doubt it's as significant a factor for still photographers. Ellis Vener and a handful of other folks here could probably give you a more valid perspective than my skewed opinion.

[david brown]

Thanks Lex always nice to get your perspective.

 

I had a killer joke posted here that you would have loved, unfortunately it crossed the line for some, you are from Texas right?

 

 

Hopefully we might hear from some MIT guys on this subject to let us know if their degree helped their photography.

 

Mind you MIT means nothing to me but obviously the college rivalry is strong in the US of A

[shots worth sharing]

Yes, education matters. That the *credential* matters in some contexts is undeniable. It also certain that it's possible to become a top-notch photographer without completion of an accredited program. All in all, completion of such a program probably contributes to, but certainly doesn't guarantee artistic or commercial success as a photographer.

More importantly, I think a strong background in the liberal arts is important to the creation and appreciation of fine photography.

[david brown]

Hi Dave thanks for your input.

 

If you had a strong background in the arts would you then merely mimic the compositions of the old masters? For total originality would it not be better to create with a blank canvas rather than be restricted by century old rules?

 

On the other hand you have to know the rules in order to break them!

[michael_darnton1]

In my field many people didn't even graduate from high school, and a formal education definitely isn't necessary. However, at the second job I had, one person, when introduced to me said, out of the blue "A college boy, eh? You college boys always get everything you want."

 

And I have since come to understand that he was right. It's not the education, per se, that does it--it's the stuff you pick up along the way in the process of getting the education that enables you to function better in competitive situations. I don't need my college degree, but I deal with a lot of ineffective people in my field who didn't go. They shoot themselves in the foot all the time, and I think it's just a general lack of nagivational skills that they would have learned in college.

 

So, bottom line, since I don't know where you're coming from (are you 18, wondering what to do?) I don't think you need specific trade training as much as you need a college education of some sort.

[michael_darnton1]

By the way, at the first job I got in my current field (I'm a violin maker/restorer) they asked if I'd been to college, and if I'd been to violin making school. The profile they'd figured out, based on who succeeded, was that college was a an asset, violin making school a liability. That was one of the biggest and best shops in the world. The job previous to that, which was as a newspaper photographer, two people I was introduced to on the first day wanted to know where I'd been to college. No one asked about my previous photo experience. I think there's a lesson there.

[michael_darnton1]

And while I'm on a roll here, speaking as an employer now at a successful company with eight people, I would NEVER hire someone who said "am under no illusion that I will always be just OK. That is my plot in life to be average at most things and I can for the most part live with that."

[link]

<i>After reading quite a few threads lately it is apparent that there are a lot of

photographers with a degree in this field ( Arts or specifically Photography ) and a lot like

me who are self taught.<p>

 

I have read so many books on our craft or hobby or career, and am under no illusion that I

will always be just OK. That is my plot in life to be average at most things and I can for the

most part live with that.<P>

 

For those of you who excel at photography does the diploma make that much difference

or do some people just have IT? If you did not do a diploma do you think it would have

fast tracked your progress at all?</i><P> <P>

 

David, at first I was really saddened that you limit yourself to "average" at most things like

photography.<P>

 

Then I remembered in my youth taking summer semester at music college...where I

learned that I should become a ...cinematographer :)<P>

 

Certainly for music, I don't have IT. I think I do for photography. No college is necessary to

get IT, though it might be fun.<P>

 

Knowledge is necessary to do IT well though.<P>

 

I think if you're interested in photography, you must have at least a little bit of IT.<P>

<P>And I don't think you'll find IT on ebay either...

[thirdrulephotography]

>If you had a strong background in the arts would you then merely mimic the compositions of the old masters? For total originality would it not be better to create with a blank canvas rather than be restricted by century old rules?<

 

I've always found this sort of idea to be rather odd. Knowing the methods and techniques someone else used doesn't force someone to use those techniques, let alone to do nothing but duplicate what has come before.

 

I think maybe part of it has to do with misunderstandings people have about what creativity and originality really are, and what people in creative professions do. Anyone can have a "creative" idea, be it good or bad; in any given day I have far more than I'm ever actually going to use. Unless I have the skills and knowledge to realize that idea it's pretty much worthless, as it's just going to sit around accomplishing nothing. This is what painters/writers/photographers/etc. get paid for; the ability to turn an idea into something tangible and original. Knowing the "rules," techniques and tools of a creative trade not only equip them to create, but helps them to avoid duplicating work that has come before; whereas someone who isn't familiar with the work of the masters, however skilled, may wind up doing nothing but repeating what has already been done without ever even realizing it.

 

Hmm. Seems I've gone over $0.02, so how about we call it a dime and a bit.

[thirdrulephotography]

Whoops, looks like it should be a dime and a nickel; because I forgot to point out that personally I consider self-teaching in these kinds of fields to usually be of equal weight to formal academic study; though there are times when the academic experience is more valuable, such as the previously mentioned teaching positions.

[ellis_vener_photography]

My university degree is in English /Liberal Arts (University of Texas 1980. I did take two semesters in what was then called "Photo Illustration" (basically a studio course). That led to a connection to a highly regarded advertising photographer in Houston and after a couple of months of freelance assisting I then went to work for him as an assistant from 1981 to 1984, when I went out on my own. The big spur for me was a workshop with Jay Maisel , http://www.jaymaisel.com at the Maine Photographic Workshop in 1983 . The kick in the rear I got from Jay still pushes me along to make better photos today than the ones I made yesterday.

 

At UT I also met people who were both friends and competition while i lived in Texas: Kirk, Tuck, Rocky Kneten, and Stewart Charles Cohen to name three.

 

assisting led me into contact with other really fine photographers: Joe Baraban, Arthur Meyerson, Bob Gomel, Pam Francis, Janice Rubin, Jerry Burns (Atlanta), Chas McGrath, Jim Sims and Amy Boynton, and Mark Green among others. Because I was working for someone who was at the top of the advertising game at the time , not just locally abut nationally, that opened a few doors initially for me but I had to prove myself as a reliable and talented photographer, technician, and as a business person, and just as a person people want to spend time with. (I certainly have my character faults --as we all do-- but evidently people still like and trust me).

 

I also know and am friendly with people who did go to school for photography - who are very successful: Robb Kendrick, Jack Resnicki, Gregory Heisler , and one of my former students (I've also taught at a very fine commercial arts school -Portfolio Center in Atlanta) Gregory Miller.

 

All of the successful photographers that I personally know and am friends with have these characteristics in common:

 

They are reliable.

 

People enjoy their company.

 

They are good business people: even when they make mistakes they learn from them and grow.

 

They market themselves very well.

 

They are very talented.

 

They both very focused and really enjoy what they do.

 

If they are more consistently financially successful than I am it is my fault alone: I just have never done a very good or consistent job of marketing myself.

 

So what should you study at school? Business; marketing; reading and writing -- how to intelligently communicate ideas with people at all levels is vitally crucial; history; people; some science (it is surprising how just a little knowledge of basic physics is a great help in photography and dealing with computers and software); and then maybe photography. Today, more than ever it will pay off to be really well rounded.

 

Unless it is a really really good school that teaches more than mere technique I can't advise anyone to go to photography school. to evaluate one: Look at who the instructors are, seek out graduates in other fields, try to sit in on a couple of classes, and don't buy the sales pitch from the tour guides.

[Brad_]

Formal college education is always good, even if it's not in your chosen field - it opens doors

and differentiates.

 

Unless you're like Steve Jobs and the other guy. They really could have been somebody and

excelled if they didn't drop out of college...

[shots worth sharing]

David, when I stress grounding in the liberal arts, I'm emphatically not talking about rules--I'm talking about understanding.

[lex_jenkins]

David, regarding the Texas, thing, I'm not sensitive to jokes. I'll bet I've heard 'em all and repeated 'em all before. Gotta have a sense of humor about yourself to be a Texan.

 

Here's my perspective on the college eduction issue...

 

I was a journalism major. I didn't finish college - ran out of money in my junior year and had to get back to working full time. That factor severely limited my future as a journalist.

 

IMO, majoring in journalism is like a painter majoring in paintbrushes. After a certain point it becomes about the tools - pencils, notebooks, typewriters - and not about the craft. The best journalists tend to come from majors in other fields: government, history, engineering, urban planning, environmental sciences, etc.

 

However, I finally realized, too late, that a college degree tells a prospective employer that you have the determination to finish what you started. Quitting college tends to leave you branded as a quitter. Nobody cares about the reasons - the fact is, lots of folks finish college despite difficulties. It was a valid point I learned the hard way.

 

There's no guarantee that a college education will improve your mind. I know a lot of folks who came out of college stupider than they went in. They sucked up a bunch of information and can regurgitate it on command, but they aren't thinking. But, boy, they can quote from "The Irony of Democracy" just like the good little Marxists they were programmed to be.

 

I know others whose minds and outlook on life were greatly enhanced, even very late in life, by the challenge. Several years ago I ran into a woman I'd known 20 years earlier. She'd been a rather sheltered housewife, bright but not well educated. During those 20 years she'd gotten divorced from an oppressive husband, gone back to school to become an RN, married a doctor, gone back to school again to study voice and had become not only an accomplished soprano but a very sophisticated, articulate and truly intelligent, thinking person.

 

IMO, the best reason for a young person to go to college is to learn how to learn. The years up to college tend to reinforce only how to pass tests and fit in; they don't teach people how to learn. Once a person has been away from public (or private) school for awhile they tend to learn how to learn anyway, so this benefit doesn't always apply to adults later in life.

 

As a photographer your portfolio is your resume. I can't see why any rational employer or client would care what schools you did or didn't attend, if you can deliver the goods.

[albert_richardson1]

David do you mean to ask if a degree in Photography or a related field makes a difference? Some of the respondents point out that degrees can be important for qualifying applicants for jobs. It isn't clear to me that you want to ask such a broad question. Are you considering pursuing a degree in Photography (Fine Arts actually) yourself?

 

I have no problem with a person characterizing himself as average. Humility can be real, and it is possible for a person to produce outstanding work without putting on airs about it. Admiration, after all, comes from other people and not necessarily the worker himself.

[tri-x1]

I would rather hire a "average" person who I know will be at work every day and follow instructions, that some person who believes because they are gifted hard chargers they should be exempt from the rules everyone else must follow.

 

When I started in journalism forty years ago I had no formal training. But the editor who hired me said he could teach me to write. My talent was that I already was familiar with the area and the people I would be writing about. Today a business may have fifty people applying for the same job. The easiest way for them to reduce the field is to only consider people with college degrees. They miss out on some very talented candidates that way but it's easier.

[JDMvW]

I just saw a shocking statistic! Half the photographers on this web site are below average!

 

Obviously remedial education is the answer.

[fullmetalphotograper]

I did the education route, and I am glad I did it. I started in commercial art then later

switched to journalism. It gave my technique some structure and the rudimentary

understanding photographic principles. I had some excellent teachers and I had some that

probably set the art back 10 years.

 

We did have an ongoing joke at a paper i worked at about having to untrain rookies and

interns. One of the most important things they do not teach aspiring photographers in school

is how to deal with people. Which is one of the most important skills I know in photography.

[tri-x1]

Ralph. You are dead on in your assessment of what isn't taught in school. But the ability to deal with people is the most important skill you can have in just about any job.

[david brown]

Ok, sorry it took so long I was sleeping and had to work today.

 

Just to clarify I am 47 yrs young own my own business employing 14 people for the past 8 yrs, and have always loved photography but fate led me to other things in my life.

 

MICHAEL, I left school in 1977 and became an electrician, I have had 3 careers since then none of them related in anyway, most not trade based either. I was just wondering if people found their degree helped their image making!

If their is no degree did they find it hindered them in some way!

Just curious.

 

bg.

Unfortunately 14years of martial arts training taught me humility, if you get ahead of yourself you can be bought down to earth pretty quick.

I did say average in most things though, I am very good at business and people!

 

JOSH, I was playing the devils advocate a bit in order to stimulate a bit of conversation

 

DAVE, same as above no offence meant.

 

ELLIS, thank you for your opinion, you too would have liked my joke but it was too blue for admin.

 

Lex, thanks for the follow up, the joke was not that offensive to texans, just too blue.

 

ALBERT, Yes I was just asking if the degree mattered to whoever you are, correct in that. Things went in a different direction than I thought, the 12hr time difference does'nt help otherwise I could have clarified it as we went.

Yes I am a what you see is what you get type of person with no self importance about me just a normal bloke.

 

WAYNE, you are spot on

 

RALPH, you too are right, over the years I have dealt with newbie grads, and you do have to untrain them in a lot of things. Theory and reality in the real world are seperate, the combination of all is true power.

[keith selmes]

I would agree with Lex where he says<P>

 

a college degree tells a prospective employer that you have the determination to finish what you started <P>

 

and<P>

 

the best reason for a young person to go to college is to learn how to learn

[tonmestrom]

David, can just tell you from my own experience. I did go to a acadamy of fine arts to study photography. Not with the intent to eventually make a living out of it but because I wanted to become better at what I'd found to be a great hobby i.e. way to express myself. I learned a lot of useful things there like fine art printing, how to setup lighting equipment and use it to its full potential, making good compositions, something which becomes second nature if you're limited to the use of just your standard lens, one film and have to print your whole negative for about two years. We were also were required to build our own pin hole camera and use it a lot which really teaches you what light really is and does (love it ever since). And I can go, but noticed something? These are all technical skills which I still find helpful every day. What they can't teach you tough at any acadamy I know of is to become a great photographer because that takes creativity and that's either in your genes and can be developed or you'll never get it.

Working with some of the best teachers around and being exposed to some of the most talented photographers there are around it mostly gave me a great sense of modesty. Because there is still so much to learn.

Yes it's useful and I would recommend it to anyone who asks. It's also a lot of fun if you can cope with being broken down to the ground on a regular basis. But there are no guarantees.

[david brown]

Hi Keith, yes I agree that you need to learn to learn and with employers sifting through reume after resume a degree can help short list.

 

However there are other places of higher learning besides college, and other ways to show that you have determination to succeed.

 

I personally have seen a lot of out of work grads because they chose unwisely.

[david brown]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your personal take on my question, I agree with you that you are greatly creative by birth or you are ok or not creative at all.

Artists use different parts of the brain as far as I know to non creative people, you know right and left side logic.

Thats why everyone does not go to do an arts degree, but we can learn to be better at it than if we did not try at all, but still not as brilliant as a naturally gifted person, some things just come naturally to a lucky few.

If we strive to learn something new every day we will all succeed at something.