College, where to go?

[patrick_smith1]

Western Kentucky University for Photojournalism- check them out, www.wku.edu they have one of the best programs

 

Savannah College of Art and Design for photography www.scad.edu

[josh_goldstein]

Get the best liberal arts education you can. Learn art history and theory. It will inform your photographic vision.

[timberwolf1]

Since I graduated from SF State, my opinion is valuable. They also have a Broadcasting dept. to round you out. For business, they are something like 25th in the nation. Local newspapers accept freelancers, like the Spanish publications. We have fashin shows and two more art colleges. This was/is ground zero for internet media. San Francisco is a 2nd level city for photography, New York/LA being in first. Unless you want to teach, a degree in photography is worthless. The most important courses in business are marketing and business law 101. Come to San Francisco, the World's most favored city. Only 6 hot days a year, otherwise, 63 degrees.

[wordsandpixels]

Timber,

 

My three sons (sounds like a TV show) moved to SF for many of the reasons you list. Second the idea.

[timberwolf1]

Extreme sports hosts their showevery year here at Pier 34. We have street luge--60 mph body skateboard down our hills, no brakes. We have Kayaking in the ocean or down several rivers. We have suring ( Mavericks--50 foot walls at Prince-by-the Sea. We have scuba diving, sailing, kite boarding, board sailing, extreme skate boarding down our hills, World class running, Stanford, Cal football, gliding off our windy mountains, only 7 hot days a year. Groups that talk every sport. Hospitals to put you back together. It is 60 degrees here when it is 100 degrees in the mid west. We have indoor rock climbing..Yosemite is nearby., snow skiing at Lake Tahoe. We have car racing at Sears Point and Monterey. Hot rod shows, big concerts, theatre, North Beach clubs, glider flying and parachuting. Hiking in the redwoods, Sierra Club, 450 PR agencies, ad agencies, jobs for waiters, tourists from every country.

[roger_hicks1]

Dear Noah,

 

Forget photo college. Go somewhere that teaches you to read and write, and study photography (informally) in your own time. If you can read and write clearly, and present an idea well, people will take you on for almost anything, including photography. I know -- I have a degree in B***sh** aka law.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger

[harry_seldon_____aka____fl]

Have you thought about going abroad? I was looking at international studies in Ireland. It happens that Ireland interests me, but there are plenty of host opportunities. To study art, you need to learn the basics, but you also need to have a broad base. I think the influence of another culture could do nothing but help. A semester or two abroad would not only give you a different prospective, but think of the photo ops for your portfolio. Remember, the degree may help get the interview, but it's the portfolio that get's you the job. If another country is not practical, think about getting as far as you can from where you are, same reasoning.

[juddirishbradley]

Fine Art? University of New Mexico

 

Commercial? RIT

 

To make money? when you find out tell me

[hjkl_hjkl]

If you are willing to transfer to ONtario, Canada there are numerous, well-known Universities and Colledges with high quality photography programs readily available. Ontario Colledge of Art and Design, Ryerson University, Concordia University, and Sheridan Colledge are just a few of the very popular and well-known choices. Also, for a more complete list of choices in both Canada and the U.S. see www.careercruising.com, very very helpful for many students including myself.

[hjkl_hjkl]

If you are willing to transfer to Ontario, Canada there are numerous, well-known Universities and Colleges with high quality photography programs readily available. Ontario College of Art and Design, Ryerson University, Concordia University, and Sheridan College are just a few of the very popular and well-known choices. Also, for a more complete list of choices in both Canada and the U.S. see www.careercruising.com, very very helpful for many students including myself.

[rene_theberge]

Noah,

 

Here's an out of the box option: Sarah Lawrence College. My daughter went there to study photography among other things (which she did), but she came away with much, much more. SLC has a very unique system of education modeled on Oxford. If it is the right fit for you, then there is no place better. As Roger Hicks advised above, it will teach you to think and to express youself using writing, verbally and artistically in many mediums. It's not for everyone, it's very expensive (but with good financial aid) and it can change your life. It's just outside New York and offers many internships in the city. The faculty in the arts, including photography, are practicing professionals at the highest level. Last Sunday's NY times had a good piece on the school in their Education Life section. I could go on for a long time about its virtues, but check it out for yourself at www.slc.edu. I am a poorer, but very satisfied parent.

 

Rene Theberge

[link]

I went to an ivy league school and majored in economics.

 

Now, I photograph movies for a living. Go figure.

 

But I always regret that I did not go to a fine art college instead.

 

I think that photography itself is not too hard to learn on your own with the aid of

books and the internet. But the vision thing is much bigger than technical

photography. So I'll vote for a fine art school such as the Rhode Island School of

Design etc.

 

And...the college degree itself maybe worth more than you think. That's because

teaching photography may be the only way to photograph what you want, and feed

the family at the same time. My high school art/photo teacher was a superb fine art

photographer. I've seen his work in a very major art museum. He now makes his

living as a college professor and can work as he pleases as a photographer...So don't

stop at a BA, get an MA or PHd!

[aardvarko]

The Corcoran College of Art and Design teaches *artistic* photography, as well as having the first pho/j degree program in DC.

[Spearhead]

I've heard Harvard is pretty good.

 

When I think about the skills that I have used to avoid being murdered or destitute, none of them came from college.

[sk_arts]

I think all the anti-college posts are pretty silly myself, and i wonder if they

have been to a photo school.

 

If you want to avoid your creaativity stifled, blah blah blah then don't go into

the industry... because school is a great place to sharpen those skills. Atleast

tht was my experience.

[skibberean]

Hi Noah,

Since you are in Mass, there are 2 schools that have pretty good facilities. New England School of Photography and Mass Fine Arts which are both in Boston. I have been going to NESOP and have enjoyed the teachers and students; they are very encouraging.

Best wishes!

Meg

[foto_hess]

Well, since everyone else here has given what they believe to be correct, I thought I would not give you any advice, I will just tell you what I am doing. After reading your post, it was like reading about myself. I too work at a large hardware store. I too am a people person, but hate people (probably from working in retail). I too like extreme sports. Two days ago I started the process of transferring to another school. I spent three years trying to figure out what I wanted to do in college and when I finally figured it out, I realized that the school I was going to didn't have the program I wanted. Everyone says do not get a photography degree. But I think you make what you are given. I just want to be a great photographer and work for a newspaper. I want to make a difference in the world and I see the camera as the means. If I make a ton of money all the better, but I am not doing this to get rich. There are plenty of other ways to get rich. Oh, I am going to move to Bozeman, MT and go to school there. They have a good photography program, plus some journalism. They have mountains, for snowboarding, biking, hiking, camping. Not too far from Glacier National Park, so I can do some camping, shooting there. Well, good luck. It is good to see that I am not the only 22 year old trying to find his way. Hope you find it.

[john_cook1]

There are many fine schools currently doing an excellent job of teaching photography to thousands of students. Almost none of them will find work after graduation. Be very, very careful about photography as a major unless you plan to have another source of income.

 

Believe me, I did six years of college, graduating from Art Center College of Design in California, one of the highest-rated schools in the country. I could have done about as well if I had majored in Tiddley-Winks.

 

I'm not kidding.

[jlee]

Hey Noah, look like you've got plenty of good answers but I thought I'd drop

my .02. I'm a 29 year old going for a second degree in Photojournalism at

Western Kentucky U. You can certainly make it in this field without this

education but it is extremely competitive and I wanted to give my self every

advantage. So, I asked around, visited some schools and am convinced I am

at the right place. Not only am I learning to be a better story teller but I am

getting the chance to build relationships with people in what is a very tight knit

field. Just like in any other, if not more so, "networking" is extremely valuable.

I can't say enough good things about WKUs program where fellow students

take the little free time they have to help each other. It's a great team

environment and is largely what has kept WKU at the top of the list of the best

PJ schools in the country.

Check us out at wku.edu and take a look at the www.mountainworkshops.org

Good Shooting, JLee

[xbehindtheglassxaol.com]

If you want to learn photography, it doesn't matter which school you go to. It matters in what your heart's desires are. If you want to learn, you will do everything in your power to do so. I do have to admit that the colleges and training do have a far impact on how fast/ effort of learning of the trade and art you get, but you will find a way. Just dont give up.

 

I will be attending Brooks Institute of Photography in Santa Barbara, Ca. From what i have been hearing they defenetly know their stuff. Find what works for you. Brooks has the knowledge but it always ends with the size of your wallet.

[james_tau]

I'm currently attending a liberal arts school majoring in photography and they don't teach you any technical skills except the bare basics to get you started in two weeks. Photography is easy to learn. It just takes time and practice. Truth be told, any motivated 6-year old can do it. Learning to take photographs is one thing; learning to talk about it is another (some may even venture to call it the 'art of bullshitting'). But this is the general attitude I get from this forum: photography major is useless! Allow me to refute that mentality.

 

First, what is an artist? I have to define this before I go any further and I'll try to define an artist within the confinements of visual arts, since of course, a poet, an actor, or even a con man can be classified as an 'artist'. In my philosophy, an artist is a person that effectively communicates the abstract/creativity through a visual medium; it is someone who projects his visions, thoughts and ideas to create a commentary, let it be social, political, personal, etc. An artist strives for a greater ideological achievement for the betterment of men and not for monetary reasons. But from art, he earns money as a byproduct for his art and not as the cause for his art. And with this I present the main crux of my argument: why photography major is not completely worthless in order to be an artist.

 

"Don't major in photography!" But why not? Because of the lack of job prospect? Lack of sufficient money? Security? True, you won't have any of those (except a teacher) but you have to understand, it's ART; you major in photography in the school of fine arts to be an ARTIST. One way to make money is to do commissioned work through galleries and private collectors. Another way is to apply for grants, fellowships, scholarships, awards. And if you establish yourself as an artist, you can even travel and give lectures for a hefty sum of money. But can you be an artist even if you don't go to art school? Sure, but assuming you do go to an art school, you may learn to be an artist faster. Otherwise photography major is completely worthless - just like drawing and painting, printmaking, sculpture, ceramics, etc. In a way, you can learn *any* of those on your own. Granted, photography has more leeway than ceramics or a printmaker major in the sense that you can use the camera for a multitude of uses and hold different jobs, and because of that, we forget there's a distinction with fine art photographer, commercial photographer, photojournalist, sports photographer, etc, and expect a major in photography to encompass all those fields. Well, it doesn�t. Photography major = fine art.

 

If you want to be a commercial photographer, then a technical school that teaches you how to make attention-getting, pretty pictures will suffice - for those are the only qualities advertising agencies look for. Oh and creativity, but nobody can teach that.

The question becomes, do you want to do photography because of money and have fun on the side (sounds like most people here) or because you seriously consider yourself as an artist and want to refine your craft? It is not to say that commercial photographer doesn�t create art, but when he/she shoots a Lexus for a magazine ad, it�s no different than the industrial designer that created the logo for Coca Cola � it is art in their own right, but not quite �fine art� per se.

 

If you choose the latter, you may further consider photography major because:

- you want to be an artist

- equipment (darkrooms, enlargers, processors, chemistry).

- critique - unlike popular myths, professors (at least here) don't mold you into their mini-me's; they teach how to address and defend your work (a.k.a. sell your idea/art). They push you to evolve and explore hidden facets of creativity. But don't listen just to the professor; listen to your peers. Here at the university we cultivate a strong relationship with each other to appropriate constructive criticism - art heads are the most valuable assets to make you grow as an artist. I've asked my roommates, parents to critique and most I get is "that looks cool," or "good job!" with the inability to explain why. At school, you learn to articulate.

 

"Major in business/engineer (or something useful!) and do photography on the side"

Again, what is "useful?" The ability to receive steady income? Have medical benefits? Retirement plan? Hell, I know business majors with master's degree from a very reputable private University who now work as a meager salesperson at clothing stores - was their degree useful in that perspective? Sure you can major in business, marketing, web design, etc. At best you'll end up working at Ritz Camera corporate headquarters and still taking pictures as a hobby. Why? You don�t have time to shoot enough and grow too slow as an artist. When was the last time those "business" people had a gallery show soon after college? Not many. Of course, just because you major in something else it doesn't mean you can't be an artist. But because of the limited time and amount of commitment to your craft, it'll take you longer to be recognized as an artist in the art community especially when you haven't "done your time." Commercial photographers are another case in which I will discuss later.

However, there are photographers out there that "made it" without any degree or ever going to photo school. Take Harry Benson, for example. Or any of the National

Geographic photographers (well, they got degrees but you'd be surprised at what they majored in). What did they have in common? They took lots, and lots of pictures using a lot of their time. Their professor? The editor. Experience is the dominating factor for success - and this is true for ALL careers (and a pinch of ambition).

 

As for commercial photography (portraits, high school shoots, etc): do you even need a business degree? My ex-roomate was a business major and the most benefit he got is networking with people. I know a very good photographer who just moved to the U.S. and opened up a studio and has regular clients. On top of that, he doesn't speak a word of english! He got involved with the community and people got to know him through craft shows. His secret? Being friendly and resourceful. Of course he�s an isolated incident but that point is, just are there are many ways to succeed in photo, there are many ways to succeed in business as well. If you want to succeed in anything, you have to do it on your own volition; not by waiting for something to happen to you or be discovered.

It is not to say that business degrees are worthless, but in relation to photography, are they absolutely crucial in opening up/maintaining a studio? Business at this level can be learned as a craft, not as an expertise. So, unless you plan to merge with Ritz Camera or B&H anytime soon, a business degree will largely be a waste of time. But if you're not the creative/innovative type and MUST have some business skills, some people suggested that you should major in business and take photo class on the side. But what about the other way around? There's nothing preventing you from majoring in photography and take business class on the side. You can choose to have a nice portfolio and not enough business skills or have those skills and a small portfolio. Either way, with time, you'll learn to master both. Ultimately what counts to be an artist on the side of commercial photography is your portfolio. It�s your call.

 

"...after graduating almost none of them will find work.� Funny. Everyone I know in the photo dept. has a job, considering that a pack of 50 sheets of 4x5 Fujifilm 160 NPS alone cost around $80�. But I think you mean a �secure career� with �steady income� and a fancy title to top it off. My peers may not have the best job, or get paid well but they work on these jobs to supplement their passion for photography; not for buying Ferraris, plasma-screen tv, summer houses. Even better, get internships or assistantship for photo-related area like I did. I will say this again: you can apply for grants, fellowships, and scholarships - consider them as sabbatical-passes, if you will, from your job. Now, wouldn't you call "working under a grant" to be "work?"

 

As for most posters such as John Cooks, I'm sorry they didn't find their college experience invigorating during the 70�s. But his comments (and of J. Scott Schrader, among others) seems only to apply on commercial photography and how to make enough money for...something. But can you be a commercial photographer and an artist? Of course! But what I�m arguing here is that you can also be an artist without being a commercial photographer; you can be an artist by being a photography major.

 

But here's the kind of photographer that WON'T make it as an artist: the kind that expects to be "discovered" by accident or chance. Do yourself a favor and find another source of income because you'll be waiting for a long time. But if you're the kind that can articulate your work and can present yourself, then you don't have much to worry about. You already have the salesman in you. You need to have the skill and will in order to make it as a serious artist. Or just get an agent. Read Joe Innis' book �How to Become a Famous Artist and Still Paint Pictures� (http://www.innisart.com/books.html for the free online version). It is possible to make it as an artist. Granted he's a painter, but how different is a painter from a photographer other than the medium? Or somebody who majored in drawing & painting versus a photography major? These are two completely "worthless," jobless, fine art majors.

 

In short, what you people (negative posts about photo major) are trying to do is market a fine art degree into something that's commercially-viable. While it's possible at times, it seems like a gross bastardization of what you've been originally trained for � to be an artist. But in Noah�s case, I think he wants to major in photography only because of the sheer joy in it, with the diploma to prove he was professionally trained? Whatever his reasons are, he only has to answer himself.

 

So it all boils down to this: Do you want to be an artist or a hobbyist photographer? Because it is possible to make it as an artist.

 

I�m not kidding.

 

[john_cook1]

There is a major fallacy widely believed by most young, naive, gullible students. It is that if you (1) work very hard in high school (2) do well of your SAT tests, (3) select a famous, highly-rated college, (4) pay one hundred thousand dollars or more for tuition, (5) study hard in that college, (6) pass all their tests with high scores and (7) graduate with a degree at the head of your class, that you will be able to get a job which will pay enough to get married, buy a house, own a new Ford automobile, make babies, pay for your daughter�s wedding and retire at age sixty-five.

 

The missing key factor here is what you study. It must be something which is in demand in the marketplace, like nurses, computer programmers and engineers. Getting a PhD in Crystal Ashtray Construction is not in high demand. And the demand is falling every year as fewer people choose to smoke. I don�t care how gifted you are, there is no work making ashtrays. Get a grip.

 

Photography is one of those jobs for which the supply of yearly graduates (thousands) exceeds the demand (dozens).

 

Some fool will tell you that it is something he must do, and that he doesn�t care about the money. He might as well say he doesn�t care about oxygen, as both are necessary for survival.

 

Two of my closest friends teach at Brooks. It is an excellent school. They are both absolutely superb photographers. They are there because they can no longer make a living in Hollywood.

[james_tau]

So far I haven't followed *any* of the steps mentioned for the "american dream", and I don't plan to in the future. If that's your guideline for happiness, then so be it. But it's not the only one. Hell, I did pretty well in my previous career as network administrator without ever taking a class for it. I started as a lowly tech support and worked my way up. I don�t mind living in an apartment, driving a Toyota; don�t plan to ever have kids, and hope to never retire. Can artists (except teachers) ever retire?

 

As for studying, the factor is not only WHAT you choose to study but to NEVER stop studying. Any average Joe can go to a college and learn to be a programmer. Guess what? Technology is ever-changing, and the language he learned in school will be obsolete in months. You have to learn how to learn. So unless you're in a stagnant job that doesn't require thinking, continuous studying is essential for any profession and photography is no different. Education paves way for innovation. Oh and thank you for the brief lesson in supply and demand, but as an artist you must remember to create/open up opportunity for demand instead of just fulfilling them. You must be innovative/different to separate yourself from others. Same is true for commercial photography. The photographers that are "ahead of the pack" were the ones transferring wedding photos onto dvds when that technology was still emerging. Now that has become the "standard" and if you're unable to provide such service, you're behind.

 

In regards to smoking, I don't know the exact figures but from what I can infer, it may be true that smoking is decreasing in the US due to heavy campaigning and increased taxes. But you forget that the US is just *a* country on earth. Smoking is increasing in other parts of the world. And if you can extend this to an analogy, the world is a big marketplace for anything, even art. (as an aside, there's even a Starbucks in the Forbidden City).

 

"Demand in the marketplace" but which? For jobs that make +$80k a year? The difference between not "caring" about money and not "wanting" money lies in the degree of quantity. I may be satisfied, or even happy making < $20k a year, but to others, this amount of money may not suffice. Right now I�m doing dandy at $8K/year, considering I�m a student. Just because Mr. Smith has a PhD in Crystal Ashtray Construction, doesn�t mean he can only get a job in the dwindling ashtray business. Hell, he can sell crystal tables with ashtrays built-in. But the point is to be innovative and find/create a niche in the market. If you found jobs based solely on the degrees offered in colleges, this world would be very limited in skills and opportunities. You can major in biology and work for a computer company telling them how to effectively build new protein-unfolding algorithm; or be a medical doctor and work for tv or movies as a consultant. Both those industries have nothing to do with the earned major, yet it is a career. Perhaps it is the prospect of making < $20k considered "unsuccessful" after earning a degree. But it's just another condescending view placed by society; you choose whether or not to let it bother you.

 

As for oxygen, I don�t need to hyperventilate to stay alive.

 

But if wealth is to be an indicator for happiness, then please, don't be an artist.

[john_cook1]

Pick up any newspaper from any city in the country. Look in the employment classifieds. How many listings do you see for "photographer"? I rest my case.

[db1]

I graduated from college with a BS in Business in 1991. I've had a camera with me since I was 12. I started my business career 3 months after graduation. Then in January 2001, I quit my near-six figure a year job to go back to school to study photography. My business career had no soul and no matter how much money I made, it never made me as happy as making photographs. Now I am back in school at the age of 34 and I am studying photography. I make about $12k a year and I could not be happier. I go on roadtrips whenever I want and I never had to check someone else's vacation calendar. Yes things are a bit different. But do whatever makes you happy.