nolefan32

Okay, listen ... to all you people who watch reality shows, any of them whatsoever, do us all a favor and stop. It's because you helped Survivor and American Idol get top ratings that we now have stuff like this.

"I went through MEPS and did my ASVAB this week, and I found out unfortunately the photography progam is now unavailable, and only for civilians."

 

So talk to other branches if this is what you want to do. Or check out the journalism program -- military journalists also shoot, it's not just writing. The Air Force might have closed that MOS for the time being, but they aren't the only belle at the ball.

 

BTW, I find it hard to believe the Air Force has done away with all of their military photographers forever. They might just be overloaded at the moment, and so they had to temporarily shut it down. But since they can't send civilians on recon, they've got to still have military people doing the job.

"Just curious, do enlisted people still do all the menial chores that we grunts did years ago, like cleaning toilets, pulling KP, overnight guard duty, and running errands for officers? Wouldn't that apply regardless of one's MOS or assigned main duties (at least, for a few years)?"

 

Yes. Though how much that you get to do that sort of thing depends on which service you end up in and where you are stationed. Our base, for example, has cleaning contracts, so even the most junior sailors don't have to do those sorts of chores, at least the cleaning and the like. But that's not the case everywhere.

 

There are collateral duties that everyone in the military(uniformed personnel, not so much the civilians) has to do. The higher ranked you are, the less menial the jobs may be, i.e., privates clean toilets while seargants and officers manage the annual charity campaigns. But you're right, nobody really ever escapes those duties.

"There is maybe an 70% chance Canon will release a new FF DSLR this year. There is a 50% chance that if they do, it will be a 5D upgrade. There is a zero chance it will be released before August. There is a 90% chance that Canon will offer a rebate on the 5D next week."

 

It should be noted that 42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.

 

In repsonse to the OP, yes, Canon will eventually release a new FF body. But when that will happen, and which will come first (a 5D successor or the 1Ds Mk III), every person who knows those answers is employed by Canon and sworn to secrecy. However, it's a safe bet that it won't be in the next two months; most of the camera makers time their release announcements to coincide with major photo shows (like the recent PMA, when Canon announced the 1D Mk III), and there aren't any events like that in the next two months.

Both Canon and Nikon are great cameras. I'd recommend taking a trip to your local camera store, hold each, and decide from there which just feels best to you.

"So let me see if I have this straight, well sorta straight: I would need to enlist into said branch of military, go through basic training, and then get shipped off to wherever they want me. Then, i MIGHT get my desired MOS of combat camera, but if they don't have a spot and they need something else filled, I could wind up doing something else."

 

Nope.

 

When you sit down with your recruiter, whichever branch you decide has the best deal for you, he should be able to promise you, in writing, that you will be going to photo school or journalism school or underwater basketweaving school or whatever other school rocks your socks off at the time, immediately following your graduation from boot camp. If he isn't willing to put it in writing in your enlistment contract, walk out and have a sit down with a recruiter from your second favorite branch.

 

And once you've signed the contract, both you and the branch you joined are bound to it. As long as you continue to maintain your eligibility for your school, they have to give you the school they promised. Understand though, that "eligibility" includes graduating from boot camp on time; if you delay in boot camp for reasons such as you have difficulty with the physical regimen or the various testing, to the point that you miss your school's start date, then the contract becomes void and you have to re-negotiate.

 

What you can't negotiate with the recruiter is the intermediate or advanced photo/journalism programs. Those are goodies that you can get after you are in and have proven yourself, developed your portfolio. Of course, if you want to stay in, they're great negotiating tools for when it comes time to re-enlist -- if the Army/Navy/etc. wants to keep you another hitch, they have to be willing to give you the advanced school of your choice, that sort of thing.

 

But that basic photography school or journalism school, that one will be in your enlistment contract and they can't take it away from you unless you do something to screw it up.

 

"I like structure, and I like staying fit, but I think the toughest thing would be giving up the independence of my own place, with own bed, where I can shut the door when I want."

 

Open bay barracks are pretty much a thing of the past, except for boot camp. After that, even if you live in what's called the barracks, it's really just two or three-man rooms, you'll have a locked front door and a lockable storage locker (the size of a large armoir) to keep your things in. And as you advance in rank, you'll eventually get a private room all to yourself. The worst part is that you have to keep it clean, as there are weekly inspections (though they only wear the white glove in boot camp and school -- once you're with a real unit, it's just to ensure you aren't living like a pig). The only time you'll have to deal with communal living outside of boot camp is while on deployment; whether it be on a ship or with a unit in the field (i.e., in tents), those times you'll be giving up your privacy, but back at the base you get treated almost like a human being. Almost.

 

"Here's another question: would the military pay for my graduate school if i wanted to further my education beyond my BFA? Even if it was in photography or photojournalism?"

 

Yes. There are several programs designed to pay for college. There's tuition assistance, which pays a portion of your tuition while you're on active duty (and I think all the services are up to 100 percent of tuition, though books are your responsibility). There's also the Montgomery G.I. Bill, which is where you sock away part of your paycheck every month and the military matches it, and then you've got a college allowance for after when you get out. Each of the branches have some of their own programs, too; ask your recruiter for details. And you can major in anything you want, anything at all. The only catches are (a) you have to be working toward a degree to get assistance, you can't just be taking a mishmash of classes for fun, (b) you have to be progressing forward, i.e., since you have a bachelor's, the military will help you toward a master's and eventually a Ph.D. if you're so motivated, but not a second bachelor's or associates, © there are per semester and per year caps, which really come in to play with graduate programs because the classes are so much more expensive then undergraduate courses -- just means you might be slowed down a little toward getting your master's, if you want the government to pay for as much as they will, (d) the school you attend has to be an acredited program, which isn't that the military has to acredit it, but that one of the national school acrediting programs has verified that you aren't just attending Bob's College of Underwater Basketweaving, but you're really attending a degree program at some place like the University of Maryland or a legitimate vo-tech program.

FYI, regarding age -- Fox News just did a story only moments ago about how the Army is in need of people, and so they've raised their cutoff age, from 35 to 42.

Steve makes a great point, what the pros use isn't always what consumers require. Pros have different requirements than the average shutterbug, even the average serious shutterbug. It's not just about sharpness, it's also about build quality, autofocus speed, quietness, etc.

 

Think of it like this -- a lot of pros shoot Canon 1-series bodies or Nikon D2X's/D2H's. Does that mean that the Rebel or the D40 isn't worth owning or can't take a good picture? Of course not. It just means those cameras weren't designed for pro shooters.

 

In the end, just like when you picked your body, you have to judge those lenses for yourself. Does it fit *your* needs, *your* budget, *your* hands? Don't worry so much about if it fits the needs of some other shooter you never met.

I just looked back at my last post and realized I said that the intermediate course gives writers a foundation in shooting and shooters a foundation in shooting -- should have said shooters a foundation in WRITING. Oh, if I could only have an edit function for my posts here.

 

Oh, you asked about teaching. I don't teach -- as a PAO, my job is to run the base communications. I oversee the newspaper, the website, media and community relations, etc. I sometimes actually get to write a story or take a picture, but for the most part I'm just a manager now.

 

As for teaching, that's mostly done at DINFOS or at the various services' photo schools. And there are some civilians on staff, but there are also military folk; hang around long enough and proove yourself, and that could one day be a tour of duty you pull, training your successors.

OCS: Officer Candidate School. In essence, it's a boot camp program for college graduates so they can become officers.

 

As a civilian, I mostly photograph events here on the base I'm attached to. I have known of opportunities where they've gone looking for civilian volunteers to go and assist in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those haven't been frequent, but I don't think it's hard to contact the right people and volunteer should I be so motivated. I'm not, so admittedly I haven't looked to deep into it.

 

In the Navy, I was actually a writer rather than a dedicated photographer. All of the military writers get taught at the same place, the Defense Information School at Ft. Meade, Md. (near Washington, D.C.). That school focuses on newswriting techniques and public affairs/public information. There's also a brief introduction into photojournalism; see, the military considers a "photojournalist" to be more than just a news photographer, but to actually be writers that shoot and shooters that write. So writers are expected to shoot, too, though the dedicated photographers are expected to have a broader understanding of photography, in that they'll also be taught how to do studio photography, recon photography, etc.

 

Following either the basic photography or journalism training, there's also an intermediate and an advanced course in photography. I went through the intermediate course later in my career; it's also taught at the Defense Information School. The idea of that course is to take writers and give them more of a foundation in shooting, and shooters and give them more of a foundation in shooting, and then give them both experience in feature and news photography.

 

The advanced course, I never did, but friends who I know that went through it raved about it. It's gone back and forth between Syracuse University and the Rochester Institute of Technology as to which teaches it; currently I think it's back at Syracuse. But it's nine months of photography and writing classes taught at a university, with you going to classes right along with regular college students, and you don't wear a uniform -- but instead of paying for the classes, you get paid to go to class and the government pays for it all.

 

Do be aware that the intermediate and advanced photojournalism courses aren't something you can negotiate with your recruiter. Those are programs that you apply for from within the service, after you've had a chance to prove yourself and build up your portfolio. But the nice thing is that all of the programs I just described are exactly the same for all branches of the military; so your decision on which branch you want to join doesn't have to hinge on which has the best photojournalism program, they all have the same one.

I would concur with Eric that 8x12 prints and frames shouldn't be that difficult to come by. For a long time when I was shooting film, the popular size for even 35mm negs was 8x12 (double the dimensions of the popular 4x6 print). 8x12 is more reflective of the native image size.

"David, what do you mean by going "the civilian route"? Is that what you are currently doing? Do you still sign a contract, or? Am I being delusional, or overly romantic, in my notion that the military might provide me with opportunities tough to find in the civilian world without a long impressive list of credentials?"

 

"The civilian route" is what I am now. It's basically the same as being a civilian anywhere, you find a job that interests you, you send them your resume, you go through an interview process and if they like you, they hire you. No contracts like being on active duty, you quit or change jobs whenever you like. No past military experience required (although it helps - veterans get bonus points). And as a civilian, you aren't going to be told to go into a war zone (though every so often, there are opportunities for volunteers who want to do so).

 

Based on your comment about wanting to be attached to a squadron, etc., and travel with them, you don't want to be a civilian. Most of our positions are attached to the various bases. We don't deploy. In that regard, we're exactly the opposite of what you're searching for.

 

And you're right, the military will grant you opportunities that might not be available anywhere else, unless you bring with you a long resume and lots of credentials. With the military, you don't have to come bearing a portfolio to be a photographer, for example.

 

The military will have you take a test early on, called the ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery); the test is designed to help recruiters determine whether or not you have an aptitude for job XYZ, in your case, photography. The ASVAB is graded in such a way that, for example, they've got a certain batch of questions they consider for if you want to be a photographer, and another batch of questions they consider if you want to be a cook, etc.; it's not a single grade, but a series of grades that are combined and measured in different ways in order to determine what jobs you have an aptitude for. The fact that you have a degree in photography won't matter at this point, you still have to take the test and meet a certain standard off the test scoring to be considered. If you are considered, then the military will send you to their own photo school and re-train you to be a military photographer (your degree still won't matter, and some people have had trouble handling the schooling because they'd think they already knew it all having already gone to college for it).

 

They'll also provide you with photo gear (the quality of which will vary from duty station to duty station). Anything you shoot, unless it's deemed classified, you're welcome to add to your personal portfolio (you just can't sell any of it, as it's ultimately property of the government and thus is public domain).

 

Regarding your age and gender, I can tell you the latter is NOT an issue at all. Especially in the post-Clinton years, great steps are taken to ensure that women and minorities get all the same benefits in the military offered to white males. Your age, however, might be an issue; there's a cutoff on how old you can be to enlist (though I don't recall exactly how old that is, I think it's 36). Waivers can be given, though, especially when a branch is hurting for people (Army might be a good choice for that reason).

 

Do you know anyone who's served? I would recommend, if you want, take a friend with military experience along when you talk to the recruiter. Now, the recruiters can get into huge trouble if it's ever proven that they lied or intentionally misled you, and so they will be straight with you. But that doesn't keep them from being, like you said, used car salesmen, wording things a certain way to make them sound better, or simply picking and choosing what they tell you, highlighting the good things and downplaying the bad. If you've got a friend that's been in the service, even if it's not the same branch you're looking at, they might be more keen to catch something that doesn't quite smell right.

 

Also talk to recruiters from more than one branch, and if you can, multiple recruiters from the same branch. Then if somebody feeds you a fish story, you'll know it because it won't jive with what the other recruiters are telling you.

 

And if they promise you anything, get it in writing. The standard policy is that any schools you are promised for joining, any automatic promotions, anything at all that the recruiter says you'll have, it will be in your contract. If he promises you photo school but doesn't put in your contract that you'll begin photo school on XYZ date, you aren't getting photo school. If he tells you that you need to go to this school or do this other thing and then you'll be able to negotiate later for photo school, don't sign - he's lying. If you want to be a photographer, then your contract will outline that as part of your initial training, you WILL be going to photo school. I can't say it strong enough, if it isn't in your contract, written explictly as such, you aren't getting it, so make sure it is. And if you want to be a photographer, even though you've already got a degree in it, you *want* to go to photo school - don't let the recruiter tell you otherwise.

 

FYI, I will say this ... if you go Navy or Coast Guard, they don't have a specific photographer school. In both cases, newswriters and photographers are combined into one job, and so the school you would want is Mass Communications Specialist (Navy) or Public Affairs Specialist (Coast Guard). The other branches have photographers, although they know them under code numbers; the recruiters should be able to show you documentation that the code (called an MOS in most cases) he's signing you up for represents the job you're wanting to do.

 

When I went in, though, my recruiter was straight with me and everything was pretty much what I expected it to be. I think it helped that I'd seen An Officer and a Gentleman a few times, and though that was about Navy OCS (officer) and I was going to Navy boot camp (enlisted), it sort of gave me a good prep for boot camp; if nothing else, it helped me to not take it personally when the company commander told me I was the worst excuse for a sailor he'd ever come across, after seeing the movie I understood that was just how the game was played and in a few weeks, there'd be a new recruit with the honor of being the worst he'd ever seen.

I spent 20 years in the Navy journalism/photography/public affairs realm; now I'm a civilian public affairs officer on a Navy base. Personally, I think this arena is the best job in the armed forces, bar none.

 

There are two types of shooters in the military, enlisted and civilian. Officers are more managerial types, rarely do they pick up a camera. As civilians, we're limited in the type of shooting we do, on account of civilians don't get put in harms way the same as military personnel. If you're wanting to go in theater as a photographer, you're looking at enlisting. Which means boot camp.

 

As for which service is the "best" for photography, that really depends on what sort of shooting you want to do and whether you want to be quasi-military (i.e., Air Force) or ultra-military (i.e., Marine Corps) for your time in uniform.

 

The Air Force is probably the least "military" of the military branches. They have the shortest boot camp, and much of the way they do business is more corporate than the other branches. They put the greatest emphasis on the job you do, whereas the other branches take the attitude that you're a soldier/sailor/Marine first and a photographer second. As such, they have a reputation for treating their junior personnel better, make a point of providing better housing, etc., and thus they have low attrition rates. The bad news is that because nobody's getting out, promotions can be very slow.

 

The Navy just went through a huge merger in the communications field, combining our photographers, journalists, draftsmen (graphic artists) and lithographers (printers) into one mega-job called mass communication specialists. As such, if you go Navy, you won't be a photography specialist, but instead a communication generalist that could easily end up as a writer, as a broadcaster on radio or TV (at an AFRTS affiliate overseas). The Navy does have the advantage that our assignments are the most varied; instead of being at one base somewhere, you could get a tour on a ship and see a lot of the world in a very short time. Traditionally Navy promotions are some of the fastest; truth be told, because of the merger, promotions in the communications arena are very, very slow right now.

 

The Army and the Marines are pretty much everything you think they would be. Right now, the vast majority of soldiers and Marines are pulling duty in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course, that also means that as an Army or Marine photographer, you'll have some grand opportunities to get some great photos. The Marines have the longest boot camp and are by far the most militarily demanding of the branches; the Army comes in second place.

 

Wigwam's a little confused about dream sheets. If you negotiate with your recruiter that you're coming in to be a photographer, you WILL get it in writing (though if the recruiter doesn't want to give you photo school right away, but wants to convince you to go to infantry school or anything else, walk out of his office and sign nothing). Dream sheets come into play once you're already in the service; that's part of a conversation process between you and your detailer as to what your next duty assignment will be. As a photographer, you will go from photo assignment to photo assignment; what's open for discussion is where that assignment is and what you'll be taking pictures of while you are there. If you end up at a state-side base, it is possible that you'll spend all your time taking pictures of grip-and-grins and change-of-command ceremonies, not very exciting. But the emphasis for all branches is on the operational units, so it's more likely that you'll end up in a squadron or on a ship in a field unit, taking photos of your military branch doing whatever it does best.

 

As far as your BFA, it opens up your options a bit. You can go to OCS and become an officer. The pay is better, the prestige is higher ... but you'll almost never get to touch a camera. Even as a photo officer or public affairs officer (which is what I do now), our job is more to manage to program than to actually do the work.

 

If you want to shoot, you need to go enlisted. The pay isn't as good, but your degree will allow you a boost to start off (most branches will bring you in as an E-3 rather than the standard E-1), and having a degree will also improve your promotion potential somewhat over others who don't have degrees.

 

If the pay interests you, here's a link to the current military pay tables:

 

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fy2005paycharts/a/paycharts.htm

 

Also, if you want to go civilian, here's the federal civilian pay rates (as a photographer with a BFA, I'd expect you'll start around the GS-7 area):

 

http://www.opm.gov/oca/06tables/indexGS.asp

Honestly whether or not photography is or isn't art depends on your definition of photography. I looked it up in Websters, and there's a slew of definitions for that tiny three-letter word, two of which apply here:

 

1. Human creativity.

 

5. A making of things that have form and beauty.

 

Most of the other definitions are just variations on a theme. Basically, it comes down to whether you define art in the broader sense of anything that is created, especially that which requires application of human imagination to be created (essentially definition 1), or if you go with the more narrow definition whereas art requires artistic merit, i.e., "form and beauty" (definition 5).

 

Under the broader sense, photography is definitely an art form. It is indeed a tool to create and express ones imagination, not unlike painting, sculpting or music. But just as there are sculptures, paintings and music that don't have artistic merit and thus don't qualify as art under the more narrow definition, so is the same for photography.

I agree with Rand that the Domkes are nice bags, but it should be noted that they aren't very protective of your gear, which might be a consideration when traveling. Domke keeps the padding minimal so to allow easier access to the gear and also because it makes the bag a lot more maliable (thus it sort of forms to your body rather than sticking out). That makes them great for sideline shooters and photojournalists, but not so great for travelers.

 

I've heard of people that put their gear in something like a Pelican hard case for the trip, but once they get to their destination, they transfer it all over to the Domke.

Have you seen the new National Geographic backpacks? I don't know much about them, but on the web they look pretty cool and they've gotten strong reviews. They hold a lot of gear and still have other pockets for other stuff (food, jacket, etc.); they're well padded to protect your gear; they're shaped so they don't stick out far from your back (so it's easier to move around in narrow places); and they dont scream "photo backpack" like a lot of other bags do.

 

http://shop.nationalgeographic.com/product/199/3639/121.html

A guy in my office has a pair of D200's that he shoots everything with ... nature, sports, Civil War re-enactments, grip & grins, you name it. And the D200 has never let him down. He says he's never gotten the full 5 fps the camera is supposed to have (though how you could know that outside of a lab is beyond me, so I think he's just guessing), but even at 4-5 fps, he's come back with some excellent shots, even of sports.

 

On the other hand, one of the other photo shops on the base has mostly D1H bodies (the D2H's predecessor). The images they've provided us have worked fine enough for newspaper useage, but they don't enlarge worth a damn at all. Of course, that's the D1H and not the D2H, but still. In my office we question why on Earth they even bought the D1H's since this is a shop that NEVER shoots sports or action, but instead is primarily interested in portaiture for advertising purposes.

 

Anyhow, what I'm trying to say is, unless you're a dedicated sports photographer who needs absolutely the ultimate in fast burst rates, I personally think the D200 is the better of the two cameras. And 4-5 fps is nothing to sneeze at, unless you absolutely do need faster.

"So is tech school not really a good place to learn about photo because they don't tell you everything that college does?"

 

They'll teach you the fundamentals. The biggest difference between college and a tech school is that college will teach you a lot of things that have nothing to do with shooting. English, math, science ... even photography-related, you'll get a lot of theory-related, history of, that sort of thing. And they'll do a lot to teach you the various kinds of photography that's out there, whereas in the military tech school, they'll teach you what you need to know in order to do the kind of shooting they need you to do.

 

If you decide to also go to college in photography, be aware that a lot of your military schooling will count toward that. And the Air Force will pay for it all.

 

As for how the pay is for photography, it's the same as it is for any other career field in the military. Those pay rates are a matter of record, which can be found at http://www.dod.mil/dfas/militarypay/2006militarypaytables/2007_Web_Pay_Table.pdf. Your pay will consist of three main parts: base pay (which you'll get no matter what), Basic Allowance for Housing (unless you live in the barracks), and Basic Allowance for Subsistance (unless you get a meal card and thus eat at the chow hall for all your meals). You might also qualify for aircrew pay, hazardous duty pay, etc., depending on your duty assignment. FYI, pays are taxed by the government (just like a civilian job), allowances are tax-free; if you end up in a tax-free zone like Iraq, your pays are also tax-free.

In most of the multipoint focusing system cameras I've seen, the camera reads the eye of the photographer to figure out what the subject is (the assumption being that the photographer is looking directly at whatever is most important in the photo). It doesn't just randomly pick a point. The fact that the 1D Mk III has 45 points for your eye to lock in on simply means it's considerably more precise than those that came before; but it should still be your eye that tells the camera what should be in focus.

You're 16, really just starting out in photography? I'm with Dan, the body that would do you the best service is the Rebel XT/350D. A lot of places still stock it, the innards are pretty much identical to the 30D (the 30D's advantage is a more solidly built body), and it would be cheaper than even the Rebel XTi. Adorama has refurbished XT's for $425.

 

Or you can consider the Nikon D50, also a great body. Refurbished on Adorama for $400. My daughter's got a D50 and she gets great photos with it.

 

In either case, you're going to get a body for a lot cheaper than either of the ones you suggested, and either of those cameras can do everything you're wanting it to do.

 

To decide between the Nikon and the Canon, your best bet is to go to a camera store and handle them both. It's as simple as which one feels better to you in your hands, which one do you like the layout of the controls better, etc. They're both great cameras, so there won't be a wrong answer on that particular test.

"Defense Information School(DINFOS)Command"

 

Yep, that's the school that taught me most of what I know about photography today. Though I attended when they were still out at Fort Benjamin Harrison, near Indianapolis (Fort Ben was closed in the 90s by the BRAC commission). I had so much fun at that school, especially coming back for the intermediate photojournalism course.

 

Being Navy, I never got to play around in the mud and trees like the guy in the photo Andrew provided, though.

"Since the camera isn't available yet (at least not in the US as far as I know), nobody can give you any quantitative data right now."

 

These guys got one of the last prototypes and did a pretty extensive field test.

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A.HTM

"It's surely an over-priced camera when 5D could be bought for only $2300."

 

Sorry, but the 5D is really just a 30D with a full-frame sensor; the 1-series bodies are much, much better cameras as far as capabilities and build quality. There's no comparision.

"I have narrowed down my search to H1 Photo, Calumet, Adorama & B&H Photo."

 

That's pretty much the short list I was planning to recommend, as well. Beach Photo also has a pretty good rating, as well.

Jason --

 

Answering your queries one-by-one ...

 

"1. AF photogs seem to win the most awards."

 

Not true. Each branch of the service has our own media awards, and then the first-place winners from each branch compete against each other in the annual Thomas Jefferson Awards competition (which is going on right now at the Defense Information School). In my own experience, I've seen more Army winners than anything else; Air Force seems to come in second.

 

"2. Officers don't get to do any photographing - so you've got to get enlisted to do any real shooting. A. Problem - you have to do a lot of boring stuff before you get to the good stuff. B. Problem - you get paid less. a. However, you do get paid more if you have a BA/S and you still enlist instead of trying to get commissioned."

 

Enlisted personnel do do the lion's share of the shooting; officer's are managers mostly. As for when you get to do the "good stuff", that's the same as anywhere, as an intern/apprentice, you have to earn your stripes and prove yourself capable; however, opportunities to shoot do still come, even at the lowest paygrades, and the best shooters do prove themselves early. Also, it depends much on where you're stationed; smaller shops don't have the luxury of not using their junior shooters. And regarding pay, sorry, but there's no pay bonus for having a degree. An airman is an airman is an airman, degree or not. What the degree does offer is an improved opportunity for other airmen without degrees, and that will bring higher pay, but the degree itself won't get you money.

 

"3. From what I've been told, yes you can work on a degree while you are in the military but no, they will not let you major in art."

 

You can work on a degree in the military, and you can major in art or anything else you want to. The military will not dictate your degree program. They will also pay for it, through tuition assistance or the Montgomery G.I. Bill program (again, anything you want to study). However, if you're relying on classes provided by the military to get your degree, chances are there won't be very many art classes.