Considering earning an MFA in Photography

[IpseLux]

Education is always a worthy endeavor. It’s not about what you’ll earn, it is about you. Investing in you as a person and your interests.
Some general advice…. Pick the best school. It’s not about a degree. But studying under the tutelage of those whose work you admire. And in a community that will enrich your experience.
Education is a noble profession. And art is a necessity. Neither is generally well paid. But a satisfying life is preferable to riches.
Just remember the difference between art and science. An artist does. A scientist knows. Practice your art. Do. Knowing how to be an artist is not enough.
Best of luck. I hope you will become a great photographer and a fine educator.

 

[Paul Howell]

That said, the higher-ed market is very tight right now. Most colleges depend to some extent on government support, whether public or private, and the first thing they cut when funds are shrinking is faculty jobs. Hopefully, that may change in the future and these things can be very different from one community to another, so you may well find a college that's a good fit and has money to make a new hire!

One factor may come in play, Federally Guaranteed Student Loans are now limited to 11 professional degrees, unless OP has a stipend or grant or private funds she will need to barrow at much higher rates, if she can find a loan as the labor market for MFA is limited.

 

[Tel]

I’m curious about the websites listing galleries that accept submissions. To my (limited) knowledge, galleries won’t look at anything unsolicited unless it is a referral or through events such as portfolio reviews.

ArtDeadline.com lists calls for entry and other similar websites that also maintain lists of such calls. Using sites like this I found 1650 Gallery in LA, operated by Andy Overtoom who I knew from a filmmaking group (quite coincidentally) and the Black Box Gallery in Portland and the Glasgow Gallery of Photography, all of which have exhibited my work. These are all legit brick-and-mortar galleries that exhibit and sell work. That said, I've not sold a lot of stuff and certainly never made a profit from it. But in academe, that doesn't matter. My department colleagues routinely made movies that were only screened in minor festivals and none of my colleagues in the fine arts made any profits from their work. All that matters in the race for tenure and promotion is that your work was exhibited somewhere and you have a nice long list of shows in your CV. (1650 Gallery is no longer--Andy was art director, as I recall, on Spongebob and got transferred to Montreal, so had to leave LA.)

 

[pamphoto]

Pam, I would encourage you to get the MFA. A terminal degree (there is no PhD in art per se, so the MFA is it) is your ticket to aspire to college-level teaching. To be competitive, you'll also need a portfolio of work, published or exhibited; the bigger the better. I did an MFA in theatre (production design, to be specific) and spent a few years in New York practicing and teaching, but what I found was that though the MFA was a requirement it didn't limit my choice of subject too strictly. I've taught in an art college at one point and for the last 30-odd years I taught television and film production, because those are fields in which I also worked professionally. My point is that doing a terminal degree in one field may not rule out changing tracks to another if circumstances warrant. So I say do the MFA and get started on showing your work ASAP. There are websites listing galleries that accept submissions and you'll want to get going submitting your work because you'll be taking on two jobs in parallel: getting the degree and building your portfolio. I had the good fortune to build a relationship with a gallery in LA (though I live in NJ) that hung a lot of my still photo work and gave me a substantial portfolio to crow about at my college job, even though it wasn't directly related to my teaching brief. And you'll need a thick skin--academia can be brutal if you take it too seriously, but less so if you enjoy the teaching part. (I really enjoyed working in TV; it was actually less stressful than the teaching gig was!)

That said, the higher-ed market is very tight right now. Most colleges depend to some extent on government support, whether public or private, and the first thing they cut when funds are shrinking is faculty jobs. Hopefully, that may change in the future and these things can be very different from one community to another, so you may well find a college that's a good fit and has money to make a new hire!

Thank you for the information. I have been showing work, though not as often as I'd like. I do like acquiring skills and like the idea of the discipline that comes with being in school. I am exploring possibilities right now and see what options I might have.

 

[pamphoto]

. Pick the best school. It’s not about a degree. But studying under the tutelage of those whose work you admire. And in a community that will enrich your experience.
Education is a noble profession. And art is a necessity. Neither is generally well paid. But a satisfying life is preferable to riches.
Just remember the difference between art and science. An artist does. A scientist knows. Practice your art. Do. Knowing how to be an artist is not enough.
Best of luck. I hope you will become a great photographer and a fine educator.

Thank you. I have two options close to me right now for schools. These I can easily get to from my home. I do like the idea of studying under certain people. I am wondering if taking more of these classes through private photographers might be a better idea. But then, I wouldn't have the option to teach, at least at a school. Maybe I could teach privately at some point.
I will continue to practice photography. I don't think I could stop.

 

[pamphoto]

Thank you everyone for your insights, opinions, and thoughts. You have given me a lot to think about. I am considering my options and trying to find my path.
I am making notes from what everyone mentioned and appreciate everyone who took the time to comment.
I am thankful for this group of photographers!

 

[Tel]

Whatever you do, keep shooting! You've got a great eye....

 

[Pieter12]

ArtDeadline.com lists calls for entry and other similar websites that also maintain lists of such calls.

Most calls for entry are for paid submissions to galleries, some museums. They are more likely to be a source of income for the gallery than a consideration for representation.

 

[pamphoto]

Whatever you do, keep shooting! You've got a great eye....

Thank you!

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Most calls for entry are for paid submissions to galleries, some museums. They are more likely to be a source of income for the gallery than a consideration for representation.

It's a catch-22 - if you don't have an exhibition resume, many galleries/museums won't even look at your work. So you need to balance your resume-building through submitting to group shows with the financial hit of submitting to group shows, and the moral repugnance of the gallery making money off of work they didn't show (through entry fees).

 

[DREW WILEY]

I had a friend who was ecstatic when a private venue sold about 8 of his prints in a single day (to a co-worker who felt sorry for him). When he tallied up all his expenses afterward, including the framing cost, he almost seemed pleased that he had lost only $200 a print to put them up (there were about 20 in total, so that around a $2000 loss for a week or so of wall space). That's stage coach robbery, not representation.

I've never had a resume. That seems like academic fluffing of feathers. What I did have is recognized artist friends who respected the quality of my own work, and referred galleries and curators to me, not the other way around. That takes some luck and connections; but one also has to have something suitable to begin with, or at least recognizable potential to produce it. When you're "in", you're in. But sometimes you wonder if you really want to be in that world. Shows can be a lot of work. Glad I did most of them way back before family responsibilities.

 

[Pieter12]

It's a catch-22 - if you don't have an exhibition resume, many galleries/museums won't even look at your work. So you need to balance your resume-building through submitting to group shows with the financial hit of submitting to group shows, and the moral repugnance of the gallery making money off of work they didn't show (through entry fees).

Most galleries/museums won’t look at your work unless you have been referred by someone. That and the pay-for-play portfolio review that rarely results in a show or representation. Socialization in the art world helps, going to openings, meeting and mixing with other artists and collectors—that might result in some worthwhile connections.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Most galleries/museums won’t look at your work unless you have been referred by someone. That and the pay-for-play portfolio review that rarely results in a show or representation. Socialization in the art world helps, going to openings, meeting and mixing with other artists and collectors—that might result in some worthwhile connections.

Yes, you're not getting in the door at a gallery without some kind of referral or personal connection, but one thing commercial galleries look at is your exhibition history (and sales history). If you don't have that history, they're not going to want to invest time and money in showing and marketing your work. YOU have to put in the work and prove you're worth it to the gallery. And just a single word-of-mouth referral isn't going to get you more than a glance at your portfolio - gallerists want to see consistency, and they want to keep hearing your name from multiple sources. Thinking otherwise is buying into the myth of the artist laboring in their studio to produce a perfect body of work that then is magically discovered and they are transformed into a name brand artist overnight. That may have happened to one or two artists, but counting on that method to build a career is like praying to win the lottery without buying a ticket.

 

[Pieter12]

Whatever you do, keep shooting! You've got a great eye....

Where have you seen her work?

 

[Don_ih]

Where have you seen her work?

A wild guess: her Instagram account - linked in her signature.

 

[Pieter12]

A wild guess: her Instagram account - linked in her signature.

Wild. I could have sworn her signature had a dead link to a flikr account...I must be hallucination.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Sales history has little to do with artistic credibility. Some private galleries are tax write-offs for the rich or their wives, which operate more as a labor of love and interest rather than as a source as more income. They show and promote what appeals to them, or which aspiring practitioners they believe in. Some of their representation goes on to make a more public impact, some of it doesn't. Not all galleries are the same in either their objectives nor financial standing. It's a pretty hard business model to stand on its own, given the high overhead.

On the other hand, there are a lot of just plain sleazy "tourist trap" venues which hold onto prime locations through deceptive selling practices, or by taking advantage of artists rather than sponsoring them. No need to elaborate, except to be aware of their presence and tactics.

Water seeks its own level. Quite a few of my prints sold to other photographers, including some famous ones. I've never sold a print to a tourist in my entire life. Architects bought a number, wealthy collectors, etc, but also personal friends. Got extra income when I especially needed it, but didn't want to pursue that as a lifestyle. I photograph and make prints primarily for personal reasons, not commercial.

There are other more dependable ways to make a living. And since, in my main job, I interacted quite frequently with museum crews and university facilities at multiple levels in terms of technical consultation and actual supplies, I knew about the sketchiness of those paths too, in terms of career reliability, and how much is actually dependent upon intermittent philanthropic funding and even unpaid volunteers. That's all fine; but one still has to pay their bills.

 

[Tel]

There are other more dependable ways to make a living.

Absolutely. And to bring us back to Pam's original post, she's considering launching a career in teaching, in which building a portfolio of exhibition entries is just a part of a larger process. In today's education market, just having a terminal degree in the subject isn't enough to make you employable. Exhibition and/or publication are absolute requirements for employment and advancement. And the pay-to-play economy has become entrenched in academe as well; friends of mine who teach in the sciences tell me that it's now the norm to pay certain journals to publish your work. It used to be more or less merit-driven but those days seem to be gone.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, "pay for play" amounts to corruption - tipping the scales in someone's favor. It has always been around, even in the sciences, but never has been regarded as an acceptable norm. More often in University settings it takes the form of slaving away doing the hard R&D yourself, but then some higher up taking the credit for it. That's one reason I didn't want to pursue an academic research career myself. I already had a couple of my papers plagiarized.

And I've known some University art/photog professors who were lousy photographers or painters themselves - just philosophical hot air, predictable and P. correct for their own demographic pigeonhole at the time. But any aspiring student should sniff around in advance, and seek out nurturing thought environments and unpretentious helpful people instead of cogs in the academic machine.

 

[Ian Grant]

Unless you have done a Masters yourself it's all hearsay and not based on anything particularly factual, because you don't have the experience.

A Masters in Fine Art Photography is not just about your own work, it's about research & critique of other photographers work, and then usually exploring your own work, to a much more vigorous level than a Bachelors. It's unlikely you'd be accepted to study a Masters unless you have an excellent Portfolio and then have an in depth interview, and usually a good Bachelors Degree.

I can only speak from UK experience, but a Masters if preferred for teaching Art photography, and then you are expected to be exhibiting /publishing your work as well.

Yes, you're not getting in the door at a gallery without some kind of referral or personal connection, but one thing commercial galleries look at is your exhibition history (and sales history). If you don't have that history, they're not going to want to invest time and money in showing and marketing your work. YOU have to put in the work and prove you're worth it to the gallery. And just a single word-of-mouth referral isn't going to get you more than a glance at your portfolio - gallerists want to see consistency, and they want to keep hearing your name from multiple sources. Thinking otherwise is buying into the myth of the artist laboring in their studio to produce a perfect body of work that then is magically discovered and they are transformed into a name brand artist overnight. That may have happened to one or two artists, but counting on that method to build a career is like praying to win the lottery without buying a ticket.

As @TheFlyingCamera says it's that referrals, personal connections, also that provable history. You do make the contacts doing a Masters.

I have to admit I began making the contacts through workshops in the mid 1980s, and networking in photo circles in the 1990, with a few small exhibitions before my first large one in 1994. Early ones were self funded, inexpensive, but no gallery fees. The 1994 Exhibition was booked by the gallery in 1991 based on the project's work in progress, I had regional arts funding, plus I knew I'd get paid a gallery fee, I was able to get materials (mostly paper but a bit of film) at cost from my supplier, in return for a mention on posters, invites etc.

When I did my Photography MA 2001-4 I'd kind of already put myself through much of it a decade earlier. The question would be was it worth it, definitely I became even more focussed on the ways I was working, concentrating on specific projects. That didn't/doesn't mean not shooting outside them, that's been the case for 40 years, those may be the spark of a next project, you just maybe slowly add . . . . .

So the opposite of Drew's doom-laden replies. The only thing I'd agree on is don't pay to display.

I'd just say to @pamphoto go for it, it's your choice and future, enjoy, question, make more great images.

I did end up teaching after my MA, and quickly (3 months) becoming head of college department with a large external budget, in a different field Music. Skills are transferable I was essentially teaching young bands how to market themselves, and their online presence. It's only slightly different to how we need to do this as photographers.

Always expand knowledge, and experience.

Ian

 

[DREW WILEY]

To imply "no experience" just because one does has not themselves taken a specific route hardly makes sense if they have abundant opportunity to converse and socialize with those who have. One person's highway to achievement might well be a convoluted unnecessary detour to someone else. And there was a time when notable art programs were taught by people chosen for their actual accomplishments, who never had degrees themselves.

The point is - seek out what seems best for yourself, an experience you will appreciate whether it pans out or not
as a career path. I intensely studied all kinds of things which never factored into my income, simply because I was interested in them to begin with.

 

[Tel]

And there was a time when notable art programs were taught by people chosen for their actual accomplishments, who never had degrees themselves.

Ditto that; one of the best professors I learned from in graduate school had a BA in English but an excellent professional track record in theatre. My sense, from recent personal experience, is that such hires are not the norm these days but I know from staying in touch with my old university that they are still being made in a few cases.

 

[pamphoto]

Wild. I could have sworn her signature had a dead link to a flikr account...I must be hallucination.

Must be someone else, I don't have a flikr account.

 

[Carnie Bob]

Unless you have done a Masters yourself it's all hearsay and not based on anything particularly factual, because you don't have the experience.

A Masters in Fine Art Photography is not just about your own work, it's about research & critique of other photographers work, and then usually exploring your own work, to a much more vigorous level than a Bachelors. It's unlikely you'd be accepted to study a Masters unless you have an excellent Portfolio and then have an in depth interview, and usually a good Bachelors Degree.

I can only speak from UK experience, but a Masters if preferred for teaching Art photography, and then you are expected to be exhibiting /publishing your work as well.



As @TheFlyingCamera says it's that referrals, personal connections, also that provable history. You do make the contacts doing a Masters.

I have to admit I began making the contacts through workshops in the mid 1980s, and networking in photo circles in the 1990, with a few small exhibitions before my first large one in 1994. Early ones were self funded, inexpensive, but no gallery fees. The 1994 Exhibition was booked by the gallery in 1991 based on the project's work in progress, I had regional arts funding, plus I knew I'd get paid a gallery fee, I was able to get materials (mostly paper but a bit of film) at cost from my supplier, in return for a mention on posters, invites etc.

When I did my Photography MA 2001-4 I'd kind of already put myself through much of it a decade earlier. The question would be was it worth it, definitely I became even more focussed on the ways I was working, concentrating on specific projects. That didn't/doesn't mean not shooting outside them, that's been the case for 40 years, those may be the spark of a next project, you just maybe slowly add . . . . .

So the opposite of Drew's doom-laden replies. The only thing I'd agree on is don't pay to display.

I'd just say to @pamphoto go for it, it's your choice and future, enjoy, question, make more great images.

I did end up teaching after my MA, and quickly (3 months) becoming head of college department with a large external budget, in a different field Music. Skills are transferable I was essentially teaching young bands how to market themselves, and their online presence. It's only slightly different to how we need to do this as photographers.

Always expand knowledge, and experience.

Ian

I agree with what Ian says, it is very much like this in Canada as well , I think for the right person a MFA is definitely a door opener.

 

[Carnie Bob]

To imply "no experience" just because one does has not themselves taken a specific route hardly makes sense if they have abundant opportunity to converse and socialize with those who have. One person's highway to achievement might well be a convoluted unnecessary detour to someone else. And there was a time when notable art programs were taught by people chosen for their actual accomplishments, who never had degrees themselves.

The point is - seek out what seems best for yourself, an experience you will appreciate whether it pans out or not
as a career path. I intensely studied all kinds of things which never factored into my income, simply because I was interested in them to begin with.

I also agree with Drew here, years ago the school I attended photo ed brought in a person with no educational certificates but with real world experienc and it benifited all of us.
A little bit of both is needed now. Experience and Study.