What photography schooling did you take?

[Cheryl Jacobs]

Entirely self-taught from day one. That's how I learn best.

Of course, since I do workshops, I'm glad for those who learn best that way! .

 

[Sean]

I got sucked into I.T. and started job hopping to travel some, first went to Colorado, then landed a gig in NZ. After just a few weeks in NZ I felt like I had come home, and the thought of leaving this amazing place has not crossed my mind since. It's tough being far away from family and friends back home but you just have to weigh up the pros and cons and go with what feels right..

 

[Konical]

Good Evening,

Self-taught for the most part. Photo magazines and Kodak publications back in the '60's were major sources. Trial and error (mostly error) was (is??) my principle method.

Konical

 

[Alex Hawley]

One week formal training, U.S. Navy Submarine Surveillance Photography course. Before that;

Parents who were amateur photographers - learned any room could become a darkroom. Dad processed B&W film/paper in the kitchen on the farm. We did the same thing on the submarine. Home-grown water in both places.

Photography merit badge in Boy Scouts.

Self-taught the rest of the way. Today, my darkroom is about the same size as that tight little pantry on the submarine.

 

[Flotsam]

After seeing a number of posts here, it occurs to me how many people I have worked with over the years who originally got their photographic training in the Navy. Quite a few although they all seemed to be on Carriers. I'll admit that this is the first time that I've heard of a Submarine Photographer.

 

[Alex Hawley]

I'll admit that this is the first time that I've heard of a Submarine Photographer.

Neal, you thought there was just an eyeball looking through the periscope.

My boat, USS City of Corpus Christi, SSN 705, returning from initial sea trials, October 1982.

 

[kwmullet]

My first professional training was while I was in the Navy. [...]

Greetings fellow squids! I'm an ex US Navy PH (Photographer's Mate) too! I was the photo dweeb in middle- and high-school, then joined the Navy for five years, got basic survey (very good school, IMO) photo training in Pensacola, FL, spent all my tour that wasn't spent in training on a carrier (USS Saratoga). In about '82, I got sensitometry and Kodak EH38 rollfilm processor maintenance training in Key West, FL.

That covers about 1975-1985. Sometime around 1983 or 1984, I got distracted by computers, then started doing various things in computing from 1986 to 2002. For the past two years, I've operated a small portait and wedding studio, and I've learned as much about photography and about what I like to photograph (which has changed significantly during these two years) as I had during all the previous years put together.

The combination of economics and the solitute of being a one-man shop have motivated me back to getting a Regular Day Job, so I'm about to enter a new season of my photographic life. I'm looking forward to learning all the things I'll learn and do this time around.

-KwM-

 

[Flotsam]

Alex,
I was thinking of a lot of pictures taken with wide-angle lenses in cramped quarters.

Beautiful picture. The drama and symmetry. Breathtaking but as the viewer, I feel like I'm going to get very wet very soon.

 

[isaacc7]

Different kinds of schooling...

I received my BFA in Film, Photography, and Visual arts from Ithaca college back in '94. I was considering pursuing an MFA for a while and I got some great advice... There are considerable differences between schools and you need to make sure you are going to the right school for the right reason. If you're looking for technical skills, many community colleges will do fine. There are more advanced technical schools out there like RIT or Brooks, but I'm sure they will be getting away from traditional photography as their main focus before too long.
In my view, technical considerations are a given at the better programs. After all, anyone can learn the technical part if they have lots of time to do it or are motivated by a paycheck to get it. The hard part is learning what is going on in photography and see where the hell you're going with your work. Not having any direction and trying to find it is very difficult, and a GOOD arts program will help you. A bad one will simply try to mold you into whatever they think photography should be. Ultimately, an arts program should be about much more than making nice pictures, you should learn quite a bit about yourself in the process. That's what makes it so tough After all, if you just wanted nice pictures, you could buy many of them from many places. Why you feel like you need to make them should be an important question in any arts program. If you're not interested in those types of questions or that process, check out a local community college or go to some workshops, they're a lot of fun, you'll learn some very useful things, and they don't have the time commitment (or cost) that grad school has.


Isaac

 

[ThomHarrop]

I have bachelor's and master's degrees, both from Brooks Institute. Best campus, best climate among photography schools. Nearly every job I have had since I got out of school was given to me because I went to Brooks. That and my boyish good looks I guess.

 

[bjorke]

I went to a couple of art schools, most notably CalArts when Catherine Lord (of AfterImage) was there. The technology overlaps with filmmaking for the most part. 20+ years of filmmaking pretty-much drowns-out the stuff you learned in school, in terms of the volume of learning-by-doing that it entails. I also was a model when I was a teenager, and learned a fair bit from local catalog and ad shooters, and at the same age worked as a babysitter to a newspaper shooter who lived across the street from us, and relished the job because once the kids were asleep I could (with his blessing) devour his photo-book library and his regular admonitions that equipment was secondary to ideas and people. He's now photo editor at National Geographic, guess he had a clue

 

[sparx]

Took a City & Guilds course last year. Found it thoroughly enjoyable and very useful. My photography improved noticeably from start to finish.

 

[modafoto]

Self-taught with lots of input from books and fellow members of my photo club. I did one course that lasted 12 weeks where I learned the basics of film development and printing (including a little toning et.al.) plus basic composition and techniques of photography with an SLR.
My teacher was very narrow minded IMHO so he wasn't very good at accepting your personal preferences and style of photography.

Morten

 

[arigram]

I did go to school for art (see my introduction post) but I only took one class on photography and didn't teach me much more than what an apparture is.
Everything I have learned has come from books, the internet and experience shooting. Unfortunately I have had no luck finding a seious teacher to help me with certain matters, but I survived well so far!
When I got the Hasselblad last year, I was thinking of doing a masters on photography and maybe even a carrier but now, after the storm of digital has flattened too many good things in photography, I changed my mind.

 

[rogueish]

2 night classes at Humber College in Etobicoke and one at Sheridan College in Oakville. Lots of books, APUG (Thanks everybody!), trail and error. The biggest impact on my photography was when I started developing and printing my own.
Have had a lot of fun and far too much agrivation in night calsses. I like taking the classes and the fellow students are usually great. BUT if you end up with a mediocre or "my way or the highway" instructor, the learning aspect could be lacking. With the right teacher, it's fun and enlightening. One class at Humber was taught by Ethan (hope I spelled that right and wish I could remember his last name) and he was great!

Last night was last class at Sheridan, and while I will miss the darkroom and some of the people, I'm glad its over. I didn't like the Instructor at all, felt the program was lacking in darkroom technics... well that's another rant.
Yet for all my whining, I'm going back for more punishment next semester :rolleyes: All in all, I would say I have learned at least something from each class.

 

[photomc]

One class in college, rest from books and trial and error, and error, and error..should fire my teacher (self taught)

As has been stated, have learned more about photography here than anywhere. Have made that point many times recently - when telling people about this site.

 

[SuzanneR]

I have a BFA in photography from Pratt Institute. At the time it was a very artsy program, lots of critiques etc. They also had a foundation program, drawing, painting, sculpture (ugh!), that I think was really useful for training my eye. I still go back to drawing when I'm in a rut, and I think anyone wanting to improve their photography can benefit by taking some drawing courses. Although, I had a great experience there, they lacked really good technical teachers. We had a professor who was a very good, working commercial photographer for our studio class, but he was a lousy teacher, who rarely gave demonstrations. About a year ago decided to take a lighting course at NESOP to fill this real lack in my skills, and found a great teacher, who did excellent demonstrations. I also took a darkroom class there to brush up in those skills after a long hiatus, and really got a lot out of it.

As many have said before, I think the teacher can really make or break a class. I found the critiques in college helpful, but I just wish they hadn't been quite so light on the craft, and offered a better balance between the visual and the technical. If time will allow, I still plan to take classes. I've learned quite a bit here on APUG, but you can't beat the feedback you can get from teachers and other students. There always seems to be more to learn!

 

[anyte]

I've never taken a class. I plan to take at least one class next fall. As of current I'm teaching myself what I can by reading a few books and through trial & error and with the help of APUG.

 

[lee]

I will put my 2 cents in for my alma mater, Mass College of Art in Boston. Back in the old days it was all in one building and next to Beth Israel Hospital. Now they have moved to a large campus in the area. In the photo dept all of the instructors have received at least one Guggenheim and all have work in major collections and museums around the country.

lee\c

 

[Bob Carnie]

Fanshawe College, London Ontario, 1973-76
Fell in love with photography the first time I saw an image come up in the Developer, I am still amazed everytime the image emerges, feel a little bit like a magician when this happens.
At the time this school was very heavy into the practical applications and pushed us real hard.
I would like to give my praises to John Kippen, and Don Dunsmore for their help and encourgament during this period of my life.
John and Don gave constant praise when we did something right and gave us shit when we didn't work hard enough.

 

[James Bleifus]

I took a couple classes in high school with a guy who was a physics teacher as well as a photo teacher. He was pretty grouchy. He was a big fan of the west coast influence (this was the early '80s and Imogen Cunningham and Minor White had only been dead for a few years and Brett Weston and Ansel Adams were still alive) but he couldn't understand the Zone System. He would say that it was extremely complicated and he couldn't explain it. And he used HC-110 because that's what Ansel used though he didn't know about rating film speed. I got thrown out of his class over a conflict about two weeks before he left the school under duress.

After that I've remained largely an autodidact. Although I took a few more high school photo classes, the only formal experiences I've had that were valuable were a couple of seminars with Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee.

Cheers, James

 

[Lee Shively]

Other than a couple of weekend seminars over the years, I learned by making every mistake I could. Sometimes multiple times. I'm still learning.

 

[philldresser]

I've had no formal training bar a 5 evening course in 'Advanced Darkroom' which I used to get darkroom time.

My mentors have been photography books and lots of trial and error.

Phill

 

[hortense]

Self-taught for many (many) years. Then in 1980 Fred Picker's 2-week school for beginning large format; early on in Bruce Barnbaum's career, a 2-day course; 2 1/2-years ago, John's Sexton's hectic 1-week workshop (by far the BEST - leanred a LOT)

 

[k_jupiter]

Tim, this I find interesting. Of all the graduates of Brooks ( Santa Barbara) how many do you think are working professionals in photography.

In my experience, a very high percentage are privileged LA, kids who want to be photographic "stars" a la Arney Fretag (sp?) or film makers. I wonder what your experience was with this.

I, like most portrait photographer started by the seat of my pants doing weddings and gradually got into doing better work by attending seminars. I attended Winona School of Professional Photography in Winona Lake Indiana (now Chicago)which is run by Professional Photographers of American.These were usually one week seminars taught by working professionals who came to teach for a week.

I attended about 7 different ones of these as well as West Coast School (Brooks Institute) and a number of others as well as seminars put on by the Professional Photographers of Canada.

I believe that although full time schools are the best way to learn technical information, that often the best people photographers are self taught. I think that in Europe that a commercial photographer has to apprentice although I'm not sure about a portrait photographer.



Michael MCBlane

I don't know about Brooks, I have heard it is a fine school, I have seen a mess of work on the web by Brooks graduates and am suitably impressed. As for NESOP, many of my cohorts joined the legions of assistants in the Boston and New York areas. I didn't because I needed to make a living on a semi permanent level as I got married a year or so after school. I spent a couple of years doing graphic arts work for a small screen printing shop, Filene's Advertising department and a high tech plate making firm north of Boston. I only got out when I realized most people making stainless/copper printing plates eventually die of cancer. No thanks. I also turned down a number of jobs that just didn't interest me.

After I left graphic arts, I went back to school studying Computer Engineering. I worked in the darkroom at the major college I went to and was not particularly impressed with the FA curriculum. Lots of Juniors and Seniors running around, not a clue as to how to make a decent B&W print and wondering "What would the instructor like?". I couldn't get across to them that it shouldn't matter what the teacher likes, it their work.

David Akiba (do a web search) was one of two of my prime instructors at NESOP. Alan Metnik was the other (If anyone knows what happend to Alan, p-mail me). You got the message early that you didn't take photos for David, you took them for yourself and defended them in class every week from critique by both David and your other classmates. The weak didn't survive. What survived was technically strong work that had a semblance of artistic vision. Your artistic vision. Very few people left NESOP with an incomplete understanding of how to be an assistant or an accomplished darkroom working in the field.

Could it be done by self learning? Of course. Thi way though you are forced to bring your artistic and photographic standards up to a point where you are at least employable. The student body in 1985 was a mixture of young kids with out a clue and people like myself who might have been making a life change. I was 28 years old, a veteran, an electron equipment field service engineer who had no real responsibilities except to learn something new. Hell, if I hadn't gone there, I would have probably wound up at the North Bennett School or some culinary institute. Not bad choices.

Some of my best friends in this industry taught themselves. My hat is off to them.


tim in san jose