What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
62 Comments
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -1/+24All disciplines are better served by personal research.
- Supernova36, on 12/14/2007, -0/+19"Rarely is the question asked: Is our photography students learning?"
- morericeyo, on 12/14/2007, -3/+20Finally, the explanation of kids who take any black and white shot and consider it art.
NOT.
If you decide to take a picture do it, from your angle, from your thoughts, not from what you've seen in a postcard - napk, on 12/14/2007, -2/+15So apparently back in the day photography was all about being drunk or stoned, and getting edited by people who are also drunk and stoned. And it was good. And now it is not.
What an *****. - davecor, on 12/14/2007, -0/+13When I worked at the lab at Brooks Institute we had a sign on the wall ~ "God made the sunset, Nikon made the camera, Kodak made the film... That does NOT make you a photographer!"
Either you have a great eye, or you don't. "Schooling" can't change that very much. Give a pencil to two different people and they will produce vastly different drawings - same with a camera, it's just a tool.
Read "The Tao of Photography" and you'll realize all the equipment in the world is no substitute to being in the moment and connected to your subject. - jisrael, on 12/14/2007, -0/+8The article was a little on the short side but still true; and not just true for photography. My girlfriend and I just graduated from a rather popular art college in the states, neither of us in photography, and we both have the same opinion of our 'education.' Professors will never be as tough as the real world because grades will never mean as much as a paycheck. There are plenty of students who get a degree just cause they can pay the tuition and not because they're artists.
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -0/+8The politically correct spread sheet mentality has unfortunately penetrated all factors of life. You learn by trial and error which leads to experience and the development of a keen eyesight. A good photographer should be like an artist; develop an individual and unique style and not be dependent on Photoshop to mimic the work of others.
- stoneking2312, on 12/14/2007, -0/+8Especially morticians
- flag546, on 12/14/2007, -0/+7Childrens do Learn!
- mediaphile, on 12/14/2007, -0/+7Actually, yeah, that's part of it. Your brain puts priority on color over line structure, so when you see a color photo, most of the processing in your brain is being done on the colors of the photo. With black and white, your brain has no color to focus on, and you're more likely to see the structure of line detail, especially in things with really complicated textures and structures. This is especially true of black and white photos of people and skin, and landscapes (e.g., Ansel Adams). But if there's no interesting texture or line detail to look at, there's not much of a point to b&w over color.
That's not to say that a black and white photo is automatically more artistic, just that there is a difference in the way your brain processes black and white images as opposed to color. - Samburger, on 12/14/2007, -0/+7There's a difference between learning the skills to taking good photography and actually taking good photography. You can't just drift through your college photography program and expect to become the next Ansel Adams. I'm sure students know this and the ones that don't will become mediocre. Same thing goes for painting, drawing, writing and all of the arts. If you just put forth enough effort to pass the class you should by no means expect to become the master of your craft. Hell if schools were able to churn out thousands of Rembrant's and Sally Man's every summer wouldn't it devalue the work at some point?
I guess I see it as kind of a natural selection of sorts. - elhaf, on 12/14/2007, -1/+7Even morticians?
- innocentsinner, on 12/14/2007, -1/+7I want to slap people when they say that black and white makes a picture more artistic.
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -1/+6So, just make up ***** about what things were like 40 year ago, and submit it to Digg now?
- 4newbies, on 12/14/2007, -0/+5I personally enjoy the hippy professors over the politcally correct ones.
- davecor, on 12/14/2007, -1/+6Agreed. My own crackpot theory is that the sensation of "artfulness" comes from your visual cortex trying to deal with a monochrome image.
- Supernova36, on 12/14/2007, -1/+5If he thinks photography lecturers aren't tough and abrasive he definitley hasn't met mine..
Infact, tough, abrasive, but knows the business is pretty much a perfect description of my photography lecturer. - davecor, on 12/14/2007, -1/+5I'm just saying some are born with something that other people could never achieve with a lifetime of work.
Either group will benefit from practice and study, but the untalented will never match the talented.
Call it unfair if you like, but talent is funny like that. Given a thousand years, I'd never be as good as Mozart was in his twenties. I'm OK with that. - iSnooze, on 12/14/2007, -6/+10Great article
- xjeffx, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3As a former photography student... absolutely nothing. I didn't learn jack until I started trying to work in the real world. Now I consider myself a professional photographer but I make very little money and other than how to control a camera (in the most basic ways), I didn't learn anything from school.
- MiddleOfNowhere, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3As others pointed out, this is not only about photography.
I am forty now, and I keep seeing photos, I keep listening to music and watching movies that - as I am told - are "revolutionary", with a lot of theory and clever commentary thrown in.
Problem is: They're not.
Raw, dirty guitars are still great, and so are vulgar, out-of-focus bw shots and disturbing movie sequences. But when I am being told that this particular singer/photographer/director just re-invented the wheel, I can't help laughing. He clearly hasn't. He's just reliving the friggin' Sixties, the freedom his parents (or their stoned friends) fought for; with the extra comfort of a digital safety net: He now has Logic/Photoshop/Final Cut to add "dirty" after doing a safe shot.
And this is just sad.
I'm not grumpy. It's obvious that every new generation needs to feel they just discovered/invented sex, politics, revolution, protest, deconstruction, go-*****-yourself attitude.
Fine, go ahead. Just don't get on my nerves while you are learning to crawl. Come back when you have done something really new. - crashingechelon, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3Well as a photography student I can tell you what I'm learning. There is no correct way to take a photograph. Everyone has their own unique eye at looking at things through a camera lense and what i've found is that usually comes from the kind of person they are. It seems like out of all the classes I've had what gets pushed the most is to try to get out taking a traditional straight on shot and think of different ways to approach it. All I can say that I've really learned or have been taught to do is: correctly load film into a camera, how to take it out of casing and put it into a tank and reel to be processed, cleaning my negatives, how to do the chemical mixings, how to use an enlarger, filters, dodging and burning, the recommended times for processing, cleaning, hypo clearing, selenium toning, and how to spot.
Other then those things I'm free to take whatever subject matter I so choose and how ever I want to photograph them. Since I know how to use the equipment I'm free to experiment with different ways of printing. I guess since my teacher at the university is a known art photographer, she knows how to get you to come out in the photos you take instead of saying a correct way to do things.
All thats not to say that design principles don't do anything for photographs, they do help out a lot and it does help me since part of my college life was spent studying graphic design. The only problem with that was they seem to force you in a direction instead of allowing to free think. There are photographers out there that are good and probably don't know a thing on design principles and that's fine. It's all a matter of how well you can use the tools you're given and how in touch you are with yourself. Practice and trying different styles will help you fine tune your images.
As for the article I'm sure there's a lot of schools that teach in the way he was complaining about. - scabbers, on 12/14/2007, -2/+5He and his generation are completely to blame... but as a typical baby boomer he blames the poor suckers who are being churned out of uni this way.
- Nev9, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3He must not have read the Facebook story concerning "is"
- slayerab, on 12/14/2007, -0/+3I remember AP photo, and having to sit for an hour every week, and having to see the same types of pictures that this described, b anw w pics of depressed girls sitting in a dark addict in a really colorful dress. I just got so tired of it. I tried really hard until everyone started to tell me my best pic was a black and white photo of a chair in the middle of the room.
- NaziHatinChimp, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2Unfortunately teachers can't give you credit for getting drunk and taking pictures of whatever you want. I've tried that. Teachers get paid to teach you about a subject. Real art comes from you and cannot be taught. Most true art teachers would agree.
- stalefries, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2Ugh, tell me about it. A kid in my art class would constantly do the "moody emo kid" photos. Adding insult to injury, he would then go and tweak the sliders in Photoshop just enough so that his picture rested on the precarious cliff of ugly. I don't know how my art teacher (strongly conservative, especially for an artist) even passed that guy.
- ThinkBox, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2My photo professor assisted Ansel Adams for 15 years. The dude is a freaking genius, and he looks just like Stan Lee, kinda funny.
- legoalert33, on 12/14/2007, -1/+3How to take the perfect shots?
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -3/+5"If you decide to take a picture do it, from your angle, from your thoughts, not from what you've seen in a postcard"
That's so original. - brycelb, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2It's obvious that you have never taken even a beginning photography course at a real university. Point and shoot is what you learn at the rec center. I have sold photographs that would cost more than your proposed "photographers setup" that were taken with a $10 plastic camera.
- blizzok, on 12/14/2007, -1/+3This relates to things other than photography. Being a youngster myself, I've noticed that almost all of my friends fit into the belief that something has to official, or right, or fit into a certain pattern. Everything has to be shown to them, explained, and they need their hands held. I stopped caring about that early junior year of high school, and I'm much better off because of it.
- brycelb, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2Completely untrue. Being a College photography professor I have witnessed this over and over again. I have never, and I mean NEVER had a beginning student that could be considered a talent. Some students certainly have a more developed capacity but none could be considered talented. Once these students reach their 3rd or 4th year they begin to "acquire" those skills necessary to be a practicing artist. The non technical aspects of being an artist must be learned. Since everyone seems to know who Ansel Adams is we can use him as an example. He spent his whole career honing his vision and his craft. His vision (I guess we would call that his talent) was nothing special for many years, in fact he would be one of the people this guy is complaining about since he was mimicking the work of the pictorialists and had not yet developed into the artist he eventually became.
- davecor, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2Everyone has a gifts in one or more areas. Are you saying Mozart would someday be as good at basketball as Michael Jordan or good at theoretical physics as Stephen Hawking if we just encouraged him enough? Sorry, never gonna happen.
I'm comfortable enough to watch a true master/virtuoso/champion work their art and skill without being envious or deluding myself into thinking I could be that good too. That's the TRUE mark of a master - to do the difficult with such ease that in watching them, you too feel like you could also do it. THAT is how art releases us from the ordinary and mundane. You can marvel at an artist and feel inspired, but that's no guarantee you can do the same... - endustry, on 12/14/2007, -1/+3"Every day I meet darkroom assistants working hard to put film on their family."
- t0ny, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2The photography class in highschool sucked. We did more reading about photography then doing it. I learned nothing until I bought a slr camera after high school.
- mikhon, on 12/14/2007, -0/+2this guy sounds way to bitter...
- stalefries, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Think of it this way: if your photo looks fine without any doctoring, you did well. Otherwise, go back out there and try it again. Sure, Photoshop might fix the image, but what does that teach you? Reliance on a super-expensive tool, rather than a working knowledge of true photography.
- drgmdp, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1i would never take photography lessons from someone who thinks than taking pictures of chicks is perverted.
- stalefries, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1High school electives always suck. If you can, get into some sort of early college program. Then, take all the cool classes. You'll get out of your crappy highschool and into a classroom where the teachers actually care about the subject.
- lovestospooge, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Gombrich agress
- DocGlass, on 12/19/2007, -0/+1This article outlines the basic reason I recently dropped out of a highly distinguished design school. After moving to New York City over the summer and having to get a job, which was in my field, I quickly realized that creative education is a farce. $40,000 a year for four years to attend an institution where you are ill prepared for real work and in severe debt, forcing you into a crappy job straight out of college.
I feel that part of the explanation for this mediocre work is that there is an illusion that just by getting into a design/photography/creative program at a school you have passed some kind of creative test. At my college we are always told how talented we were just to be attending, the problem is that 90% of the kids at school sucked. You can't learn talent, no matter how much someone tries to teach it. - spyd3rweb, on 12/14/2007, -1/+2You aren't learning anything... either you have the photography talent or you don't. All you really need to learn is basic camera operation and scene lighting methods.
- TankerJoe, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Damn twitchy digg finger. I so meant to digg this down. grrrr.
- outofstep, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1What he was describing is kids trying to do what todays greats are doing, and of course aren't getting terribly meaningful pictures each time. Thats why they are in school, and not hirred to get some drunk photo editor to bark at them. Nowadays, people have to go to school to get jobs in art, which is disheartening. From the sounds of it, he was doing the same thing as the kids he is criticizing (copying the avant-garde of the time), only back then photography was less competitive so he could get a real job.
- brycelb, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1This guy (in the article) actually sounds like a commercial photographer who taught a class at a place that develops art photographers. There is a huge difference. There is a reason why you rarely see commercial photographers cross over and exhibit at galleries and museums. Generally they are too uptight about the medium and all of the rules to actually create something.
- OverlordXenu, on 12/14/2007, -0/+1Real artists don't usually go to school. Look at the great directors of the world, like Stanley Kubrick. Look at artists like Picasso. Personally, I've always thought that you cannot be taught art. You can be taught how to start to use a tool, or maybe some techniques, but you cannot be taught how to make art. Going to school to learn art is a waste of money.
- identifiedlogo, on 12/14/2007, -1/+1i need to see that girl with a picture of Cheguvera
- inactive, on 12/14/2007, -1/+1nowadays.
-
Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is