I wonder, how did you change the teaching model that you disapprove of? Especially after having (presumably) accepted payment for teaching on this course?

#
F said:
December 13th, 2007 at 8:54 pm

As an art student some 15 years ago I discovered that by including bare ass in my photos I could ensure a good grade. The funkier that ass was presented, the better the grade (and the more of said ass you could procure... at least art school was good for that).

After 10 years as an award winning (hey , aren't we all?) staff photojournalist for a large newspaper in the U.S. I realized that most art school photography was little better than harmless, regurgitated, visual scat cranked out by self-induced angst laden, wanna be artists.

After 5 years of freelance work I discovered that photography makes a better hobby than business and that if you want to make real money at it you'd better spend more time studying the business end of selling work and churning up clients and less time shooting self-indulgent crap that looks like all the other self-indulgent crap being produced by all the other self-indulgent crappy art students.

Now I teach at the college level and conduct some workshops for kids and after so many years of looking at so many images I gotta say to most of the art students out there, give it up. Get a real job for christ's sake 'cause unless you don't need money for the rest of your life (and if you think you don't and haven't won the lottery or don't have a large trust fund... you are wrong. Trust me. Remember when you were a tiny litle kid and didn't really know anything about anything? Well, you are still that kid... I'm serious.), unless you REALLY don't need money... remember that photography makes a great, great hobby.

Prove my point through taking photographs - easy. I have been shooting solidly for the past six weeks illustrating a book on the aftermath of war so I think that I can claim that whilst I may, according to some be a dinosaur roaring in the swamp, I am at least still walking the talk.

And may you all find people who as as informed and helpful towards you were those I encountered in my early days.

Enjoy the light!

Mike heil

Going to art school is like going to genius school.

Photography is a skill like any other.

Mathematically correct zone system black and whites without soul, blah!

I think the reason is not so acutely that the attitudes of kids in school has changed, but rather that the term art has changed.

The word “art” has been kidnapped by an aristocratic sort of club who propped it up on a pure white pedestal and forced it to drink overpriced Champaign.

“Art” has became about the pontification of intangible celebrity rather than the craft.

It is not the fault of the students that the examples for which they’ve been taught to strive are so different from the profession they hope to enter.

All art books begin at classical excellence and end in modern rubbish. There is a point where the definition of “art” changes from it’s classical definition to it’s modern definition, and it is at that point where this arrogant exploration of self displaces the diligent pursuit of excellence in one’s craft.

So I got into digital art in order to avoid what appeared to be a soulless path of peddling self image.

http://gallery.mac.com/thomasbroach

I acknowledge greats like W. Eugene Smith but I liked his Country Doctor more than horror pictures of mercury poisoning victims. That kind of photojournalism serves a useful purpose but I have been in 30 countries and all 50 of the United States and find life is seldom as ghastly as SOME photo students or pros would like to have you believe. That stuff sells, so that's what many of them deliver. Note, I said SOME. I discovered long ago that being poor doesn't mean mentally impoverished or a slum resident. Being poor doesn't give you a ghetto mentality as many would have you believe in the USA.

I remember some guy was furious because I posted a picture of a Muslim woman in India who obviously didn't like being photographed. A photojournalist who has time to ponder whether he will offend the subject should seek another field of employment. It's about taking the picture and sometimes that means others will take offense. In my case I wasn't being paid and love the picture to this day because it caught one of those precise moments like Cartier-Bresson was famous for.

I went to the NY Institute of Photography in 1961 and learned some good technical skills. I soon quit my job as a commercial photographer as I hated taking what somebody else wanted me to take. I went back in the Air Force where I could photograph what I wanted when I wasn't working. Being an amateur has NOTHING to do with the quality of your photography. Being a pro presupposes you have some ability but being an amateur has no meaning except you do it for pleasure. Quality doesn't come with $$.

I've taken all sorts of photographs. See my website:

http://gallery.mac.com

for examples dating back from day one to the present.

These days I photograph mostly nature photos but also work as a volunteer for the local police recording them at work. I switched to digital in August 2004. Since then I have owned, or own, a Nikon D70, D70S, D80, D200, D2Xs, D300. Yes, I think the technology helps me be a better photographer but anybody who believes buying the right camera will make a photographer out of somebody who hasn't got the talent naturally, is great for the camera and lens industry, but sadly won't ever become a good photographer because of the camera he/she owns.

I don't know anything about today's students or instructors. I look at the NY Times daily and the level of photography is superb and they seem to have outgrown the boo-hoo liberalism I so despise.

i'm working with alternative processes right now

After 10 years as an award winning (hey , aren't we all?) staff photojournalist for a large newspaper in the U.S. I realized that most art school photography was little better than harmless, regurgitated, visual scat cranked out by self-induced angst laden, wanna be artists.

After 5 years of freelance work I discovered that photography makes a better hobby than business and that if you want to make real money at it you'd better spend more time studying the business end of selling work and churning up clients and less time shooting self-indulgent crap that looks like all the other self-indulgent crap being produced by all the other self-indulgent crappy art students.

Now I teach at the college level and conduct some workshops for kids and after so many years of looking at so many images I gotta say to most of the art students out there, give it up. Get a real job for christ's sake 'cause unless you don't need money for the rest of your life (and if you think you don't and haven't won the lottery or don't have a large trust fund... you are wrong. Trust me. Remember when you were a tiny litle kid and didn't really know anything about anything? Well, you are still that kid... I'm serious.), unless you REALLY don't need money... remember that photography makes a great, great hobby.

Brilliant rant, thanks.

As a printer for many of the top photographers in Chicago, I get to see into their creative process. It's never about making a cool photograph. It's all about showing what they are interested in all the way from steel mills to sex and drugs and gangsters.