Who should teach photography?

Started Sep 26, 2013 | Polls thread
glasswave Forum Pro • Posts: 10,283
Re: Who should teach photography?

Jeff_Donald wrote:

ilta wrote:

Talk about loaded survey responses. Is your point to actually do a poll, or seek confirmation for what you already believe?

And honestly, I think photography, if it's a class, should be taught by craftsmen, with a big headline at the end that is "THESE ARE THE RULES, BUT YOU CAN BREAK THEM ONCE YOU'VE MASTERED THEM. NOW GO AND MAKE ART."

The art will take care of itself. The technical know-how, not so much.

-- hide signature --


None of the surveys here are worth a darn. The number of respondents are too small to draw any kind of unbiased conclusion.

So that makes it OK to post useless surveys with biased and leading answers in a effort to demonstrate your ability to force the respondents to prove your point?

In my experience teaching photography on and off for almost 35 years at all levels (university professor, summer children's programs, adult education etc.) art rarely takes care of itself.

This is true, for most of us the objective of producing meaningful, artistically meritorious imagery requires study, practice, failure, successes, learning and struggle. Most of us are not gifted, we study, we practice, we learn we improve.

The people that learn the craft side continue to produce boring images that are technically correct. They migrate to online forums where they congratulate each other on taking technically correct images that in the vast majority of cases are boring.

What, pray tell, then are you doing hanging out on gear forum. Is the pot calling the kettle black?

In the vast majority of cases the students that really don't care about the techie stuff create visually more stimulating and interesting photos.

In my experience, 20 years teaching the creative arts and associated technology. It's the ones who immerse themselves and struggle to learn all they can about both the artistic and technical aspects of their craft that consistently find the most success.

The majority of these photos are shot by women, who don't care as much about the techie stuff and just want to learn how to create great images.

Are you living in some sort of fantasy land? The briefest survey of photo history will readily prove that the camera possesses no gender bias at all, could it be you that possess the gender bias. Perhaps you simply don't understand how to inspire your male students to pursue great images. Do you subjectively discriminate against your male students or those that show an interest in the technical underpinnings of the art of photography.

Do you use your photo classes to innfluence naive young women that may look up to their professor for "artistic" affirmation? Eeeewwwww! I know that type of prof!!

These same women rarely participate in the photo men's clubs that are the online forums.

Again, railing against photo forums and the men [and women] that participate in them, all the while participating in said "photo men's clubs." Is there something here that you are not telling us??

The online forums have self appointed members that follow a rigid doctrine and they "teach" the new members that are new to photography the craft.

As far as I can tell, no one here purports to be teachers of the craft. No one forces a rigid doctrine upon anyone. This is an internet forum not some sort of Catholic/Budhist/Hindu monastery.

Evidence of this can be seen in the threads this past week on what is exposure, is ISO part of exposure, is a ND filter part of exposure. By my most recent count over 500 posts were created across about 10 threads and it didn't create one interesting image.

Conversely, I'd argue that the threads here about producing interesting images result in verbal insights and images that are precisely about that!

I like to seen one person that made a post say, 'Wow, that changed how I make photos and look at this great image that resulted form all the learning I received.

The info available here at dpr has definitely helped me grow as a photog and I'd certainly never post bragging about a "great image" I had taken. The more I learn about the photography, the more I become convinced that it is unlikely that I'll ever take a "great image," but my hopes remain that with practice learning and hard work, I may take a few pretty darn good ones.

The vast majority of these members produce boring images. I'm not saying the images are bad.

Certainly not, how could it be construed that boring images are bad. I LIVE for boring images, woooHoooo!

In many cases they are a recording of the times of the photographers lives.

This is what photography is, a perfect definition.

Images of cats, dogs, children, relatives and vacations and milestones in the families history. But are they art? Decidedly no, they are snapshots...

These are the images upon which photography is built, were it not for these images, there would be no metric at all upon which to build a standard that represents great photography. If a stick figure had never been drawn and only Rembrandt's and Van gogh's ever been painted, could we recognize these as great works. But yes, they are art, make no mistake about that. Art is what ever the artist says is art, good art is when most other agree.

and will probably be lost forever when the hard drive they were stored on crashes.

Perhaps, someone on these forums has learned of the importance of back ups.

I can hardly imagine that I have ever responded to a post on these forums where each and every sentence thunders out for refutation, but I fear I have now encountered such a post.

-- hide signature --

Executive Director Florida Center of Creative Photography

Your sig/title comes off as pretentious, yet does little to enhance your credibility.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow