whining about College photography courses

[Longwatcher]

Just to get it out of my system.

I am getting ready to take some community college classes in the hopes of improving my photography. At one of the local community colleges they have an associate degree program in photography.

In order to get the associates degree though, I have learned that I have to use a film :-( camera. While I have one (a Hassleblad 500 EL/M) I can't see me ever needing to take a film shot ever again, given the state of art with digital photography. I won't be using one for business and definately not for art as it is too limiting in my opinion. I especially can not see me ever again using an enlarger and chemicals. So why would they force me to use something so primative as film. Not to mention the environmental benifits of going digital.

Luckly I can take some of the classes without going for the degree, but it seems kind of a waste to me.

I am just whining, but am curious if anyone can give me a compelling reason to still use film over digital? (except maybe in the large format, where digital is not up there yet)

I am hoping that it is just a case of the instructors not fully up on the level of digital technology. Would not be the first time.

[colin uk]

I to am planning to take a photography course at my local college for no other reason that to expand my knowledge, but I am holding off, as I am worried about the acceptance of my G3. I have no interest in anything other than digital photography.

I am aware of how slow the colleges are in coming forward, recently completing a WebPages design course. The course had only been on the curriculum from 2000 and was about as basic as you could make it, and all that was on offer.

[Roger_Cavanagh]

rssfhs wrote:
There are a lot of basic techniques that can be best learned with a antique SLR and in a darkroom and then once mastered, done in Photoshop, a kind of virtual dark room.

Craig,

This sounds like old-fashioned thinking to me: the new generation must go through the pain of learning outmoded methods because it will be good for their souls. This attitude is a barrier to the development of new and creative teaching methods more appropriate to digital technology.

Can you offer some examples of these "basic techniques" to support your case?

Just like you learn to write first with a pencil, not with a keyboard.

Have you seen some of the toys that are being sold these days to teach kids to read? It won't surprise me at all, if kids, in a few years, learn to use keyboards before they learn to write.

Also, don't forget that film photos still give better results in many cases.

"Many cases"? In the 35mm SLR vs DSLR arena? I don't think so. Many experts agree that the Canon 1Ds outstrips film. With cameras like the 10D and D60, the argument is how big do prints have to be before film comes out on top? For many people that answer is already "bigger than I need to print".

Tim's complaint is legitimate, but, no doubt the situation will change as teachers emerge who themselves learned photography using a DSLR. Let's not forget, these things have been around and affordable for very long.

Regards,

[Roger_Cavanagh]

rssfhs wrote:

Film has been around for over a hundred years. It can't be ignored. It's like not knowing any history at all. I'm not saying you should spend all your time in the darkroom, but at least you should know what one is.

Once upon time we didn't have motor cars, and people got around in horse-drawn carriages. I know this piece of history, but it doesn't mean I have to know how to drive a covered wagon. :) Some people still drive coach and horses today, but I'm not over-impressed when I meet one on the public highway causing traffic delays, nor when the horses poop all over the road. :D

Can you offer some examples of these "basic techniques" to support your case?

Dodge and burn for one.

Surely, this is one technique that can be learned much more easily with Photoshop? You can try over and over on the same image. If you make a mistake, you can undo, step back in the history states, or just plain delete everything and start again. You can save different versions of the image; practice different techniques at minimal cost and in a much shorter time gain an appreciation of how to use D&B.

Have you seen some of the toys that are being sold these days to teach kids to read? It won't surprise me at all, if kids, in a few years, learn to use keyboards before they learn to write.

I am a music teacher and I find the best way to teach kids to read music is the old fashioned way: writing with a pencil. Not typing on a keyboard. I think there is a close relationship between using your hands to create things and learning.

Since the zenith of my musical talent is the ability to turn on a CD player, I can't comment on teaching music. But I agree that you cannot learn to play the piano without using your hands. :D But I don't agree that writing is necessary to all learning. One of the most famous language teachers in the world - Michel Thomas - teaches several languages with a technique that requires, and indeed insists on, no writing at all.

In Japan where I live, for example, many people can't even write their own language by hand anymore, because they have been using computers too much.

I think that underlines my point. The merits or demerits of not being able to write Japanese aside, these people have acquired the skill (keyboard mastery) that generated the greater value to them personally. They can can still read, write emails and they do make exceedingly good cameras. :) (Sorry that's a joke that probably only the Brits will get.)

Many experts agree that the Canon 1Ds outstrips film. With cameras like the 10D and D60, the argument is how big do prints have to be before film comes out on top? For many people that answer is already "bigger than I need to print".

It's not only a question of pixels. The essence is different, because it is a different medium. Like comparing CDs and records.

I never said it was a just question of pixels (though I admit that inference could be drawn). The audiophile argument that analogue vinyl gives better sound than digital CD has been around a while. It may be true, but I don't hear it. Another thing I don't hear is the hiss and crackle of vinyl albums not having bought a single one since I got my first CD player. :)

If we apply the same argument to film vs digital, we can expect to see film diminish in use to a small handful who see some esoteric and artistic value in it. The rest of us will be shooting digital. All the more reason for teachers and educators to ensure the relevance of their material and allow students to develop their photographic technique using their chosen tool, be it a 1Ds, 1v, knackered old Pentax Spotmatic or the 10D. The vast majority of people who use a DSLR today will never - I predict - ever buy another film SLR.

I am not saying we should forget film - though personally, I traded all my film kit a few months after buying a D30. But I do not agree that to make good photographs with a digital camera requires hands-on experience of being up to your elbows in disgusting, smelly, eco-unfriendly chemicals in a dark room.

Regards,

[slejhamer]

I think Tim's frustration is valid. When I first bought my digicam, all of a year ago, I looked into some BEGINNING photography courses at the local community colleges. I wanted to learn the basics of the basics - composition, exposure, etc.

Every entry-level photography course available, at three different colleges, required a film camera and my own supply of chemicals for the darkroom processing lessons. (A digicam was acceptable for the first few lessons but film was mandated for the "real" work.)

Ironically, only the more advanced courses (of which the beginning courses are a prerequisite) delved deeply into such esoteric matters as exposure.

The one "introduction to digital photography" course I took was more a lesson in Photoshop processing than anything else, with less than half of the course touching on the use of the camera.

I haven't looked recently to see if things have changed, but my hopes are not high...

Meanwhile, I've learned more on this web forum than anywhere else, so thanks to Professor Pekka and all of the great contributors!

Regards,

[Longwatcher]

Well, I got hold of the program manager for photography yesterday and we had an interesting conversation.

1. I discovered that one of the issues is apparently more then just that particular community college has a photography program and it is standardized state wide. for those with the program. (I never came across another program before this)

2. Her logic for doing film first was dodge and burn and that it made it easier to understand additive and subtractive color principles. While I don't agree with the dodge/burn argument, I go with Roger on this one, PS is a superior tool; I can understand where learning color principles would be easier with the hands on of the enlarger. It would only be a unecessary refresher for me though. I do find it ammusing though that her argument was to learn color principles, but that to bypass I had to submit 10 B+W prints on RC paper [I tried to explain that I have RC paper for my inkjet but that didn't work]

3. The catch is if it were only photo 101 using film, I could live with that, but I have discovered the whole program is centered around film except for about 3-4 of the degree program courses. Especially the primary course I wanted which was studio lighting. I suppose it is to reinforce your lab knowledge, but by that point it should not matter whether or not I submit my final work from a digital or wet film process. I also discovered that I can in no way take studio lighting with out taking photo 101 and 102 first (or at least provide wet film based portfolios)

4. The college does not have the equipment for digital printing beyond 8x10 with dye sub or inkjet. While I can afford the 13x19 printer (obvious since I have), even I would have trouble with large format printers. This is important because they expect the studio lighting course students to produce 11x14 and 16x20 prints. 11x14 I can do, 16x20 I can't.

5. I did learn that a four year college has a program that includes digital photography (or will have by the fall), however the costs go up dramatically (like $250 per class to $1500+ per class).

6. Lastly, I have reasons to suspect the program manager is about 18 months behind on her technology assessment as she gave out the oft repeated line that inkjet prints only last 30 secs. Although she did admit to knowing that Epson could last 50 years with special paper and inks. [latest data is 100 years with special paper and inks, 50-70 with regular photo paper and photo inks]. Also she indicated she could tell the difference between inkjet and enlarger based prints - I dispute this as I have several inkjet prints from my S9000 that I, an image analyst, could not tell the difference between that and a conventional print. [Note: I have a lot I can, but if I color balance and contrast correctly - no difference I can tell - at least without looking at the Kodak label on the back or pouring water on it] [Trivia: with the exception of strangely, the one 13x19 that I put in my office, no other print has ever shown any signs of fading since I started printing (and it has just lightened up a bit and developed a slight pink cast to it which may be caused by the lighting)]

So in conclusion, I am even more disappointed in the course potential then I was when I first learned about it and right now I am trying to decide if putting up with the film portions of the class are worth the benifits of other skill knowledges I may learn or if I should just ignore the whole mess and seek my knowledge in other ways.

If I do decide to go for it though, I have decided that the Elan 7 seems to be the optimum film camera for my use in terms of compatability with my 10D versus price of a film camera I won't be using for anything but the college class. I suppose I can consider it a really expensive book I have to get for the class.

I am however at this point highly unlikely to waste my time or money on skills that are obsolete in my opinion.

My number one irritation, is none of their on-line or published material mention that the courses are film based only; if I had never asked I would have shown up for the first day with my digital camera and would have been more irritated them I now. I am only irritated because I took some time off from work to start the registration process.

enough for now.

[Longwatcher]

Actually, all I have to do is pay 5 to 10 times as much and go across the river apparently (45 minutes drive every class date each direction*, meaning 1 1/2 extra to those days). May still decide to go that route if I can get the critical classes at least.

While I do like teaching, I am still relearning things I new over 20 years ago and the one area that I really wanted instruction in was studio lighting. Which, although I have read several books on the topic; I am the type of person who requires hands on instruction that or lots of experience for the information to actually sink in. My catch 22 is to gets lots of experience, I need to improve my studio lighting technique so that models want me to take their pictures on a regular basis. That or lots of cash to hire the models, which kind of defeats the purpose of improving my skills.

As I mentioned in the title, I am just whining.

[willie408]

Dodge and burn !!!

You have GOT to be KIDDING.

The techniques available in Photoshop (using layers) are so far ahead of dodge and burn it is absurd. You can make several versions of the same image (OR shoot more than one in the camera) - and blend them in ways no chemical darkroom could dream of.

Trust me - there is NO comparison between old film photography and digital. A year ago I bought a Canon Pro90 IS on a whim to see what digital was about. (I had Canon 35 mm equipment). After my first shots with the Pro90 I have never picked up a film camera again. Have now added a 10D.

For the record, I am 74. I built my first darkroom at 12. I BUILT my first enlarger. I printed color when you had to use a Kodak drum. I have used 35mm for 50 years. And film cameras: Kodak brownie, Agfa, Leica, 45 view camera, Praktiflex, Pentax, Nikon, Olympus, and finally Canon.

You are certainly free to dismiss my opinions, and I may certainly be wrong - but they are not uninformed opinions.

[jasenh7]

Wow...I didn't expect to see so many negative opinions toward film in here.

I'd say that by learning film, you are learning a lot of the basics that digital bypasses. When you understand the basics and what's going on behind the scenes, you can use the camera more to it's full potential.

As for the comments by willie408. You've been shooting for years and years it seems. You learned the basics long ago and they are natural to you so the transition to digital was an easy and natural one. I relate it to riding a motorcycle. The first time out, you are focusing on simple things...ok, that's the clutch, that's the rear brake, front brake over here gotta do this and that. After a few years riding, those basics come without thinking and you can concentrate on more advanced techniques.

That being said, you are complaining about the courses at a community college level. Most folks taking phtotography are there because they are trying to satisfy an art requirement so they can graduate. Working in the camera store, I've seen folks bitch and complain about the cost of a very inexpensive SLR manual camera for a course they have very little interest in and are only taking to satisfy requirements. Those same folks certainly aren't going to spend $1K-$5K on a camera for a course. Folks like yourself with a 10D and wanting to improve your skills are few and far between.

In addition, consider the cost to the college. The cost for technology to produce photo's from the digital cameras of any real quality is going to cost them money. Most community colleges aren't as well funded as the larger universities, hence the lower class cost. And again, just because you happen to have the equipment to produce the photographs doesn't mean that others don't.

In the end it mostly comes down to $$$. I do agree, for some of the advanced classes such as studio lighting you should be able to cross platforms if it suits you, especially since so many studio's are now using digital. But until you can pick up a good quality DSLR for under $300 you won't most likely be seeing any change in the intro courses.

[Chardyboy]

Here's my tw'penneth worth.

We got out G3 as our wedding present.

I've always been interested in photography and graphical representation but have always been stuffed by the price of being "trigger happy"

Since getting the G3, I have a new lease of life and interest - it costs nothing! We got the 1Gb Microdrive as well as a few smaller cards but the Microdrive is superb.

Qualitywise - I'd dead chuffed and cannot compare to my film days as I never really experimented due to the cost and just snapped away as a normal 'snapper'.

I really respect Willie408's views as you cannot - I repeat cannot, dispute experience.

I keep looking at photo courses, but feel that I am learning all I need from my peers on these forums and that I just need to get out more and experiment.

Regards

Dave

www.chardyboy.fotopic.net

[Longwatcher]

You are probably correct about the initial cost of the equipment versus college kids, however, since it is an associates degree in photography they should be aiming a bit higher. I would expect the students to be going for careers in photography.

I believe they could probably satisfy the digital camera equivilant for the basic courses with a good P&S camera [my definition of good P&S includes a reasonably fast shutter trigger speed - my experience being Kodak DC4800 - good. Olympus something or other - bad.] Anything over 3.1MP should be good enough for learning digital skills, although an SLR would be needed for the advanced courses.

Since they have some digital courses (at advanced levels) the equipment should not be a problem. I was told they use a dye-sub printer for the two digital courses.

My issue is with the business model, which is what I believe community colleges should be aiming at.

I am highly unlikely to use film in my photography business should I decide it is viable. Anybody starting today is unlikely to be using film (except for special products) within 5 years if they are shooting subjects that would normally be shot with a 35mm format. It will be a few years yet to beat large format cameras, but the Canon 1Ds and Kodak 14N are real close to medium format capabilities.

I do not need to learn how to use an enlarger, I do need to learn photoshop or something like it. [I have photoshop 7.0]

I do need to learn how to set up color management profiles between the camera, computer and printer.

Currently there is only one thing I can do with an Elan 7e (my choice for a film camera if I got one) that I can't do with the 10D that would effect the final output.
Using B+W film will give me slightly higher resolution on very large prints (above 16x24") and infrared images (which I could always sacrifice my D60 for this at some point by having the internal sensor filter replaced).
Neither of these are likely to be things that they cover in the basic courses.

I am rambling/ranting, sorry.
You have some valid arguments and I am just irratated that I can't find the training I need short of how to books, which while okay are not what "I" need.

[jasenh7]

longwatcher wrote:
You are probably correct about the initial cost of the equipment versus college kids, however, since it is an associates degree in photography they should be aiming a bit higher. I would expect the students to be going for careers in photography.


Yes, you should expect more from those students, however on the intro level as I stated above, about 75% are just satisfying an art credit for their degree in something else. They aren't going for careers, just didn't feel like taking painting or drawing and figured taking pictures would be fun.

[NILOLIGIST]

Longwatcher & All,

I am going to take a bold stand here and I don't think it will be a favorable one, so here goes. PLEASE DO NOT GET OFFENDED!!!!!

Although, I do agree with most of you about digital photography classes being hard to find, I don't agree with what you all are doing...Complaining about it.

If you don't like something, change it. Now, that might sound a lot easier than it is, but whenever there is a change of any kind made, it is because someone took a stance and made that change happen.

I took a digital photographer very basic course here in NYC. It was not with a college but with the Learning Annex. I took it there because I wanted to get an idea of what to expect if I took the course at a college. Well, the class was the worst.

The instructor did not like digital photography and was pro 35 mm. I was so outraged that I demanded my money back, they gave it to me. Then I thought to myself, that is not enough. So I wrote them and told them just that. Refunding my money was not enough, I want the class title changed or the instructor removed. Everyone I knew told me that they would not do it, and I believed them but I put myself out there anyway and at least let my opinion be heard. Well, not only did they changed the title of the course they got rid of that instructor and they got a new one, I took that class with my refund money and it was very good.

The point I am trying to make is, complaining about something should be the start not the finish of how you feel. A complaint without action really doesn't do any good. Many people I am sure complained about that class, but not many DEMANDED they do something about it. I am sure, people took their refund and left it at that. That was the basis of my complaint to them. I argued that if they had listened to others about how bad the instructor was, I would not have had to sit through that terrible class. I also told them that no one else should have to go through that and that if they continue with that course they are knowingly allowing him to cheat their students.

Now, I am asking for a workshop and a advance digital photography class. We shall see what happens. I am prepared that they will not do it and I am also prepared to do whatever it takes to make it happen. I want it!! I will go recruit students if that is what it takes.

So please accept what I am saying here as an option to complaining, not a criticism of your valid complaints.

That is my penny's worth.

Smile?

[Longwatcher]

No offense taken,

I have let one of the two community colleges know why I am not going to be taking those classes with them.

The other community college was more receptive and it seems that they may have a digital program in a couple of years if they have their way.

Unfortunatly, apparently I need to convince the Virginia state bureaucracy of changing the format for the state's community college's, this is much harder to do and will not do me any good at all for 4-5 years unless miracles happen.

In the meantime, I still need a studio lighting workshop. The only ones I have been able to find out about require me to take at least 2 courses I find useless before I can get to the one I want. 2 courses mean a minimum of 2 semesters.

Also, please remember the title of this thread - whining.

I am also weekly looking for opportunities and courses that might suddenly appear locally. I may find I have to take the film-based courses, but must wait until Sept. to start those. I was hoping to choose whether or not I would go full time in Sept. but I guess either have to make the descision without the knowledge I need or probably have to wait another year to find out if I can actually make a go at it.

I think my composition is good, but my studio lighting is dissapointing to me. I also need to work on my artistic style a bit more to please me, but at least for classical studio portraits, I would be fine commercially if I could fix my lighting.

Or at least so I believe....

[NILOLIGIST]

Longwatcher,

LOL..Yes, I understand what the name of the thread is. I was just giving you option, there is no power in whining and you sound like a powerful, smart and very creative person. I thought that you were just letting of steam and wanted to do something about it, that is where my response was coming from. Sorry!! I like options and things that I can do to change, alter or get the situation to change for everyone. On that note, I thought of a few things that perhaps you have or haven't thought of..

You could try to ask an established photographer if you could study a few techniques under him. You maybe able to learn a lot by helping a photographer with his work load. I am doing that now.

Also, you could speak to the schools and find out what it would take for them to them to start a digital course or let someone take the courses they need. The change that they make may or may not effect you right now but if and when that change takes effect it will help someone like you tomorrow.

Another thing, find a group of photographers that might want to donate some time and see if a local center might let you use their space and teach a photography class. I am not sure if you are aware of this, but, you could very well start something that could be very big. Wanting to help yourself is good, but usually people will get involved when you want to help everyone.

Just something to consider. You sound smart and I am sure things will work themselves out. I recently found out there are no miracles that we don't ourselves create, so go create a miracle. Good luck and I hope something opens up for you. If there is something I could do when I am done with my project let me know. I have a project I am working on, helping the children of (RMH) Ronald McDonald's House. I am doing a photographic collage, people from all over the world are sending their photos to me and I am putting them into a collage, that will be hung in the playroom of RMH. It is incredible the amount of love that is pouring out from people.

If you would like to send a photo of something happy, funny or that you think children would like, send them to me...

Frederique
mydigitalworld@nyc.rr.com

Here is the link for my project:

MyOriginalPost (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=11580)

[Longwatcher]

niloligist wrote:

You could try to ask an established photographer if you could study a few techniques under him. You maybe able to learn a lot by helping a photographer with his work load. I am doing that now.

- Tried this, one figured I would be competition (probably right :-). Another agreed to teach me lighting in return for me teaching him digital. The second just plain disappeared on me within one week - studio closed, phone disconnected. Very strange, but I think he could no longer support the business without his old partner who left him. (I suspect he was hoping I would be his replacement, but I could not go full time then). No luck to date, but will keep trying if opportunities present themselves. The truly sad part is my Dad could teach me if we were not geographically separated (me Virginia, him Arizona) a bit far and too much stuff for me to fly with. I would also have to either spend a month solid or several weekend trips. Plus find a studio/space to set up in and then the models. However, I have considered this the next time I am taking a long trip out west.

Also, you could speak to the schools and find out what it would take for them to them to start a digital course or let someone take the courses they need.

Just need the State to allow the change, both community colleges sounded like they have the equipment they would need, but they have to follow state established curiculum.

Another thing, find a group of photographers that might want to donate some time and see if a local center might let you use their space and teach a photography class. I am not sure if you are aware of this, but, you could very well start something that could be very big. Wanting to help yourself is good, but usually people will get involved when you want to help everyone.

Just trying this with one other photographer on a outdoor shoot is proving tricky, but I have to admit I had not thought of getting with a local art center to sponsor something like this. The catch as I see it would be finding the instructor for the workshop. hmmmm... will have to think about this one.

A couple of good suggestions, especially the last.

[RichardtheSane]

Many experts agree that the Canon 1Ds outstrips film.

The whole question as to which format is best and which outstips the other is relative. Relative to what you use it for.
For example if you compare the 1ds to velvia 50 then the winner for overall quality would clearly be film. However if you are never going to have a need to print anything poster size, the 1ds suddenly steps back into the arena.
Both film and digital have their place in the world of photography. In my opinion the best college course for anyone who wants to make a career out of photography would include both film and digital techniques.

[NILOLIGIST]

Longwatcher,

Haven't looked at this thread since I last posted to it. I am curious, how are things going? Did anything open up for you?

I hope something has opened up for you, you sounded like you were fustrated and were in bad need for a break.

I wanted to be inspirational not come down on you, I sure hope you took it that way.

Thinking about different histories of the world, Ghandi, and how he moved THE WORLD. There was doubt but his conviction won out. I have my Ghandi days, when I just don't accept NO for an answer. If you could learn that technique, just not taking no for an answer, people respond. Remember this, Ghandi was a very COURAGEOUS man and he did GREAT things for India and for the world but, he was a MAN, no different than you.

The ONLY difference between Ghandi and you, is he DID NOT TAKE NO FOR AN ANSWER. His attitude, belief and conviction CHANGED THE WORLD.

Be Ghandi, CHANGE the system!!

[rdenney]

I just can't let this thread go by, even though it is probably no longer being read by anybody.

This is a hard one for me, with one foot planted firmly in each camp. I've done everything from my own color processing to all-digital, and I've settled into a happy medium of doing film at times (in larger formats) and digital at times, but I'm all digital once the camera work is done. There will not likely be another wet darkroom in my future.

But I think your question goes to the purpose of college more than the teaching of specific skills. To me, college is about a broad education, not about job training. As such, it is not intended to provide the latest technology to students, even though the professors may be researching aspects of the latest technology for the future. It's a paradox, I know. And colleges themselves undermine this principle when they teach out-dated skills instead of teaching basic principles upon which those skills are based.

Were I you, I'd take an art program if you want a college degree. You'll learn more about composition in an art class than in a photography class. Photography instruction is mostly the teaching of specific skills, and those skills are changing so fast that no college could hope to keep up, as you've found. You are likely to succeed more by making it up as you go, like most of the rest of us. Yes, they will teach you skills, but they will grade you on your results more than your media technique. Photogrphers are a bit too concerned with technique.

But the principles of what makes art artistic are always at the root of what we do, and a good knowledge of how to make art will help immensely in how to make photography. For example, I understand architectural photography because I studied architecture for several years. Art is innovative in that it finds new expression of those old principles, but most photographers would be immensely helped by understanding how Rembrandt shaped light around people's faces 400 years ago.

Because of my experience in film photography, I relate all I know of digital process back to film processes. It gives me a touchstone, and a way to explain things (and understand things explained to me) to other film photographers who are going digital. For example, the relationship between levels and curves, and film-based processes such as film's response curve and the Zone System makes the understanding of both more powerful.

There is also a question of the definition of photography, and some traditionalists would insist that digital work is "image art" rather than "photography." I'm not one of them. It's related to the notion of 50 or 60 years ago that photography itself was not art, and those sorts of traditionalists have always been with us.

In a commercial photography course that purports to teach specific marketable skills rather than provide a general education, they really should be up to date. But I've never thought those programs were worth much even in other areas. Someone mentioned music, and as an amateur musician I've seen talented young musicians try to learn their skills in three different ways: College, private instruction, and at a conservatory. The conservatory is really like a trade school, where specific skills are taught, and really it is just a different business model for providing private instruction. College musicians should get a general education. But they are still responsible for their own musical development, and most professional musicians (i.e., those who actually put bread on the table with it) learned at the hands of masters. Photography is best taught the same way.

So, instead of a trade school, find a local photographer who wants to learn digital, and offer to be his (unpaid) assistant. Let him teach you about composition, exposure, depth of field, lighting, and those sorts of things that are basic to all photographers, digital or not, and he can learn the digital part from you.

If I retire and do professional photography again, I'll apprentice myself out to a local pro, preferably one who is old and looking for a successor. Most successful musicians learned the same way.

Rick "who still owns, buys, uses, and loves all-mechanical cameras" Denney

[Longwatcher]

A couple updated thoughts.

I have been real busy in the past few weeks so have not had time to pursue the workshop concept.

I have approached several studio photographers in the area, but with the exception of the one that disappeared on me, they seem to think of me as competition on my area. I grew up in an area where the photographers all seemed to get along as my dad new several other photographers, but in this area (south-eastern Virginia) it seems like most (but not all) do not get along. I do have a good relationship with two other photographers, but our styles are completely different.

As to the purposes of colleges, Community colleges serve two purposes in my opinion. Getting a start on a full college program and technical training. The photography degree they were offering was oriented towards technical training and future jobs; thus it should have used current technology to the extent possible. Full colleges and universities on the other hand are supposed to be learning institutions where individuals can get a more broad based education.
When in a cynical mode, I tend to sometimes think they are simply there so people can get a piece of paper for more money later on, instead of an education (two competing concepts).

If the opportunity for a studio lighting workshop does not present itself (maybe with a little help from me), I may break down and buy the Elan7e and attend the community college programs anyway.

[rdenney]

longwatcher wrote:
If the opportunity for a studio lighting workshop does not present itself (maybe with a little help from me), I may break down and buy the Elan7e and attend the community college programs anyway.

I agree with most of your thoughts, especially your point about the different objectives of community colleges and universities. Really I was responding to a more general issue than the one you raised.

Don't give up on the local photographers. Look for the one who has a huge backlog and needs help, or that does work you like. Ask them to call you if they need an assistant, such as when their regular assistant leaves them in the lurch. They may brush you off, but you might be surprised when they call. My wife thought she wanted to learn wedding photography, and did this with a solid pro who is now semi-retired. I thought she was wasting her time because of the response she got, but darned if the photographer didn't call her for help a couple of times. She might have gotten something going if she had been able to respond to those calls (which she could not).

Don't present yourself as competition. Tell them you just want to learn photography. Pick someone near retirement--they don't care so much about competition. But they will be more traditional in their approach.

If you go through with the college program using film cameras, then I'd consider something more traditional than an Elan 7. My reason is that the Elan works as a manual camera, but not easily, and not in a way that your teachers will trust if they are traditionalists. Instead, get a used fully manual camera with no automation, such as a Pentax K1000, or a Canon FTb, plus a couple of lenses (all are dirt cheap these days). When you are done with the coursework, you'll be able to sell them for what you paid for them, and your traditionalist teachers will approve. That can only give you a head start. Plus, you'll have a focus screen that is much easier to focus manually. Keep an open mind and learn all you can.

Rick "who always enjoys learning new things, even if they are just new to me" Denney

[charr5]

Long..
I don't know if this has been addressed yet by someone elses response, but instead of taking a course at the college that is part of the degree curriculum, you might want to look for some Adult Continuing Education classes given locally. You can usually find out about them through the library, or the community colleges. Usually given at night or weekends and they don't seem to be strict about only using film, they just care about the techniques....there are usually beginner and advanced courses, and some developing classes...and now some PS classes...
Just a thought.
CMH

[billh101]

There are some compelling arguements against film here. However, for beginners I think film is a great way to get the basics. If you put a K1000 in a student's hands, they have to think through their photos through. If you're limited to 24 or 36 pictures per roll, you have to come up with the correct exposure, good composition and you can't just delete bad pictures to free up that space on your roll of film. I took my first college level "basic photography" course 15 years ago, the instructor even made us learn how to figure out the exposure ourselves, just in case the camera battery died while we were on a shoot. Now there's a way to learn the basics, give someone a K1000 with no battery. ;-) Anyway, if you already have a basic foundation, maybe you don't need film and could go 100% digital. And it is possible to learn the basics on digital as well, but if you do it on film, it becomes second nature, like learning to ride a bike, to compose well and know your exposure and equipment whenever you look through the viewfinder, whether it be film or digital in the future.
Bill
P.S. I wouldn't dare take a digital out to shoot a football game in the pouring rain, but I've done it lots of times with my SLR equipment, with no problems. I've been feeling the winds of change, but I'm not ready to abandon film just yet.

[new girl on the bloc]

as of last week i am a student of a photo II class at our local community college. it is not however, exactly what i thought it was going to be. i was looking for instruction on studio lighting, etc. too but it looks like a lot of darkroom stuff.

not only is this dissapointing to me but i have real issues with all of the chemicals. i'm pretty chemically sensitive and am also concerned about the eco issues of them.

well, my first trip into the darkroom proved a challange. the following day, feeling what i assumed were some ill effects from the chemcals i did some online research and found enough damning evidence to support using digital all the way. there is actually an entire book written on the hazards of darkroom work, by a photographer who developed severe health problems as a result of her darkroom work: "Overexposure: Health Hazards in Photography."

i tried to drop the class but it was already too late to do so. even though i get grant money to study, it would have cost me $$ to drop or switch. so i'm basically stuck with it.

so after buying some nitrile gloves (the recommended gloves to use with these chemicals) i went and developed my first role of film. since i did not get it rolled onto the reel quite right a few of the images did not get developed, but, oh well...i love the usb way of doing it!

while i was "agitiating" my roll of film i was feeling agitated myself. i felt slightly intoxicated (a reeling type of inebriation) and ungrounded, the symptoms that i experience when i am reacting to chemicals. and afterwards, some physiological depression, the same thing that i felt after being in the darkroom a few days earlier during classroom instruction. although the depression was not real long lasting, it blunted my feelings, and even my passion for photography. it is scary to feel this sort of powerful expression of not giving a damn about much of anything. and it is not in my character, at all. i'm a pretty even-keeled happy-go-lucky sort of person.

i spoke with my instructor today fully ready to educate her on what i had learned re these chemicals and to ask her to be given a few minutes of class time to educate the other students. but upon hearing of my sensitivities she quickly suggested that i go and see a doctor who could 'desensitize' me of them.

so many people do not get it. and maybe i am a bit more aware because i have studied environmental issues as part of my work in alternative healthcare. she did try and help out by saying that maybe one of the other students could develop my film for me, since it would not be any extra work for them. she assured me that the printing lab was 'state of the art' with ventilation and all (the developing room, which looks like a former closet, has NO ventilation system.)

anyway, to end this long ramble, i personally don't mind the instruction that i am getting, even though it is all with slr's and in my digital mind, seems pretty archaic. i guess that i feel like it is a piece of the puzzle that i'd like to have, but only in a limited amount. but it's strange that the D word has not even been mentioned in the class (pssst, i think that digital is still a dirty word in some of the photography world). but for this girl, it feels like the only way to go.

i actually had some resistance to digital myself until i got a camera quite by serendipity. and i have been in love with it from the first press of that shutter button. the possibilities are limitless, and what's best, there are no chemicals to contend with, which in the long run, would quickly interfere with my passion for photography.

[stopbath]

It is too bad you've had such a nasty reaction to the poisons and acids in the darkroom. :( If you don't see any ventalation ask your instructor to point it out. Make a stink about it's non-existance if need be.

Re: reel loading. Keep the film slightly bent, and slowly wind it on. Feel each revolution for buckles, unwind and start again if needed. Practice with a dummy roll outside of the dark bag.

While not agitating the film, get out into an open space. Return when only required to agitate or change chemicals.

You might be able to rent a darkroom that is better for you healthwise. I've rented in Toronto, a darkroom that uses a machine to develop the prints. You never get close to the chemicals, but have a good enlarger to work with. I think the development time was just a few minutes, and the cost was not high. Check your yellow pages.

Have fun in the classes.

[new girl on the bloc]

hey stopbath (i think that is one of the chemicals i react the most too ;)), thanks for all of your info and support. it is much appreciated!

i am checking out alternate places to develop my film and have spoke with the instructor re the lack of ventilation. unfortunately the budget here in oregon at community colleges is at an all time low so i don't think that anything will be done about it anytime soon, if ever.

i'll practice more on the dummy film before rolling my next one, with your advice on that.

thanks again ;)

[stopbath]

new girl on the bloc wrote:
hey stopbath (i think that is one of the chemicals i react the most too ;)), thanks for all of your info and support. it is much appreciated!

i am checking out alternate places to develop my film and have spoke with the instructor re the lack of ventilation. unfortunately the budget here in oregon at community colleges is at an all time low so i don't think that anything will be done about it anytime soon, if ever.

i'll practice more on the dummy film before rolling my next one, with your advice on that.

thanks again ;)

If you react strongly to the stop bath, see if you can use plain water. It will increase your development time (as the developer will still work while in the water until it's diluted away) I think you have to add 30 seconds to the development time when using water (check with developer instructions). Using water as a stop bath is popular with some, not with others.

When doing films, I always did it in the kitchen. Plenty of air and light. But I suspect you use the colleges film cans and chemicals. This would be expensive to set up at home. Perhaps used? (Although I never had any problem with the harsh chemicals in photo stuff. Cleaning solutions, yes, but not the darkroom stuff.) Thinking about it, I never used stop bath for film, just running water.

Re: Ventalation: Budget is a poor excuse for students health. Shame on them!

Re: Practise: You'll soon get a feel for those times where one side of the film has skipped the tracks.

Have fun in the dark:)

[alan-G3]

Hi

Me thinks you mis-judge.
An "academic" course has the the sole function of providing you with a "key" to a future job or academic course.
A "Training" course will provide a means of aquiring the skills to DO something.

Just what are you looking for.

Alan

[new girl on the bloc]

stopbath wrote:
new girl on the bloc wrote:
hey stopbath (i think that is one of the chemicals i react the most too ;)), thanks for all of your info and support. it is much appreciated!

i am checking out alternate places to develop my film and have spoke with the instructor re the lack of ventilation. unfortunately the budget here in oregon at community colleges is at an all time low so i don't think that anything will be done about it anytime soon, if ever.

i'll practice more on the dummy film before rolling my next one, with your advice on that.

thanks again ;)

If you react strongly to the stop bath, see if you can use plain water. It will increase your development time (as the developer will still work while in the water until it's diluted away) I think you have to add 30 seconds to the development time when using water (check with developer instructions). Using water as a stop bath is popular with some, not with others.

When doing films, I always did it in the kitchen. Plenty of air and light. But I suspect you use the colleges film cans and chemicals. This would be expensive to set up at home. Perhaps used? (Although I never had any problem with the harsh chemicals in photo stuff. Cleaning solutions, yes, but not the darkroom stuff.) Thinking about it, I never used stop bath for film, just running water.

Re: Ventalation: Budget is a poor excuse for students health. Shame on them!

Re: Practise: You'll soon get a feel for those times where one side of the film has skipped the tracks.

Have fun in the dark:)



hey stopbath - thanks for the detailed post. i used a darkroom lab in town yesterday and it was a state of the art setup. in comparison to the school darkroom it was so amazing and the guy running it has everything, incl. good ventilation. i could not even smell the chemicals in the printing lab. it was a joy to work in, so it goes to show a lot of it is environment.

[stopbath]

new girl on the bloc wrote:
hey stopbath - thanks for the detailed post. i used a darkroom lab in town yesterday and it was a state of the art setup. in comparison to the school darkroom it was so amazing and the guy running it has everything, incl. good ventilation. i could not even smell the chemicals in the printing lab. it was a joy to work in, so it goes to show a lot of it is environment.

Yeah!!! Glad you're able to do your printing/films with a clear head! :)

That's good news!

[Longwatcher]

It has been awhile, but some follow ups...

1. I chose the Elan-7e as it will function the closest to my 10D, which will, until I can afford a 1Ds or follow on, be the camera of choice for me. I will get it when I have too for a class. If I need to go full manual, I have a Hassleblad 500 EL/M to impress the instructor with. Although, if I was going to use it for a class, I need to turn it in for servicing.

2. Missed the fall semester, because I was travelling too much lately. Will check on it again in Spring, maybe.

3. I worked in the darkroom my dad had for several years. Had the most fun when my dad accidently mixed fixer and pool clorine (don't try in enclosed space, don't have anthing flamable nearby and don't hold sponge in your hand) when he attemped to use a sponge he had just cleaned the pool with to clean out the fixer tray.

My dad kept the darkroom for those times when he needed something specific that could not be gotten from the photo lab where he usually took his film to be developed and printed. He usually spent several hours touching up prints after he got them back - it is much easier to fix minor oops in the digital realm. All this just to explain I already have the wonderful darkroom experience under my belt and would prefer not to play with unnecessary chemicals.

4. My intention with taking classes was to get better at studio lighting and to also pick up any other knowledge I may glean from the teachers. I can eventually learn it on my own, but would prefer learning from someone who knows what they are doing and why. Books have not helped much, at least the ones I have checked out, I have gotten more from seeing other peoples setups and from my friend who is a video lighting tech. While my friend is very good at his lighting, video and still require slightly different techniques for dramatic effect.

5. Lastly, as of this moment, I may just get the set of studio lights I have decided on (White Lightnings) and just play with those until I get it the way I want.

Remember the title, Just whining.

[ilya]

alan-G3 wrote:
Hi

Me thinks you mis-judge.
An "academic" course has the the sole function of providing you with a "key" to a future job or academic course.
A "Training" course will provide a means of aquiring the skills to DO something.

Just what are you looking for.

Alan

I know its not my "whine", but I have to comment. Its ridiculous to forgive egregious lapses in relevance by colleges on the basis that "academia" is a theoretical exercise. I could go on, but I think that covers the high point.