Courses

[rhys]

I found some interesting looking courses via a leaflet dropped in the mailbox yesterday. There are a couple of courses that look worthwhile. I'm thinking particularly of the one on wedding photography. They're all at Midlands Technical College, (mtctraining.com).

Those I saw were:
Photography certificate basic - 18 hours
light and filtration - 3 hours
flash photography - 3 hours
wedding photography - 4 hours
marketting your photographs - 4 hours
portrait lighting - 3 hours
digital photo lab - 9 hours

Of those, the one that appealed to me most was wedding photography. I looked at the descriptions of the others but wasn't that thrilled as they didn't seem all that relevant to wedding photography.

The wedding photography course blurb reads:
"one of the most expensive and most important parts of the wedding, the wedding photographs last long after the formal ceremony. Both the professional photographer and the wedding director will benefit by learning the secrets to the formal wedding portraits, special effects, the reception, creating the proof album and maintaining control when emotions are high as the photographer and wedding director work together".

The course number is CEPIC50801.

Obviously the blurb tells me nothing about the course other than they're desperate to get people onto it - so desperate they don't care how badly worded their advert is.

Do you think it's worthwhile or just junk?

[Tish]

For just $79, if it were local to me, I'd take it. All I'd have to get out of it is something that would improve my photographic ability or business knowledge by $79 worth--and I usually find something new in every seminar I take that improves my skill set enough to offset the cost.

I can't attest to that specific program, of course, but it's probably worth at least contacting them to find out what the specific curriculum includes.

[coreypolis]

I'd rather buy a dvd set from some one like Gino L or Fong. It might be worth while, but who knows how much credability they have and what they'll cover.

[Phil V]

Reading the blurb, it sounds very much like it's been put together by amateurs for amateurs.

[tim]

I'd rather buy a dvd set from some one like Gino L or Fong. It might be worth while, but who knows how much credability they have and what they'll cover.

I don't like the Gino DVD I have, I just didn't learn much, and got bored watching it. "Masters of Wedding Photography" was great, inspirational rather than educational.

[rhys]

Reading the blurb, it sounds very much like it's been put together by amateurs for amateurs.

Sadly, that's the impression I get. I seem to be finding increasingly that the courses outside of universities seem to be extremely amateurish.

[coreypolis]

even the courses inside most universities are amateurish, though I'm a bit biased haivng attended Brooks. But I can't see it worth any ones time to major in photography at a typical state school, and even most photo school. They just don't teach the whole industry, just the techniques and some creativity.

[rhys]

even the courses inside most universities are amateurish, though I'm a bit biased haivng attended Brooks. But I can't see it worth any ones time to major in photography at a typical state school, and even most photo school. They just don't teach the whole industry, just the techniques and some creativity.

It depends on which courses. The academic courses such as physics, history, English, engineering etc are usually all pretty good. I quite enjoyed the degree I obtained. The problem comes with some lecturers on degree courses. I recall one module entitled "The Rennaisance" which looked fascinating as it covered the Borgas etc and I thought would go nicely with The Crusades, The Zenith of the Meidieval Papacy etc. How wrong I was! The lecturer was so bad that a class of 35 whittled down to 15 by the end of the 3rd week. At the end of the 3rd week even I left, joining another module (and doing rather well in the replacement module). By the time the exams came, two people of that class of 35 sat the exam and of those only one passed.

Other courses run by universities can be dodgy. The problem is that they are not actually run by the universities but rather by individuals that have put together course-like handbooks and who've hired a lecture room in the university. The universities don't care - it's all income for them.

Then we move onto courses run by other groups. I can't speak for America as I have not taken any courses in America yet. I can speak for Britain though. In Britain the current confidence trick is the ECDL (European Computer Driving Licence) which takes money from people that think they've had training and from companies that think their staff are receiving training. The course content varies and the quality is usually apallingly low. Needless to say it's a course run by the British Computer Society. When I enquired about joining them I was given some spiel about different levels of membership dependent entirely upon academic qualifications and how one could not join but had to be selected by other members to join. At that point I knew the BCS was a pile of B####C#S. Most computer professionals have a low opinion of the ECDL as do many of the BCS. At that point I refused to join any professional organisations for fear they all be tarred with the same brush.

Now let's talk about the worst courses of all - those run by the British Department of Employment. They recruit the unemployed to follow various "courses" and those courses really take taxpayers money under flase pretences. Again people go expecting training, receive nothing and the DoE can rub its hands and say "we put X unemployed people through training courses. Now there's no reason for them to be unemployed". They fact the poor souls receive no worthwhile training doesn't seem to enter into the argument.

[coreypolis]

sorry, I meant photo related, not all courses

[Banbert]

I am doing a photography course at nightschool currently and although some of its very basic its really reinforcing my knowledge in certain areas as well as forcing me to experiment with the camera doing things that I possibly wouldnt do otherwise.

Its also good to spend time mxing with other people interested in photography and we have quite a mix of people on the course from old time film pros that are just converting to digital to people who have just bought their first slr and are learning how to use it.

The other thing thats really good is that they have a couple of fairly well equipped studios there that we use and thats good fun for playing with stuff that I dont own yet like lights, backdrops, tents, light boxes etc.

Its a step towards a professional photography qualification and the cost isnt that much at all so very worthwhile imo.

[rhys]

sorry, I meant photo related, not all courses

Ah. No problem. I wanted to vent my spleen anway - it gave me a chance to sit for five minutes and enjoy a cuppa while I have a break from putting up Christmas decorations.

Thinking further. I've looked at a lot of the photography books in Barnes and Noble and Books a Million. None seem to be all that advanced. They all seem to cover the same ground and few seem to go further into the interesting areas such as DOF calculations, exposure calculations based on the Sunny 16 rule etc. It looks rather like Joe-the-low-skilled-Journalist has taken to writing books as a way of supplamenting his pittance while working at McDonalds.