BFP Vs Institute Of Pro Photograhy

Teeg67

Teeg67

Suspended / Banned
Messages
24
Name
Tony Greenwood
Edit My Images
Yes
Due to work commitments I am looking at doing an online course rather than p/t college course to improve my photography, and learn more about selling images. I have looked at both of these courses, but would appreciate any comments on anyone that has done either of these.

Thanks
Tony
 
Save your money. You can learn more in a faster time by doing "the Smiths course"

that is, you decide which magazines/papers you WANT to work for - the areas or subjects that interest you. Then you go and look at the magazines that cover those subjects. Not all at once, STUDY them - and look at not just the pictures them selves, but HOW they use those pictures.

Then go and start to make some pictures and send them in.......you'll get there. It wil cost you a few bob in magazines, but you will learn plenty. All the courses teach you is what I just have, but they charge you a load and take their time telling it to you!
 
What if you don't want to work for magazines/papers, and want to something a bit more creative ie. studio work etc?
 
Look at the studio pics in the ladies titles - you might get some funny looks!

basically learn how to analyse a picture, don't look at the picture, look at the light in the picture - where is it coming from, is it hard or soft.

get a couple of books - that is all the course is, bits taken out of books. Or a book is just bits of the courses put together. Whichever way you want to look at it.:thinking:

If you want to do studio work - portarit type studio work, or pack shots?

Just get a good lighting book and start to shoot - you'll learn faster than a course can teach you.
 
I know exactly what you're getting at fella.

[Sorry for the thread hi-jack]

I'm unsure on what I'd want to shoot, if I made a profession out of it, at the minute i've just got 3 or 4 subject I like shooting. Cars (one of my first loves), Landscapes (mostly night shots), People and Animals (probably both come under portrait?).
 
Take each inturn - you can use one subject to give you a breather from the last.

cars - sheet metal is fairly easy, it is what I do most of the itme. cars, bikes, boats - my bread and butter stuff. Most of the techniques are done in camera, a bit of PP where specialist equipment has been used. Mike Bailey uses a bloody great gantry to mount his camera on - he only has 3 lenses but is in demand from all the main manufacturers to shoot for them. His secret is lighting and technique, not fancy gear. The gantry is then removed in photoshop.

Many of the movement pictures you see are actually created at about 2 mph......I'l let you try and workj the rest out. Think about the problems and then solve them.

Landscapes - lighting makes or breaks it. Just look at loads and ANALYSE - timing is just as important. I think the main thing is being there though - and staying for the right light. I have a friend, Colin Prior, who shoots landscapes - I think they are wonderful. I don't have the patience! Sometimes he will go up a mountain in the afternoon to be ready for dawn the next day on the top of the mountain....bloody mad if you ask me. Gets the shots though.

people - the main thing here is to have subjects - ask!

Animals. Awkward. They don't understand english, so you have to try and learn animal....Dr Doolittle managed it.

How will a course teach you anything of that lot? What it will do is teach you how to learn. Do you really need someone to show you how to learn?
 
As said, know exactly where you're coming from fella, and I appreciate the input.

As for car shots, as you said are taken at about 2mph and then PP'd, I managed to work out the 'secret' behind the shot. Ok, not a massive achievement, but I was thinking too hard about it.

Cheers anyway though, makes perfect sense.
 
2mph - no wind rushing past, no engine vibration, no sudden bumps - 1 second exposure, looks like 60mph! The car is PUSHED by not so willing helpers!
 
Indeed, creates some fantastic results.
 
Hi Teeg67,

I'm currently mid way through the IOPP course. I kind of stumbled on photography by accident... some of the gear, no idea!

With this in mind I enrolled on the IOPP course after a WOM recommendation from a friend. My main aim was to be able to utilise my equipment to the full.

I appreciate what Lensflare is saying and he is totally right. however, I needed a shove in the right direction and I am a person that can learn intensely from written word. The IOPP course won't tell you to do this , then do that, step by step. It will however give you good background reading on all the associated subjects then set a task which is pretty open to interpretation.

But for me the point is that once I've 'learned and interpretated' the module, and submitted the appropriate task it is then scored by an online tutor who comments and adds more useful information. To some extent they see your interpretation and give advice on how to improve or where they see gaps... if that makes sense.

Teeg67, if you want some more info, please PM and I'll try and answer any specifics as I see them.

As I said before Lensflare is right, it's all about looking and learning, but I do feel the course has helped me start to look at things differently and understand lighting, colours and technical set ups better and quicker than I would have done by just reading magazines.

The other point is, I think I paid £450 for the course which sounds like a lot, but then magazines are £4 a pop anyway! Soon adds up!

Cheers

Rob
 
Cheers Simon. More sense in a few paragraphs there than in the 6 weeks of a photographic course I took last year.
I am going to another course though, but this time its to learn how to use post processing as I'm cr*p at it and i learn better by being shown than from reading.

Andy
 
Lensflare said:
Save your money. You can learn more in a faster time by doing "the Smiths course"

that is, you decide which magazines/papers you WANT to work for - the areas or subjects that interest you. Then you go and look at the magazines that cover those subjects. Not all at once, STUDY them - and look at not just the pictures them selves, but HOW they use those pictures.

Then go and start to make some pictures and send them in.......you'll get there. It wil cost you a few bob in magazines, but you will learn plenty. All the courses teach you is what I just have, but they charge you a load and take their time telling it to you!
Click to expand...

That's all very well if you've attained a certain level of experience and you can read a photo and work out how it was captured, but I'd say most would find it hard.

Futhermore, one method of study may work for one person, but not for a nother. Different people learn best with differing methods. Some may prefer to be shown then go away and try it out for themselves, some may work better by being taught as the first have a go. No-one can recommend with certainty a method of study above any other for someone if they're not fully aware of how best they learn.

Doidn a course give your study a framework, timelines, deadlines and also a focus. Also, while it can be useful to submit photos for appraisel to online forums, my personal opinion is that the majority of responses aren't instructive, some are plain incorrect and the few gems which do exist can be very hard to find.

The OP mentioned specifically looking at selling photos. There is a lot more to this than just capturing a good shot and this is nigh on impossible to learn yourself without a good deal of trial and error.

The key thing is to find the right training. Whilst you might think of the cost of a course as being a wase of money, if the OP can learn the same information in a much shorter time and start shooting selling shots sooner, it actually works out as more cost effective. The right training will always bring in more money than you pay out and from a business perspective in most instances going the self-teaching route is far less cost effective in the long run than finding the right course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top