Did any of you take a photography course?

[Tobes]

I just wondered how many of you learnt photography in college/university etc or if you just have it as a hobby?

Reason being (you're all going to hate me for this) is that I have dropped photography course at college. Why? There's a couple of reasons.

I wasn't learning what I wanted to. It was a lot of research on other photographers, comparing your work to theirs etc and filling up a sketch book with it all. Don't get me wrong, looking at other photographers work is important and it's what I do on here. But there's a point where it becomes boring and all I want to do is learn how to use my camera, how to compose a good shot, how to use post processing.

The other reason is because I feel it was the least important course I needed. I am aiming for a uni course in games design, specifically map design. The other courses I am taking are Media Communications, Film Studies and Design & Illustration.

So with the post I suppose I'm want to know if I could still pursue photography as a serious hobby. Part of me is slightly gutted that I have had to give it up but the bigger part knows I just need to concentrate on getting into uni as I'm getting too to be worrying about failing courses.

Don't think of this post as one that sounds like a guy who bought a camera and is now going to chuck it in the corner of the room. I have no intention to stop learning in my own time, despite what I know my parents will say when I tell them the good news...

 

[Jimmy_Lemon]

I did a GCSE in photography and also a summer course at college. The GCSE was because I was keen on photography as was fairly sure I would get a good grade, was very little taught photography as was basically a variation on the Art GCSE so was very much like you mention. The college course was just for fun really, and we got to play around in the dark room. I was taught most things by my dad (ex pro) while I was growing up, so the courses were either a way of getting a usefull qualification or just for fun for me.

 

[chenng]

Hey Tobes...

My signature says it all my friend - I don't have a lot of posh gear but the most useful thing in my kit bag is my photography 'A' level, which I got an A in.

When I did the course, the content was mainly based around the study of other photographers and artists works, and using their influence to create my own images, image boards, and dissertations. That being said, a huge amount of time was spent in the darkroom (those who don't know please PM me!), developing negatives and processing prints.

Of course there was also a great deal of time spent on learning the 'science' - the bit I found most interesting - and the history - which to be honest I found fascinating. Learning about apertures, shutter speeds, the behaviour of certain film etc in the classroom is childs play compared to reading it in a book, so in that respect I was very fortunate. When the course was completed I had greater desire to continue due to the knowledge I was armed with, and soon joined a camera club - which also opened up a number of opportunities.

If you have decided that your life's path needs to take a new direction and you are sure that is the way you want it to go, then of course you need to drop the course and do whatever is right for your career. I promise you however that if you pick up your camera and get seriously into the hobby again in the future, you will regret not having the qualification having had the opportunity! I could go on for ages about how much I enjoyed the course and how beneficial I felt it was, but if your mind is made up there is little point!!

Good luck!

Gary

 

[Tobes]

When I did the course, the content was mainly based around the study of other photographers and artists works, and using their influence to create my own images, image boards, and dissertations. That being said, a huge amount of time was spent in the darkroom (those who don't know please PM me!), developing negatives and processing prints.

You have summed up the course quiet well. The problem I have is more time seemed to be spent on other artists work than my own. As for the darkroom side, I know it's a important part of photography, but knowing I have more flexibility digitally really puts me off darkroom as it's a much longer process.

Learning about apertures, shutter speeds, the behaviour of certain film etc in the classroom is childs play compared to reading it in a book,

Apparently 3 lessons was all that was needed to explain this. Was really annoyed that not enough time was spent explaining a cameras features. Nothing was explained on light such as flash, bouncing light etc.

If you have decided that your life's path needs to take a new direction and you are sure that is the way you want it to go, then of course you need to drop the course and do whatever is right for your career. I promise you however that if you pick up your camera and get seriously into the hobby again in the future, you will regret not having the qualification having had the opportunity! I could go on for ages about how much I enjoyed the course and how beneficial I felt it was, but if your mind is made up there is little point!!

It's not really a change in direction I don't think. I spent 2 years in 6th form taking IT and failed, took a year out to collect myself, work and have a good summer. Unis require different amount of UCAS points to enter. These are based on the different grades in your past qualification. So all I needed to get into Uni was points, not specific courses. So I spoke to the college and just took the courses which sounded like something I would enjoy and could finish.

I can't say the course has been the reason for me going out and taking photos, I think it was something that pushed me to buy a camera. This weekend I went to Crantock beach whilst it was raining knowing that the shoot would have nothing to do with my work. So I'm hoping this will continue as a hobby and not stop. I guess the only thing which could stop this is if I slowly forget about it. So to counter this I should maybe start being more active on these forums and do some more reading.

 

[8utters]

The other reason is because I feel it was the least important course I needed. I am aiming for a uni course in games design, specifically map design.

I'm a 3rd year at Salford doing a degree (bachelors of science) in Computer & Video games.

It's a good field to get into as the games industry is still very young (only 20 years or so)...there's alot of money to be had in it, and it's getting bigger.

As for photography courses - never taken one myself, everything I know about photography and cameras I taught myself.

I'v had plenty of people come up to me in clubs and say 'Yeah man, I do photography at uni blah blah' and really don't know alot about it at all.

Courses in photography don't automaticaly get you a job either, the way I see it is that it's all about the opportunities you get compared to the skill you have (there are tens of thousands of great photographehrs out there who won't hit it big, purely becuase they haven't had the chance).

 

[mattt]

Hoping to do a uni or college course in photography or photo journalism!

 

[kelack]

Thinking about an online course, but just been self taught - taught on here and taught by my Dad (amongst others)

 

[petemc]

Not done a single course, or even read a book on photography or photoshop. Most of the photographers I know are the same. Courses are good in some respects as they allow you to play with kit you normally can't, and may have a lot of connections to help you get started after the course. But if you've got the knack for it you can learn it all on your own with time.

 

[8utters]

^ Yeah i'v never read a book either.

Taught myself Photoshop, Flash and Dreamweaver aswel.

 

[StevieF8]

m doing a course becasue I want a diploma in photography, I think in the end it will help me get work but at the end of the day if you dont have a good eye for a photo you won't get anywhere

ive found in other areas, doesnt matter how good you are at something these days, if you dont have a qualification to back you up, you get nowhere and no-one will take you on.

just my opinion

 

[petemc]

ive found in other areas, doesnt matter how good you are at something these days, if you dont have a qualification to back you up, you get nowhere and no-one will take you on.

just my opinion

In creative industries if you can demonstrate you can do the job it outweighs a scrap of paper.

 

[Wile E. coyote]

I've only been doing photography for less than 2 years, bought my first DSLR in may 2006 and have been self (and input from a friend) taught. Might think about doing a course in the future, however I think a piece of paper saying you can take the picture means nothing unless you can really take the picture when it matters.

 

[StevieF8]

In creative industries if you can demonstrate you can do the job it outweighs a scrap of paper.

Pete, maybe the case with photograpy, but i'm talking from experience, granted, in other fields
but ive found that no qualifications but "i can do the job" just doesn't cut it
so I started the course, - it cost me £500 but I see that as an investement, hopfully paid with the first job or 2

you know what I think about your work, I just feel this is the best way for me to get in to the business!

 

[chenng]

Petemc, I don't think anybody is saying that you can't learn it in your own time - and as you have shown with your quality of work a course is not neccessary for everybody.

"In creative industries if you can demonstrate you can do the job it outweighs a scrap of paper"

is a reasonable claim to make, however logic dictates that if two candidates for a job are equal in every respect, the one with the most qualifications would generally be successful in the post.

Just for the record, personally I knew what I wanted my career to be before taking my particular choices at A level, and none of those choices were particularly relevant to my job role. I would suggest that many people take the photography course at A level NOT intending to make photography their career - but to try their hand at a new skill and obtain a further education qualification, for any prospective job. Tobes touches on this in his second post, stating that he needed UCAS points to progress into university, and took the courses he felt he would enjoy the most, thus enabling him to progress on his chosen path.

In fact "scrap of paper" is bordering on offensive. With a willing student a lot of work goes into any A Level, and the creative ones are no exception.

 

[petemc]

Pete, maybe the case with photograpy, but i'm talking from experience, granted, in other fields
but ive found that no qualifications but "i can do the job" just doesn't cut it
so I started the course, - it cost me £500 but I see that as an investement, hopfully paid with the first job or 2

you know what I think about your work, I just feel this is the best way for me to get in to the business!

I didn't just mean photography. I did web design before hand. I know a lot of people in the creative world and a lot would agree. If you have a strong portfolio showing you can do the job, it'll be a lot stronger than a graduate with paper. Obviously outside creative it'll be different. You can't wander into surgery without a degree. But creativity is something that you don't need to goto uni for.

 

[petemc]

In fact "scrap of paper" is bordering on offensive. With a willing student a lot of work goes into any A Level, and the creative ones are no exception.

I've got A levels, and a degree in Software Engineering. My degree didn't get me a job in Web design, my portfolio did. It would also be silly to assume I meant that creative people are an exception to work. I did say they have to prove they can do the job with a strong portfolio.

 

[8utters]

Yep i'm with you there again pete.

I also did webdesign before photography, never had any qualifications whatsoever for it but managed to get plenty of work.

 

[mole2k]

The creative industry is very different to the normal ones, if somebody is looking to take you on for a photography job do you really think they care if you have a degree or not ?

As with a lot of the creative stuff you're only as good as your last work. I intend to do a degree in photography but its not for the qualification, its for the ability to try out lots of different equipment, techniques and in general gain experience. I would still do the course if it had no qualification tied to it. I couldnt really care less about having more letters after my name.

 

[mcspreader]

I'm waiting to go to college this year to study A level photography, amongst other art and media related courses, because at 43 years of age, I've discovered that potential employers are more interested in bits of paper and recognised qualifications than pure,natural, talent.

 

[petemc]

I've discovered that potential employers are more interested in bits of paper and recognised qualifications than pure,natural, talent.

I'd completely disagree. I know people who've been doing photography for over 20 years, who are very successful and 0 bits of paper. None of my clients have cared if I have a degree in it, and they're always more impressed when I say I don't. People hire me based on my portfolio.

 

[Rocket_Dog]

re qualifications in the creative field. Ive seen both sides of it, with most leaning to your portfolio of work rather than the qualification.

I have a degree in Textile design, and some Companies who employ in-house designers have often expected a degree qualification.

Though to be honest, and almost all the time in freelance work, it has been about portfolio, portfolio, portfolio. In the past I have had half a dozen agents to sell my work, and not one was bothered about my qualification.

 

[Wookie]

I think there are 2 different markets being discussed: company employment and clients

the arguments seem to run:
- company employment needs the bits of paper
- clients need the portfolio

?

 

[chenng]

I fully understand what is being said here. It is clear that when getting photography jobs your good portfolio would become the number one requirement, in the same way that a professional footballer would not crack out his GCSE portfolio at a trial.

I still believe there would be examples of jobs within photography and the media where a qualification would help - surely it can do no harm to have the qualification. And I stand by my original statement that if two people are equally matched for such a role in every respect, logic dictates that he or she who has the most qualifications would be successful. Not to mention that if you DID need a new career for whatever reason (disability, redundancy, etc) there would be no guarantee that work would quickly be found in the creative field, and you would have the fall back of a qualification.

I want to stress that I do NOT believe that having a qualification in photography neccessarily makes you a better photographer - just like having an A level in PE would not make you a top sportsman. Personally, my current job required that I had sustained qualification to A level standard. What is the harm (like Tobes right at the start) of taking those courses that are the most enjoyable, in order to end up where he wanted to? I would not swap my job to be a photographer - so I made the right choice, and it appears that Tobes is going to do similarly.

This has been an interesting thread!

 

[paulpierce]

I think it depends on the type of photographer you wish to become, for the likes of fashion and advertising, a qualification may be of some use to getting you started on that career path.

You only have to look at the attitudes on the tv programme picture this, were the judges seemed to favor those with formal training.

 

[TomB]

I'm part-way through an MSc in Biological photography & Imaging, and having spoken to past students the general consensus seems to be that if you're good, then having the 'scrap of paper' is actually pretty advantageous in securing work, but if you're not that hot then it doesn't do you much good.

 

[Chappers]

Did 4 years of Photography ,many many many years ago at what was then known as Regent Street Poly, now part of the University of North London, I think. Have a piece of paper somewhere that says I'm a qualified commercial photographer. Never been asked to show it, and probably couldn't find it now any way.

Having said that a structured course does give you a good grounding in a lot of practical elements as well as theory.

I've also found that with photography as well as a lot of other subjects you never stop learning.

 

[inaneredstripe]

nope. all mine was learnt off her indoors ,and reading stuff from the web,books and on here.
SHE has a city and guilds, O and A LEVELS in tography and has done various other specialist courses.she says that a lot of stuff in the C & G was research into others work, and not very practical.she realy enjoyed the A level tho.
and specialised courses offered her more benefit photography wise than most of the others.
but as wedding togs, our (mostly her) work(portfolio and website) does our promotion for us.
dont think anyone has ever asked to see her quals.

 

[petemc]

Having said that a structured course does give you a good grounding in a lot of practical elements as well as theory.

Indeed. I was tempted by a photography degree mainly for the social and photo aspects.

 

[mole2k]

Indeed. I was tempted by a photography degree mainly for the social and photo aspects.

That is a large part of the reason why im seriously considering it at the moment.

 

[dod]

if you dont have a qualification to back you up, you get nowhere and no-one will take you on.

Interesting, we just took on a guy with a PhD in marine biology or something. He's been looking for a job for months and couldn't get one because he was "too qualified".

however logic dictates that if two candidates for a job are equal in every respect, the one with the most qualifications would generally be successful in the post.

Very much depends on the employer. I'd rather have someone who is teachable but has good people and communication skills. They're far more difficult to teach than the technical aspects of any job.

 

[sportysnaps]

I did an o level (yes it was that long ago) - I think I’m a better photographer for it as it gave me a good grounding in exposure/iso/ aperture depth of field composition rule of thirds, and also black and white developing and printing etc.

I don’t think you need to have qualifications to be successful but some good technical knowledge allows the photographer to focus on the creative side of the process

A successful pro photographer (these days) is often successful due to marketing and business skills rather then photography skills, and sadly many courses lack these elements

 

[RobbieW]

Not done a single course, or even read a book on photography or photoshop. Most of the photographers I know are the same. Courses are good in some respects as they allow you to play with kit you normally can't, and may have a lot of connections to help you get started after the course. But if you've got the knack for it you can learn it all on your own with time.

but you must of read an article on the internet about how do do things, or did you learn your photoshop and HDR skills by your self? the internet is also a way of learning.

 

[petemc]

I did an o level (yes it was that long ago) - I think I’m a better photographer for it as it gave me a good grounding in exposure/iso/ aperture depth of field composition rule of thirds, and also black and white developing and printing etc.

Which you can get in your average high street magazine these days. B&W processing in Photoshop. General guide to taking photos, or even on here

 

[RobbieW]

I did an o level (yes it was that long ago) - I think I’m a better photographer for it as it gave me a good grounding in exposure/iso/ aperture depth of field composition rule of thirds, and also black and white developing and printing etc.

I don’t think you need to have qualifications to be successful but some good technical knowledge allows the photographer to focus on the creative side of the process

A successful pro photographer (these days) is often successful due to marketing and business skills rather then photography skills, and sadly many courses lack these elements

I think you have hit the nail on the head there.

 

[RobbieW]

Which you can get in your average high street magazine these days. B&W processing in Photoshop. General guide to taking photos, or even on here

you can read all this in a magazine, but alot of courses also enable you to do the practical side of photography which is sometime better than reading it in a magazine, and also more fun as you get to meet new people who share a common interest. Of course there are some people who don't want to meet new people and socialise - but thats up to them.

 

[petemc]

but you must of read an article on the internet about how do do things, or did you learn your photoshop and HDR skills by your self? the internet is also a way of learning.

I learnt a lot of Photoshop by playing. I learnt HDR by playing.

 

[petemc]

you can read all this in a magazine, but alot of courses also enable you to do the practical side of photography which is sometime better than reading it in a magazine, and also more fun as you get to meet new people who share a common interest. Of course there are some people who don't want to meet new people and socialise - but thats up to them.

Its what I've been saying in this thread all along.

Indeed. I was tempted by a photography degree mainly for the social and photo aspects.

 

[StevieF8]

Interesting, we just took on a guy with a PhD in marine biology or something. He's been looking for a job for months and couldn't get one because he was "too qualified".

bet he isnt over qualified to be a marine biologist!

 

[Davec223]

I agree with what sportysnaps said.
I did a City and guilds in photography nearly 20 years ago, as said it gave me a very good standing for the scientific and technical photography I was doing at the time, due to when I did he course there was no digital, It covered film from 35mm to 10x8 and I must admit that 5x4 and 10x8 were my favorite formats. Digital has brought a whole new learning curve, what I could do with film I am having to relearn with digital. The hardest thing I am finding is getting my head round sharpening.

 

[RobbieW]

Pete - you said "But if you've got the knack for it you can learn it all on your own with time" and you have now confirmed that you leanrt everything yourself, then why did you bother to do an article on HDR for a magazine last year? isn't reading an article in a magazine the same as these people doing a course, they are all learning from some one who see's themselves as a pro. How can you say that doing courses etc isn;t worth as much as real life experience when in the next breath your writing articles. Maybe had you done a course then you wouldn't of over exposed your liverpool images (as picked up by others in one of your other threads)