Do you need a degree to enjoy photography?

I read a quote recently but can't remember where saying that "photography was a combination of art and science" very astute, I think that's pretty spot on !
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
I think the pros of a formal education is that someone who has passed a formal course is that they should have very basic core skills at the very least. Also you have to remember that doing a formal course is just as much to do with socialisation as well as the topic itself, for example conditioning people to do work to deadlines. So from an employers point of view when they look at someone with a certificate, they imply that they "should" have very basic skills covered and be able to work to deadlines.
 
Michael D Beckwith said:
I think the pros of a formal education is that someone who has passed a formal course is that they should have very basic core skills at the very least. Also you have to remember that doing a formal course is just as much to do with socialisation as well as the topic itself, for example conditioning people to do work to deadlines. So from an employers point of view when they look at someone with a certificate, they imply that they "should" have very basic skills covered and be able to work to deadlines.
Click to expand...
They'd be wrong though, a photography degree is no indication of ability of the 'craft' of photography, it's an academic qualification usually based on understanding of the art of photography.

A HND or C&G would be a better measure of the craft, or even a qualification from somewhere like the RPS.

btw that in no way means that a photography degree holds no value, I'm a great believer in higher education, but they're about acquisition of knowledge and understanding not about gathering practical skills.
 
Phil V said:
They'd be wrong though, a photography degree is no indication of ability of the 'craft' of photography, it's an academic qualification usually based on understanding of the art of photography.
Click to expand...

This^

Time and time again people constantly fail to understand what a BA (Hons) in Photography is for. Bachelor of Arts.. it's an academic qualification. You are measured on the artistic and communicative aspects of your portfolio, and your academic writing and research abilities. Any good degree will INCLUDE technical training as part of the curriculum, but you are not MEASURED by it... there are no exams to pass to test your technical knowledge. If you have crap technical ability, then it will probably show in your folio. You can get BA graduates that will kick your ass technically, and you'll get some that are next to useless in a strictly commercial photography situation. That's not what a BA is guaranteeing though, so stop measuring a mile with a yardstick.

If you want to ensure someone has great technical ability, then look for graduates with a BSc in Photography, or a HND, but for god sake, stop moaning about BA graduates. It's your fault for not realising what a BA is for.

I get tired of people saying "I employed an assistant with a BA and they were useless!... couldn't even set up my Phase One system to shoot tethered via Capture One... What DO they teach them NOWADAYS".... LOL We teach technical, and some will listen and become very good at it.. some won't. You make of Higher Education what you will. We don't spoon feed and prop people up all the way through. We teach and demonstrate, then it's down to the student to carry on practising, or researching a subject. They are MEASURED on Merits of work artistically and their academic ability, because that is what a BA (Hons) programme is predominantly designed to do.. to create critically thinking visual artists... not technicians.

You want to hire an assistant, then by all means look at BA graduates, but you'll need to test their technical ability, as some will be great, some won't. If you can't be arsed doing that, then look for those with a HND or BSc instead.
 
I don't think it means a lot / is worth it these days, I also debated this myself. Even for other types of photography, for example, marine and natural history photography, I know a lot of people studying for this degree... I recently got interviewed by them and I am only several years older than them, i get published and the money i earn from working i put into my kit and travelling, so getting the shots. It's nothing that can't be self taught, in the context of the course i'm talking about, it's fieldcraft which has to be learnt through experience.
 
The only degree you need is a large degree of patience!
Theres a lot of difference between people who want to do something than those that HAVE to do something (if you have chosen a path you dont really want to pursue because you feel you have too).
There is also a difference between Preaching, Teaching and Lecturing isnt there... I wonder how many Professional Photographers have a degree?
 
Going back to the thread title, I rather suspect one can enjoy photography more without a degree, because it's able to remain a hobby and something done for fun, rather than a profession or occupation for which one has to exercise training. That's not to say you cannot or should not enjoy what you do for a living, but it can take the fun element out and make it routine and often mundane.

I have a science degree, rather than art, and one of the key things about that is that we are trained to self-educate, and if we wanted to graduate with honours then it was necessary to demonstrate that we could carry out a program of research, actually adding to the sum of human knowledge. Hopefully arts degrees are somewhat similar in this respect. However a curious aspect of science degrees is that they also fail to train people to actually do the practical aspects of science (there isn't time) so when searching for technical staff, it's been important to weed out the clever but inept. It sounds like something similar be necessary happen with photography garduates too.
 
If I need a degree to enjoy photography I should give up now :LOL:. I left school at 16 (far too many years ago now) and have been in full time employment ever since. I've done a few additional qualifications at night school and in my own time since then, but nothing to degree level as I've never needed to and nothing in photography. I'm happy with my career, job and earnings so why bother.

For me photography is a serious hobby that earns me a little pocket money now and then (although I'd have to go a long way to make back what I've pumped into it). I learn something new every day and love that aspect of it, the day I stop learning is the day I give up probably.

The only experience I've had personally with someone who has professional photography qualifications left a bad taste in the mouth as he was a stuck up, self opinionated t*** for want of a better word that thought he was better than anyone else because he had this qualification and to be honest most of what he produced was "ok" but an acquired taste.
 
Last edited:
I've not read the whole thread but my view - in reply to the question:

Do you need a degree to enjoy photography ?

No

You don't need any kind of qualification to enjoy something.

Person A may gain a better appreciation of photography upon completion of the degree and therefore more enjoyment than he or she had before but person B may enjoy it more than person A despite having no qualification.

It's all down to the individual.
 
Last edited:
Sadly Technical Colleges and Polys which used to provide 'hands on' technical training have diminished.
 
One of the things about being a student is that it brings other opportunities and encourages thought in different ways.
How many times have we seen images on here critiqued on just the technical aspects, completing ignoring the thought or artistic intentions.

It really has opened my eyes attending exhibitions I probably wouldn't have before, plus speaking to tutors or other students brings a new depth.
I can enjoy my photography, but this has moved it onto a whole new level
 
then I would need Degree in Sports Knowledge !!! lol

Taking Degree in Photography will only teach you mainly in art.
 
Ian-Highlander said:
If I need a degree to enjoy photography I should give up now :LOL:. I left school at 16 (far too many years ago now) and have been in full time employment ever since. I've done a few additional qualifications at night school and in my own time since then, but nothing to degree level as I've never needed to and nothing in photography. I'm happy with my career, job and earnings so why bother.

For me photography is a serious hobby that earns me a little pocket money now and then (although I'd have to go a long way to make back what I've pumped into it). I learn something new every day and love that aspect of it, the day I stop learning is the day I give up probably.

The only experience I've had personally with someone who has professional photography qualifications left a bad taste in the mouth as he was a stuck up, self opinionated t*** for want of a better word that thought he was better than anyone else because he had this qualification and to be honest most of what he produced was "ok" but an acquired taste.
Click to expand...
Sadly mirrors my experiences too, except with bitter photography university students who think they're better for it, pangs of jealousy spring to mind as I have a stable job which pays for my equipment and travelling so i get the shots and sometimes get published.
I completely agree with your post
 
I really cant understand all the negativity about those who choose to do a degree in photography. I'm just a keen amateur but I have a passion for photography. I never have and never will make a penny from my photography.

But I would love to go to University and do a photography degree now. If I could afford the tuition fees, I'd be enrolled for this September. I love the idea of spending three years immersing myself in a subject I love, surrounded by like minded individuals, taught by knowledgeable practitioners, with access to amazing resources, being challenged intellectually, looking at new and exciting things from a different perspective and trying to understand and make sense of the art, meeting new and interesting people and networking with creative people from other disciplines. etc etc

It really sounds like heaven to me. Surely the only barrier to any of us wanting to enjoy such an experience is finance. And sadly, as for me that is one barrier that is too large to climb (thanks Nick Clegg and his lies over tuition fees).

So I can only peer through the window and wish.

Sure you don't need a degree to enjoy photography or become a photographer but I know I would enjoy my hobby much more if I had the opportunity to study for one.

So why do so many feel the need to knock those that do a photography degree?
 
GatoAzul1968 said:
then I would need Degree in Sports Knowledge !!! lol
Taking Degree in Photography will only teach you mainly in art.
Click to expand...

Correct, as Pookey said above, you study for a Bachelor of Arts. What's the issue? What I can tell you is is gives you a wider knowledge, a greater depth of understanding. Wil that make you enjoy it more, possibly, I guess everyone is different, certainly studying for mine is very enjoyable.
 
Steve said:
I really cant understand all the negativity about those who choose to do a degree in photography. I'm just a keen amateur but I have a passion for photography. I never have and never will make a penny from my photography.

But I would love to go to University and do a photography degree now. If I could afford the tuition fees, I'd be enrolled for this September. I love the idea of spending three years immersing myself in a subject I love, surrounded by like minded individuals, taught by knowledgeable practitioners, with access to amazing resources, being challenged intellectually, looking at new and exciting things from a different perspective and trying to understand and make sense of the art, meeting new and interesting people and networking with creative people from other disciplines. etc etc

It really sounds like heaven to me. Surely the only barrier to any of us wanting to enjoy such an experience is finance. And sadly, as for me that is one barrier that is too large to climb (thanks Nick Clegg and his lies over tuition fees).

So I can only peer through the window and wish.

Sure you don't need a degree to enjoy photography or become a photographer but I know I would enjoy my hobby much more if I had the opportunity to study for one.

So why do so many feel the need to knock those that do a photography degree?
Click to expand...


Check out the OCA. There's a few of us studying this way with affordable fees, but it is distance learning and you do have to put the work in - around 8-12 hours a week.
 
Steve said:
I really cant understand all the negativity about those who choose to do a degree in photography. I'm just a keen amateur but I have a passion for photography. I never have and never will make a penny from my photography.

But I would love to go to University and do a photography degree now. If I could afford the tuition fees, I'd be enrolled for this September. I love the idea of spending three years immersing myself in a subject I love, surrounded by like minded individuals, taught by knowledgeable practitioners, with access to amazing resources, being challenged intellectually, looking at new and exciting things from a different perspective and trying to understand and make sense of the art, meeting new and interesting people and networking with creative people from other disciplines. etc etc

It really sounds like heaven to me. Surely the only barrier to any of us wanting to enjoy such an experience is finance. And sadly, as for me that is one barrier that is too large to climb (thanks Nick Clegg and his lies over tuition fees).

So I can only peer through the window and wish.

Sure you don't need a degree to enjoy photography or become a photographer but I know I would enjoy my hobby much more if I had the opportunity to study for one.

So why do so many feel the need to knock those that do a photography degree?
Click to expand...
No one's knocking them, and I'm certainly not.

I should have stated in my post that I have a couple of friends who do the degrees too and they're totally fine, it's just sad in my experiences there are those that think they are better, or elite for embarking on one and their attitudes stink. Of course, maybe I've just met 'the wrong bunch', but it is my experiences nonetheless.
With how much it costs these days, it seems more worthwhile to pursue something else and do it on the side/at the weekend, especially where the area of photography I'm concerned in anyway (nature/wildlife) - the majority of those guys make their living from renting hides/running workshops, which for the most part a degree in natural history photography wouldn't teach you.
 
woody12 said:
Hi, not sure to put this, but here goes. My eighteen year old niece has just finished a college course where she received a diploma for her course which she passed with distinction. Together we have a lot of banter which she ridicules my work which I do for personal enjoyment and have no training, no qualifications only self taught. Meeting up at a family meal she asked to borrow my camera which was fitted with a 35mm prime lens. After ten minutes she returned asking how you zoom on this camera. Couldn't stop laughing, saying its a prime and you might need to change the iso as it was set high from a previous shot. She asked me what was iso and did my camera shoot in auto mode. Surely a two year course could teach students such things as iso, surely that's basic. What really annoyed me was she was a proper photography as she had a diploma - that really wound me up, surely there's nothing wrong than finding your own way, besides I know the difference between a zoom and a prime!
Click to expand...

Thats sounds so like the people that do A level Photography at my school, There all useless. Some of them are passing and getting B/A Grades when they don't know how to change a lens or know what ISO is?! All these qualifications are pretty much pointless from what I can see, I have honestly not met anyone else doing a qualification in photography that knows anything about what they are doing, and don't get me started on people doing A level with Iphones...
 
I've always enjoyed my photography without a degree (in anything).

I have however just applied for the Open College of the Arts on the The Art of Photography course. It's not to make a new career, it's not to enjoy my hobby more, it's simply to push myself (never studied at degree level before), and to try and improve my photography. I've wanted to study toward a degree for some years but my circumstances never really fit in with it, but now they do.

But people coming out of University with a degree in a particular subject and having very little idea about the real world application of that subject is not limited to photography. I've interviewed people for technical TV roles before who didn't know where peak white was on a Vectorscope or how many frames there were in a PAL second and all sorts of other basic stuff. These have people straight out of Ravensbourne where they should have learned this information backwards.

Similarly one of the best people we've had did a Marine Biology degree and had spent the last 5 years underwater filming people for videos with a dream of one day working for the BBC. He knew his stuff and anything he didn't know he asked and learned fast.
 
Joeturner11 said:
Thats sounds so like the people that do A level Photography at my school, There all useless. Some of them are passing and getting B/A Grades when they don't know how to change a lens or know what ISO is?! All these qualifications are pretty much pointless from what I can see, I have honestly not met anyone else doing a qualification in photography that knows anything about what they are doing, and don't get me started on people doing A level with Iphones...
Click to expand...


A level Photography is crap. Don't judge all photography qualifications and courses by A levels. You'd never, ever get work in photography by having an A level in it unless you're folio was incredibly good.. It's utterly and completely useless. It's unlikely you'll get a place on a degree course with it either unless you have something significant in your folio. It's a genuinely useless qualification.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
A level Photography is crap. Don't judge all photography qualifications and courses by A levels. You'd never, ever get work in photography by having an A level in it unless you're folio was incredibly good.. It's utterly and completely useless. It's unlikely you'll get a place on a degree course with it either unless you have something significant in your folio. It's a genuinely useless qualification.
Click to expand...
I think you need to get off the fence and speak your mind David ;) Seriously though is it really that bad? I know some of the A level subjects are allegedly easier than they were, makes you wonder why and how they are allowed to be so bad ...

Steve said:
I really cant understand all the negativity about those who choose to do a degree in photography. I'm just a keen amateur but I have a passion for photography. I never have and never will make a penny from my photography.

But I would love to go to University and do a photography degree now. If I could afford the tuition fees, I'd be enrolled for this September. I love the idea of spending three years immersing myself in a subject I love, surrounded by like minded individuals, taught by knowledgeable practitioners, with access to amazing resources, being challenged intellectually, looking at new and exciting things from a different perspective and trying to understand and make sense of the art, meeting new and interesting people and networking with creative people from other disciplines. etc etc

It really sounds like heaven to me. Surely the only barrier to any of us wanting to enjoy such an experience is finance. And sadly, as for me that is one barrier that is too large to climb (thanks Nick Clegg and his lies over tuition fees).

So I can only peer through the window and wish.

Sure you don't need a degree to enjoy photography or become a photographer but I know I would enjoy my hobby much more if I had the opportunity to study for one.

So why do so many feel the need to knock those that do a photography degree?
Click to expand...
I'm with you on that one, what a great way to spend three years - better buy a lottery ticket ...
 
PaulButler said:
I think you need to get off the fence and speak your mind David ;) Seriously though is it really that bad? I know some of the A level subjects are allegedly easier than they were, makes you wonder why and how they are allowed to be so bad ...

I'm with you on that one, what a great way to spend three years - better buy a lottery ticket ...
Click to expand...


Yeah... I'm sure there's an A -level course somewhere that is OK.. there's always an exception to the rule, but I know a great deal of A level courses, and they're nearly always taught by someone who doesn't really know what they're doing... they have very few facilities, and they just give a very basic introduction. Every A level student I've interviewed (we get a fair few applying for the BA) can't even really use a camera. My advice to anyone of an age to be considering a photographic subject is go for a BTEC Diploma/Extended Diploma, and then if you're still determined after that, go onto higher education. The reason A levels in photography still persist is because in order to do a BTEC, kids have to study full-time, and parents nearly always don't want their kids to do that, as it's "not a proper job", so they usually convince them to do an A level as that is just something they can study along side "proper" subjects.
 
No.

Everything I know, I taught myself on an old Olympus OM1 and then a Canon 300D. I enrolled in a Degree Foundation photography course purely to make use of the benefits - unlimited dark room time and free film! I spent 2/3rds of the course in a locked ward for mental health (thankfully far better now!) and still came out top of the class with 100%.

I then went on to enroll in the HND course.. got close to about 1/3rd into that, walked out and never went back. It took me a little over a year to get the passion back and pick up a camera again.

I don't claim to be fantastic or even good but I know what I know thanks to myself. And I bloody love it too, education or not.
 
toadstool said:
I don't claim to be fantastic or even good but I know what I know thanks to myself.
Click to expand...

With all due respect... that sounds as if it's because you were never there, and when you were, was perhaps the not the most attentive student :) You've already explained why you went on the foundation course, but what then made you enrol on the HND?
 
You don't need a degree to understand photography, there are many educational resources out there for 'self taughties'.
There's a big difference between wanting to learn a craft for career reasons and choosing to self educate for personal reasons (enjoyment). Regardless of what camp you are in, if you have a genuine interest in any subject you are naturally going to sponge more information imo.

I would love to to do a degree in photography as I know I would find all aspects (artsy and scientific) immensely interesting. It's just a shame that career opportunities and high income potential in the photography business are not that great.
 
hobodan said:
You don't need a degree to understand photography, there are many educational resources out there for 'self taughties'.
There's a big difference between wanting to learn a craft for career reasons and choosing to self educate for personal reasons (enjoyment). Regardless of what camp you are in, if you have a genuine interest in any subject you are naturally going to sponge more information imo.

I would love to to do a degree in photography as I know I would find all aspects (artsy and scientific) immensely interesting. It's just a shame that career opportunities and high income potential in the photography business are not that great.
Click to expand...


You assume that a degree is just for career reasons? We have many mature students who have no intention of chasing photography as a career; They just want to learn more about the medium they use and it's possibilities beyond the merely technical and conventional. They enrolled because they want to explore photography as a art medium or a communications medium. Our oldest student so far was 68.
 
One thing I don't understand is why anyone would do a joint degree? A few years ago one University was offering a joint honours degree in Forensic Science & Tourism. You can't get subjects or careers further apart, one is scientific the other social!
 
Pookeyhead said:
You assume that a degree is just for career reasons? We have many mature students who have no intention of chasing photography as a career; They just want to learn more about the medium they use and it's possibilities beyond the merely technical and conventional. They enrolled because they want to explore photography as a art medium or a communications medium. Our oldest student so far was 68.
Click to expand...

I certainly envy those who have time to do a degree for recreational purposes, couldn't happen in my life. Maybe when I'm 68! :)
 
Pookeyhead said:
With all due respect... that sounds as if it's because you were never there, and when you were, was perhaps the not the most attentive student :) You've already explained why you went on the foundation course, but what then made you enrol on the HND?
Click to expand...

Sorry? I'm not sure whether you're replying to my assessment of my own abilities or my saying I know what I know thanks to myself. If it's the first half, that has nothing to do with the course or how often or not what I was there and everything to do with my confidence within anything I do, hobby related or not. The Degree Foundation course was the equivalent of an introductory A Level course (not even quite as high as A Level, more somewhere between GCSE/highers and A Level) - it covered the very basics like exposure and assignments were such like "research this style/era/photographer etc and produce your own work based on it" and "this is aperture, this is what it does and doesn't do - produce an end product that exposes this." It also focused heavily on dark room skills and production. It was 100% film and, like I said, aimed at teaching the very basics of which I went into the course knowing. It was a highly flexible course that allowed a great deal of creative expression and your own interpretation of assignment briefs. As long as you could explain how your end product still it the brief, it was accepted. I was an attentive student who still attended dark room days, hand in days, one to one tutorials and class outings. When possible, I was in physical classes - of which there were only 3 or 4 for the year. Despite not being there, I passed, like I said, top of the class with 100% - the first 100% for that course in that college in a good few years so I must have been attentive enough.

I enrolled on the HND because I very much enjoyed the way the subject of photography was taught within that college, it's something I highly enjoy doing and I wanted to see what the HND could offer me. I had no qualifications to my name and got on on my grade from the DF and my portfolio. I wanted to further my knowledge and skill under the eye of the highly recommended course leaders. If I recall correctly, two of them were a part of the team who formulated the HND course itself. It was purely for my own enjoyment with the added perks of a qualification.

I got there and into the course and I didn't enjoy it at all. I will be the first to admit that I went into it with blinkers on after the amount of creative freedom within briefs (again, as long as it still fit the brief in a way you could explain) the Degree Foundation afforded. I enjoyed the academic side of the course but I didn't enjoy the "creative" side of it. I realised working to a brief that had to be done to a T with no creative juices, even if it still met the brief, allowed whatsoever wasn't for me. It's why I will never, and don't wish to, work in photography professionally. I do this for me and to satisfy and fulfill my own briefs. As I said, I came out of the course and didn't pick up a camera again for a long time - the way the course worked squashed any passion and love I had for it and it took a while to gain that back.

On the whole, the HND is a great course and a hell of a lot can be gained from completing it. It just wasn't a great course for me and it took trying my hand at it to find that out. My niece has not long completed it with a respectable grade and thoroughly enjoyed it.

(if I remember correctly Pookey, you work in the photography education field don't you? Sorry if I'm preaching to the choir with any of that if so!)
 
Last edited:
toadstool said:
Sorry?
Click to expand...

Ok.. let's try it this way... LOL


You said "I don't claim to be fantastic or even good but I know what I know thanks to myself. And I bloody love it too, education or not"

Then I said, "With all due respect... that sounds as if it's because you were never there, and when you were, was perhaps the not the most attentive student :) "

Meaning that what you know is down to you, and it seemed to indicate that education didn't teach you anything, and you had to do it yourself. My point was that you didn't really seem to engage with the course... so of course you didn't learn much from it. In that situation, any learning you do yourself will be better than the learning you are NOT receiving from the course by being absent all the time :)

I'm not sure that cleared it up actually...

I meant nothing bad anyway.... just saying that you didn't learn more by yourself because the course was necessarily rubbish.... you just didn't really engage with it.


toadstool said:
(if I remember correctly Pookey, you work in the photography education field don't you? Sorry if I'm preaching to the choir with any of that if so!)
Click to expand...

Yeah... Lecturer and programme leader on a BA (Hons) Photo course.
 
Last edited:
Oh no, the course was far from rubbish. I greatly enjoyed it, I just didn't gain a lot of knowledge that I didn't already have from it because of the type of course it was - it really was the bare basics with a lot of dark room time - the latter was what drew me to it. A lot of the class were there for the same reason as me but the majority were there after having only just picked up a camera and wanting to know how to use it better. The progression in understanding from the start of the course to the end was massive. The lecturer, resources and content were otherwise fantastic and one of my main reasons for moving up to the HND.
 
Pookeyhead said:
You assume that a degree is just for career reasons? We have many mature students who have no intention of chasing photography as a career; They just want to learn more about the medium they use and it's possibilities beyond the merely technical and conventional. They enrolled because they want to explore photography as a art medium or a communications medium. Our oldest student so far was 68.
Click to expand...

Yeah that. One of the questions I get asked is "are you planning a job with the Berger afterwards". We'll no actually, I'm doing it for fun, for learning more and pandering to my creative side as I spend all day being technical.

As for having no time, there's plenty of time and opportunities to study through distance learning. You don't have to leave work for three years, but you do have to be prepared to put some time in. The course I'm on gives you twelve years to complete.
 
For all those saying they are self taught, when was the last time you went to an exhibition, or studied another photographers work (not just a single or few images on a forum).

I doubt many have, yet there is so much to learn, which I'd never have experienced if I wasn't on this course.
 
Pookeyhead said:
While you don't need a degree to enjoy it, I think you'll find the majority of "the best in the world" have. There are a great many who haven't of course, but they simply would have been better at enforcing the level of study required themselves, that's all.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. For clarity I'm not the best in the world. However I started from scratch, not being able to take a picture at all. I've now got to the stage where (IMHO) I am capable of taking a decent picture. Did I go to UNi to do this? No. I did however do at least the equivalent amount of reading that I did for medical royal college fellowship exams.
 
Going to University to gain a photography degree or not. You need to realise that it will cost you around £27,000 for a 3-year degree course, plus accommodation, travel expenses and spending. You can always take out a student loan, but is it worth it? A 1-year photography academy would have cost you far less.

Just my 2 pence.
 
Do you NEED a Degree to enjoy photography......................................................................................No







Just a CAMERA
 
canonrebel said:
Do you NEED a Degree to enjoy photography......................................................................................No


Just a CAMERA
Click to expand...

You don't even need a camera to enjoy photography which has already been created.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
You don't even need a camera to enjoy photography which has already been created.


Steve.
Click to expand...


Good point.

You don't even need a camera to MAKE photography that hasn't :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top