How Creative are you..............Really?

Andrew Davies Photography said:
Probably talking to people politely and professionally , understanding his clients and marketplace and realizing the potential in situations rather than taking opposing sides. You know David all the qualities of a successful business person still running their own business. If he wasn't like that or things got the better maybe he could take up lecturing though.
Click to expand...

Yeah... nothing to it. Just talk crap for a few hours a day. Highly recommended.
 
I'm utterly stunned at some of the nonsense being spoke in this thread, these pathetic point-scoring exercises by people who seemingly have little grasp of what they're talking about absolutely baffle me.

As for the creativity question, am I creative? I don't know and I don't care, I do what I do both in music and photography (professionally and otherwise) for no reason other than I absolutely love it. Photography's a very personal thing for me and everything I do is based on what feels right at the time, whether that concept or my results are classed as creative, artistic or anything else is of absolutely no consequence whatsoever to me.
 
big soft moose said:
according to whatuni.com not every student on the blackpool photography courses is feeling creatively inspired (and i am not saying that this relates to David personally - much as he isnt my favourite person I believe he's better than what is described here). This an excerpt from a review of the extended diploma art and design (photography) course



That kind of thing is exactly what i was talking about in my earlier post , but which i'm assured is out dated and doesnt happen any more (except in 2012 and 2009 it appears) http://www.whatuni.com/university-course-reviews/blackpool-and-fylde-college/6792/?pageno=3
Click to expand...

My daughter started a photography degree course at Manchester Met (old poly?) this year, and when researching Universities, virtually every one had a student comment along those lines. Hard to tell if a justified criticism or a failed student trying to justify their own shortcomings.

She is motivated as are the student friends of hers I have met. She also tells me that some students are not motivated and barely turn up to anything. I imagine there will be fewer students starting the second year than the first. It's up to each student what they make of the opportunity at University.

We talked a lot about her doing a degree, and she is clear that a degree is NOT a training course. If she wanted a training course, then there are different routes. While her degree does contain an ongoing module of 'professional employability' and other real world applications, the essence of the degree is about exploring photography as a creative medium. I would love to be there with her studying the same degree, with no intention at all of ever being a professional photographer, but for the love of the subject and the opportunity to study in an academic environment surrounded by like minded people.
 
Can't really take some of the comments seriously. Some rate 5 stars and give glowing reports, some rate 1 star and slag it off.. some are regarding the FE course, and some comments weren't about photography at all.

Best advice with any uni... just go and visit... talk to the students.

There is a problem with people confusing a degree with a training course though... ongoing and annoying problem that.
 
I have never considered myself very creative but some of the thoughts that have come into my mind whilst ploughing through this thread might make me reconsider. ;)

PS
Can I start the June "What is creativity" thread?
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
There is a problem with people confusing a degree with a training course though... ongoing and annoying problem that.
Click to expand...

yeah those silly students expecting their degree to train them in useful and employable skills in return for the collosal tuition fee they pay these days :thinking:

If the degree isn't providing training in how to be a decent photographer (which would explain why you periodically see graduates who don't understand exposure or composition) what is it doing ?, and what good is in it the real world ?

Personally if someone asked me for advice on how best to spend 20 or so grand and three years of their lives with the aim of starting a photo business , i wouldnt suggest they go to university
 
big soft moose said:
yeah those silly students expecting their degree to train them in useful and employable skills in return for the collosal tuition fee they pay these days :thinking:

If the degree isn't providing training in how to be a decent photographer (which would explain why you periodically see graduates who don't understand exposure or composition) what is it doing ?, and what good is in it the real world ?

Personally if someone asked me for advice on how best to spend 20 or so grand and three years of their lives with the aim of starting a photo business , i wouldnt suggest they go to university
Click to expand...


In all honesty Pete... if a candidate came to me and told me they wanted to train to set up a studio and work as a commercial photographer, I would actively dissuade them from taking a degree. I do believe I've said this many. many times in other threads too. It's not that a degree CAN'T give you everything you need, just that its not the degree's primary purpose. It's an academic qualification designed to educate people and create critically thinking visual artists. If you expect anything else, and still enrol on a degree, then you're simply on the wrong course. What you need is a HND, as that is a far more vocational course. It baffles me why you, and others keep bringing this up. It's like buying a Ford Focus, and then complaining to Ford because it only seats 4 and there's no room to put your dog. You simply bought the wrong car... which is your fault.. not Ford's.

If you want to be a photographic artist, curator, agent, or publisher etc... a degree. If you want to walk right out of college and become a commercial photographer... HND. Simple.

Having said that... any higher education course is what you make of it. We've had many graduates go on to be successful commercial photographers... it's just perhaps not the best way of going about it, but due to the self-led nature of HE.. you can pretty much take it where you want.

Do you NEED a degree to be a commercial photographer? No. I did it without a degree, as have many others. I don't believe I, or anyone else has said you need a degree to be a photographer.
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
yeah those silly students expecting their degree to train them in useful and employable skills in return for the collosal tuition fee they pay these days :thinking:

If the degree isn't providing training in how to be a decent photographer (which would explain why you periodically see graduates who don't understand exposure or composition) what is it doing ?, and what good is in it the real world ?

Personally if someone asked me for advice on how best to spend 20 or so grand and three years of their lives with the aim of starting a photo business , i wouldnt suggest they go to university
Click to expand...

Maybe the issue here is that art is sometimes being taught with a nod in the direction of photography, rather than photography with a module on art and creativity? Hard to see where art is useful when you have to take 'nice' portrait shots of 300 school children in a day (or however many) but strong technical skills and a sharp eye for detail would be useful.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Maybe the issue here is that art is sometimes being taught with a nod in the direction of photography, rather than photography with a module on art and creativity? Hard to see where art is useful when you have to take 'nice' portrait shots of 300 school children in a day (or however many) but strong technical skills and a sharp eye for detail would be useful.
Click to expand...

It's not... and if that's what you want to do... don't take a degree.
 
The reason it keeps coming up is that that isnt clear to the student going in , degrees are 'sold as a gateway to a career in freelance photography when they really arent - for example the blackpool site (for the BA hons) says under employability information "Our graduates have a good track record in securing employment in the creative industries. Graduates have found employment as freelance photographers, studio assistants, stylists, curators, and some go on to study at post-graduate level. " (my bold)
 
ancient_mariner said:
Maybe the issue here is that art is sometimes being taught with a nod in the direction of photography, rather than photography with a module on art and creativity? Hard to see where art is useful when you have to take 'nice' portrait shots of 300 school children in a day (or however many) but strong technical skills and a sharp eye for detail would be useful.
Click to expand...

I think part of the problem was the last governments obsession with degrees - and that everyone had to have a degree in whatever subject... so you've now got degrees in say hairdressing , when in the past that would more realistically have been an apprenticeship.

thus kids tend to think that in order to be a XYZ you have to do an a degree in XYZ

We see it in the countryside all the time where you've got kids doing countryside management degrees who want to be dry stone wallers or tree surgeons, wheras in practice if you want to be an arb contractor the best way in is to get a job working for an arb contractor as a brush monkey and work your way up , and the 20 or whatever grand they waste on tuition fees could get you a nice start in vehicles , certificates and equipment

likewise if you want to be a portrait photographer wouldn't that money be better spent on some decent camera kit and lighting solutions and may be some short courses on specific skills (and on marketting, websites etc)

I don't blame the lecturers per se - but the universities admission bods and the people who write the marketting blurb do have some culpability in telling potential students what they want to hear rather than the unvarnished truth - probably because students are money at the end of the day , especially if your course is under subscribed
 
I expect some of them have - if the courses are as un-photographic as suggested then on the 'spray & pray' principle a few must succeed, if for no other reason than they were competent photographers before they started.

My expectation of a degree was that it would equip you with the mental tools to research and interpret your chosen area, and it may be better to have strong technical ability instead if you don't want an academic or research-based career. In the case of art, we talk about exploring ideas, and this is where I would see the cross over into research in the type of thinking required.

No uni is not going to market itself carefully to get as many students as possible, and it's likely there's a bit of a gap between reality and brochures.
 
big soft moose said:
The reason it keeps coming up is that that isnt clear to the student going in , degrees are 'sold as a gateway to a career in freelance photography when they really arent - for example the blackpool site (for the BA hons) says under employability information "Our graduates have a good track record in securing employment in the creative industries. Graduates have found employment as freelance photographers, studio assistants, stylists, curators, and some go on to study at post-graduate level. " (my bold)
Click to expand...

But that's all true Pete. "Freelance Photographer" is a fairly wide description. All photographers are essentially freelance. They are advised. The problem is many want to be strictly commercial photographers, but also want to have a degree, and feel they're getting second best with a HND or "lesser" qualification. There's a disconnect between what they want and what they need.

A good course will advise appropriately.
 
Not sure why degree courses get knocked for not preparing people for real world. Whats wrong with just studying and learning for the sake of knowledge and love of the subject. Why does it have to be reduced to a commercial value? I love University. Best 3 years of my life. I loved doing an MBA. I would love to go back and study at University a subject I enjoyed solely in the pursuit of knowledge rather than for any commercial gain or advantage.

I did a degree in Finance and Accounting. That didn't help me much in the real world other than get a graduate trainee position at an accounting firm who sent me to college to study for and sit professional accounting exams along with on the job training. I could have had a degree in History or Geography as some of my peers did. The training did not take place at University, but after to become an accountant.
 
Steve said:
Not sure why degree courses get knocked for not preparing people for real world. Whats wrong with just studying and learning for the sake of knowledge and love of the subject.
Click to expand...

I've no idea. People seem to think that's a bad thing these days.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I've no idea. People seem to think that's a bad thing these days.
Click to expand...

probably because if they are spending £27k (assuming the full loan for a three year course) they want to see some definite return for that cash (plus of course the living costs ec on top).
If I spent 27 grand and came out unable to get a job because my degree was an irrelevance in the real world, i'd be a bit peed off too

back in the days of full grant , spending three years partying and/or 'being creative, dude' might have looked like a good idea, but not when it comes at the cost incurring that much debt
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
probably because if they are spending £27k (assuming the full loan for a three year course) they want to see some definite return for that cash (plus of course the living costs ec on top).
If I spent 27 grand and came out unable to get a job because my degree was an irrelevance in the real world, i'd be a bit peed off too
Click to expand...


It's not irrelevant though.. just the wrong qualification if you want to be a wedding photographer is all. If you do... don't take a degree... just watch some you tube stuff and go on a few courses.
 
Pookeyhead said:
It's not irrelevant though.. just the wrong qualification if you want to be a wedding photographer is all. If you do... don't take a degree... just watch some you tube stuff and go on a few courses.
Click to expand...

or a portrait photographer, or a press photographer, or a sports photographer, or a police photographer, or a schools photographer , or a wildlife photographer, or a landscape photographer or in fact practicaly any form of photography that you might want to make money from.

If your ambition is to be a fine arts photographeror work in academia then its probably great - but if you actually want make money from photography in the real world, then its an irrelevance
 
Is there any point whatsoever to this thread anymore?

I could find half a dozen where BSM and PH have had more or less the same tedious argument.
 
big soft moose said:
probably because if they are spending £27k (assuming the full loan for a three year course) they want to see some definite return for that cash (plus of course the living costs ec on top).
If I spent 27 grand and came out unable to get a job because my degree was an irrelevance in the real world, i'd be a bit peed off too

back in the days of full grant , spending three years partying and/or 'being creative, dude' might have looked like a good idea, but not when it comes at the cost incurring that much debt
Click to expand...

I can see what you are saying, but find it a little sad that this is the view of many. My dream would be to read classics at Oxford. Huge cost and zero real world relevance, but imagine the experience and joy of learning for learning's sake.

And I could quote Homer from the Iliad rather than the Simpsons.
 
and if you are an international playboy theres no reason not to - but most people can't afford to spunk 27k on something that isnt going to pay back

for a cheaper option theres nothing stopping you biuying a copy of the iliad in translation from amazon, for a lot less
 
Steve said:
I can see what you are saying, but find it a little sad that this is the view of many. My dream would be to read classics at Oxford. Huge cost and zero real world relevance, but imagine the experience and joy of learning for learning's sake.

And I could quote Homer from the Iliad rather than the Simpsons.
Click to expand...

So why not do it, later in life, or in retirement. The idea that university should be for young people is a sad one, it should be one for those that not only can afford to go, but who can go because they want to and are clever enough too.
 
Yes I'm sure buying a copy from Amazon would be exactly like studying at Oxford

And yes, people frequently 'spunk' thousands on things that are not going to pay back. Expensive cars, holidays, weddings etc all over and above what they actually need. Would you be as sneering to someone who spent 27k on a new car when its 'never going to pay back'
 
ST4 said:
So why not do it, later in life, or in retirement. The idea that university should be for young people is a sad one, it should be one for those that not only can afford to go, but who can go because they want to and are clever enough too.
Click to expand...

I'd love to Steve...and as David said there was a 67 year old on the course so age is not a barrier. Wont get into Oxford though...not clever enough :)
 
ST4 said:
So why not do it, later in life, or in retirement. The idea that university should be for young people is a sad one, it should be one for those that not only can afford to go, but who can go because they want to and are clever enough too.
Click to expand...
But, this doesn't take into account those that want to, and are probably clever enough, but just can't afford it....
I am of the same mind set as Steve.... I would do it just for the joy of learning, certainly not because I want to get employment from it.
 
It's a hell of a lot easier to read the translation(s) than to wade through the original Greek with a lexicon in the other hand!
 
ST4 said:
I take photo's of what is there, I do not create what is there to photograph.
Click to expand...

OK, you're not a still life or table top photographer. But you can still exercise creativity in what you photograph by selecting what to show and how to show it. The initial step should be looking at the world around you, and noticing things that others might pass by.

Steve - if I knew then what I know now (as they say) I'd have chosen different subjects at A level. My favourite subject was Latin, and possibly I should have studied classics. For what it's worth, some people regard Homeric Greek as easier to learn than Attic Greek; and if you have any Latin, Greek is comparatively simple to pick up on your own. I managed it... If you want any books suggested, PM me.

Translations always lose something, and in some cases almost the whole point of reading the work. I found Lucretius tedious in English to the extreme; but the Latin showed why he was popular.

Sorry for the off topic stuff - I wouldn't have posted if I hadn't wanted to make the point in my first paragraph.
 
Andrew Davies Photography said:
I think someone needs to start another thread entitled 'Pointless rantings about the education system and its merits' and stop hijacking this one with irrelevant debate unrelated to the original post.
Click to expand...

the relation to the original topic is about whether the pookster is a demi god of creativity who we should all fall down and worship ( and on no account disagree with because his opinion weighs more heavily than ours because he teaches photography to 19 year olds), or, erm, not
 
press photographer, or a sports photographer, or a police photographer, or a schools photographer ,
Click to expand...

I've worked as all those and you need experience and the piece of paper or you don't get in the door.

Both are important.

not important if you are freelance or going self employed.. but even most the freelancers I know worked as employee before going freelance.

Only thing that niggles me about this forum is the Pro section is all bloody wedding togs.....
I've been full time all my days and worked with government and some really great companies.. some of my best friends are full time togs never ever been self employed.

I never really wanted to go solo until I realized I could quad me earnings......

College/Uni.. Paper still means something to companies out in the world.
 
simon ess said:
Pete - you have an issue with pookeyhead - we get it. We got it 6 threads ago.

ffs
Click to expand...

Its not that i have an issue with pookyhead - its that on this very thread he claimed that his was the only opinion that counts (because he inspires creatives for a living) - are we really supposed to let that degree of arrogance go unchallenged ?

If I said "hey i'm an expert so your opinion doesnt matter" or for that matter even claimed expertise in any feild - I'd have the usual suspect troll crew crawling all over me - and probably a moderator or two taking the p*** while hiding behind their status to protect them from any blunt and honest reply. But david does it and we're supposed to just go "oh your so big and special and you know so much about photography... please let us kiss your feet"

b*****ks to that.

If the consensus is that we should bin this tiresome diversion and return to the original topic, then yeah great lets do that... but lets do it without any more lectures about how only those who spend their days "inspiring creatives" (that is teaching kids about photography) are qualified to comment on what makes us creative.
 
big soft moose said:
Its not that i have an issue with pookyhead
Click to expand...

I suppose it's possible that you might even believe that, but most reading this and previous threads will know that it's b*****ks.

And yes, this is a tiresome diversion, so I'll now stay out.
 
ST4 said:
I admire creativity but don't really have it. I am more a documentry style photographer taking pictures of pretty landscapes, lovely cityscapes and my travels. I take photo's of what is there, I do not create what is there to photograph.
Click to expand...

I think that would describe me too. That's why I posted earlier in this thread that I find it difficult to call myself creative if I am pointing a camera at something which already exists. In the case of landscapes, nature has done the creative bit.

I think using the term 'documentary' to describe a landscape shot is correct. It's not usually used in this way and until now, I wouldn't have used the word like that.


Steve.
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
or a portrait photographer, or a press photographer, or a sports photographer, or a police photographer, or a schools photographer , or a wildlife photographer, or a landscape photographer or in fact practicaly any form of photography that you might want to make money from.

If your ambition is to be a fine arts photographeror work in academia then its probably great - but if you actually want make money from photography in the real world, then its an irrelevance
Click to expand...


Pete.... give it up. No idea what the problem is. All of what you listed, except possibly Landscape photographer, you do not need a degree in order to do. they're technical jobs that require zero creativity. They need the technical training of a HND or specific courses aimed at the specialisms required. You also need experience.. practical on the job experience.

Advertising, fashion, documentary, fine art, ethnographical and conceptual photography... then get a degree.
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
Its not that i have an issue with pookyhead - its that on this very thread he claimed that his was the only opinion that counts (because he inspires creatives for a living) - are we really supposed to let that degree of arrogance go unchallenged ?

If I said "hey i'm an expert so your opinion doesnt matter" or for that matter even claimed expertise in any feild - I'd have the usual suspect troll crew crawling all over me - and probably a moderator or two taking the p*** while hiding behind their status to protect them from any blunt and honest reply. But david does it and we're supposed to just go "oh your so big and special and you know so much about photography... please let us kiss your feet"

b*****ks to that.

If the consensus is that we should bin this tiresome diversion and return to the original topic, then yeah great lets do that... but lets do it without any more lectures about how only those who spend their days "inspiring creatives" (that is teaching kids about photography) are qualified to comment on what makes us creative.
Click to expand...


Just.... wow... LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top