money money money

  • Thread starter Thread starter stratocaster72
  • Start date Start date
S

stratocaster72

Guest
my lord I've spent a lot on photography over the last 4 months.

its frightening...... I blame everyone on here :)

it started simple, canon 1100d just to mess about with at home.
its went off the rails now (canon 60d, strobes, softboxes, beauty dish, books, online courses, lenses and more lenes, meters, small flashes, triggers, bags, more books, memory cards, tuition sessions....aarrrrgghh).

my bank card is near meltdown.

but its been awesome, great, fantastic, I want to do this professionally one day and have been out doing shoots for people already (which weren't a disaster).

so what next? I see what I want, its a long way off, but I'm trying hard.

now.... my question is, how many of you have studied photography at college or uni? or is this something you've learned informally? I ask as im wondering if I should try an actual college course next (more money) but if most of you are self taught then thats good enough for me as there are some incredibly talented people on here.
 
In a way, I'm glad that I can't afford to buy the gear required to get really good bird images; serioulsy, just paying £85 for a sigma 70-300mm was reckless on my behalf :D
 
I.M.H.O if you do it the self taught way (as I am doing) you teach yourself slowly and with lots of bad habits.
I don't mind as I just do photography for pleasure , but if you have the aim to eventually make money from it a college course or any sort of course is a must .
 
stratocaster72 said:
now.... my question is, how many of you have studied photography at college or uni? or is this something you've learned informally? I ask as im wondering if I should try an actual college course next (more money) but if most of you are self taught then thats good enough for me as there are some incredibly talented people on here.
Click to expand...

Photography was a small part of my university degree some [ahem] years ago in the days before digital had ever been heard of so the complexities of calculating exposures, processing film and images was definitely something that had to be "learnt". The way I see it, with digital you can start with a basic knowledge of your camera/computer and build by experience and the best way to do that - get out there, make mistakes and learn where you went wrong. Sites like TP are full of knowledgable people who are more than willing to help out. The best education I have found is by going out with fellow enthusiasts and sharing our knowledge, expertise and ideas.... My twopenneth :D
 
There are heaps of threads on here about just this.

Formal education certainly isn't a must. In fact, there are so many bad courses out there, I'd bet many would do more harm than good.

I "taught myself" ie. listened to and read from other people whom I didn't pay, up to a point. Then I went to uni.

Don't go to uni to learn the technical stuff - you can do that in a day yourself, it's not complicated. Go to uni to meet people, and focus your time.
 
I'm doing the pi diploma course online, and have booked a few sessions with pro photographers to learn more about night time, studio and landscape shoots.

I'm still thinking a college course (maybe evenings) would get me there quicker.
I already have a degree in marketing and have been in a business environment the last 15 years so I don't really need to learn the business/marketing side, I can probably manage that. I'm also good on technical things and self taught myself guitar and was pretty successful at that (played semi pro for 20 years)... hope that doesnt sound big headed.
its more the application of the technical stuff I need to learn, I know how and even why, but not always when and where to use certain techniques, or how best to asses a situation and know what needs done quickly without too much messing around.... or is that really just years of experience?

having spent 6 years at college and uni I'm not really keen to do it again (plus my view on what I learned is that I picked up more in 3 months of working in a real business than 6 years at uni).

I don't know...... I'm just trying to see if most good photographers are uni or self taught.

please let it be self taught :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
having just started on the light science and magic book I'm thinking the technical stuff takes more than a day lol, theres years of learning just in that alone :)
 
Get out and shoot, Learn how your kit works in differnet conditions and learn from your own mistakes...When you stop making mistakes, Then start thinking about offering your photo skills for money ..
 
I was taught by my father then went pro in jobs all over the country... then getting jobs and interviews was getting hard so went did C &G 747 pro pt ONE and pt " at college.

Then had experience and paper work.

Learning from a course can be quicker. working and course is even faster!!!!

Do it and never look back.....

Learning your self takes too long and you will pick up bad habbits.... as another posted.
 
Just a thought - seek out your local camera/photographic club. You will find some very experienced photographers and get good advice.

Try entering some of your images in the club's internal competitions and see how they fare. Judges' comments will soon put you right.
 
I keep on thinking as I've spent so much on all this gear I should go and get some tuition. But then I go out with my camera and come back every now and again look through my photos I've taken and 1 will hit me as being an outstanding photo and I think again. If I can do it without any tuition any body can. I don't need anyone telling me it should be done like this or that. That's only other peoples opinions anyway.
My biggest critic by far is myself. I bin literally hundreds of photos that I'm not happy with for one reason or another. Other people keep telling me that this one, or this one is great but to me it's probably average. I have between 9-10,000 pictures on my computer that I have decided are good enough for me to keep. I rarely offer critique to other peoples photos, as I don't know exactly what they are trying to achieve. The photographer may be 100% happy with the picture, exactly posed to the inch of what they wanted to get and someone else comes along and says "thats out of focus, that bit should be there, its badly composed etc". There are no fixed rules in photography, we're all in it to enjoy it so lets just do that.
 
modchild said:
I keep on thinking as I've spent so much on all this gear I should go and get some tuition. But then I go out with my camera and come back every now and again look through my photos I've taken and 1 will hit me as being an outstanding photo and I think again. If I can do it without any tuition any body can. I don't need anyone telling me it should be done like this or that. That's only other peoples opinions anyway.
My biggest critic by far is myself. I bin literally hundreds of photos that I'm not happy with for one reason or another. Other people keep telling me that this one, or this one is great but to me it's probably average. I have between 9-10,000 pictures on my computer that I have decided are good enough for me to keep. I rarely offer critique to other peoples photos, as I don't know exactly what they are trying to achieve. The photographer may be 100% happy with the picture, exactly posed to the inch of what they wanted to get and someone else comes along and says "thats out of focus, that bit should be there, its badly composed etc". There are no fixed rules in photography, we're all in it to enjoy it so lets just do that.
Click to expand...

I am a keen amateur photographer with no intention of turning pro as I enjoy my day job so much. So my opinion is exactly that and doesn't come from pro experience but the above quoted post perhaps highlights the difference. I don't think the method above would 'cut it' as a pro. I feel that if you were doing it for a living you would have to guarantee results, not just shoot hundreds of images and hope that you get some keepers. I am all for formal training and qualifications but experience must count for something too. Training would only be the start of a career in photography. All the above IMHO. Iain
 
I feel that if you were doing it for a living you would have to guarantee results, not just shoot hundreds of images and hope that you get some keepers. I am all for formal training and qualifications but experience must count for something too.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more with you. I don't just shoot hundreds and get a few keepers, like I said I've got between 9-10,000 keepers on my computer. If I was doing it for a living I would get some formal training as to what is expected say of a wedding shoot, or a school shoot etc. but that's not the point I was making. Take the best photo you have ever taken, you absolutely love it and to YOU it's perfect. No one else is going to have your insight, emotion and feeling as you did at the moment you took it.
But it's a bit soul destroying for someone to then just see it and say I don't like this bit, this bit is out of focus, this bit should of been there, you haven't followed the rule of thirds etc without knowing what you wanted and got from your picture, even if it's not technically perfect. That's why I don't critique other peoples pictures, I'm not qualified.
I've sold photos and have taken informal shoots for various people at various functions and had people ask me for portrait shoots etc but I'm not a pro and don't want to be, but the comments from some people (not including the above) can make the difference between someone really pushing on for a career or giving up, thinking they can't take a photo no matter how hard they try.
 
Well said Stuart, I agree with you too, photography is very subjective isn't it and as such everyone has an opinion. I am sure you are more than 'qualified' to critique others photographs on here and your opinion would be as valid as the next person.
Perhaps that's what sets the amateurs apart from the pro's is the ability to work to a brief, achieve that brief to the clients satisfaction and move onto the next. If the client is happy then the pro is happy. Iain
 
In some ways, I'd rather receive critique from those who don't think they know what they're talking about ;)
To me, if an image grabs you in a millisecond, it's good.
Pro's, I appreciate, have much stricter criteria and dare I say it, less room for artistic manoeuvre.
I've done and seen pics which aren't up to pixel-peeper standards but in both cases, the person paying the money was happy.
Don't get too hung up on technicalities, if the basics are there, such as exposure and lighting for the look you were actually after, then as said, the rest is subjective.
I'm learning/reading that a Marketing qual is much more important than a Photography one! Shame I don't have the former lol.
(Or the latter but WTF :) )
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top