Value of Traditional Film-Based Training

[kurtwall]

I've been thinking I'd benefit from more formal education in photography and art in general. I haven't the time, money, or energy to pursue a full BA or BFA at the university (at this time), but a program like one of these at a local community college appeals:

• A.A. Degree - Photographic Arts
• A.A. Degree - Professional Photography

Of the two, I'm inclined to the first because it permits transfer to a 4-year institution if I so desire. The second does not. I already have a BA in another field.

I have two questions. First, is formal education in photography and art useful? Second, is the emphasis on traditional darkroom techniques useful considering that photography is increasingly digital?[1] I'm sold on the value of learning basic principles and techniques of art such color, form, composition, and light because photography is both art and science.

That said, I'm not trying to start a thread about film versus digital or engage in debate about self-taught versus book-taught. The latter doesn't interest me because I know how I learn most effectively: combining teaching, demonstration, book-learning, and study with what I can glean up on my own. I'm interested in the question of whether or not traditional film-based training will enhance my skills and the quality of my photographs, even if I shoot primarily (well, exclusively so far) digital.

NB: This might belong in the general chit-chat forum, but it was closest to being on-topic for this forum.
Thanks!

Kurt

[1] If photography is not increasingly digital, I'm willing to be corrected.

[sk66]

Originally Posted by kurtwall

I have two questions. First, is formal education in photography and art useful? Second, is the emphasis on traditional darkroom techniques useful considering that photography is increasingly digital?[

1. Absolutely!
2. Not really IMO.

[Doug Pardee]

Originally Posted by kurtwall

First, is formal education in photography and art useful?

Useful in the sense that you described—"enhance my skills and the quality of my photographs"—probably. Useful in the sense of impressing people with a degree, not so much.

How useful will depend on the quality of the formal education and what education you're lacking. I have a bias here from a bad experience so I'm going to leave it at that.

Second, is the emphasis on traditional darkroom techniques useful considering that photography is increasingly digital?

I'd say, no. Traditional darkrooms are disappearing, not only with the reduction in the use of film but also with the increasing limitations on chemical disposal. Although some digital darkroom techniques have their roots in chemical darkroom processes, that's basically just historical background. If you care about the history, you can read about it in a book.

That said, in my opinion, right now the state of digital monochrome photography is not to parity with film. Film and chemical darkrooms still offer a noticeable advantage over their digital counterparts for B&W photography, and B&W film processing is simpler than color processing is.

[kurtwall]

Originally Posted by Doug Pardee

Useful in the sense that you described—"enhance my skills and the quality of my photographs"—probably. Useful in the sense of impressing people with a degree, not so much.

Thanks for the input.

I'm definitely not looking to impress anyone with a degree. This is all about personal improvement and addressing the lack of any sort of art training. I've been all about the left-brain in my education and work experience -- it's time to work on the right side of my brain before the thing atrophies.

Traditional darkrooms are disappearing, not only with the reduction in the use of film but also with the increasing limitations on chemical disposal. Although some digital darkroom techniques have their roots in chemical darkroom processes, that's basically just historical background. If you care about the history, you can read about it in a book.

This is my thinking, too, but I have very little context so I haven't reached a firm conclusion.

Film and chemical darkrooms still offer a noticeable advantage over their digital counterparts for B&W photography, and B&W film processing is simpler than color processing is.

Hadn't thought of that. Again, lacking experience with film (other than cheap instamatic cameras from my pre-teens), this is the sort of observation for which I'm looking.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by kurtwall

First, is formal education in photography and art useful? Second, is the emphasis on traditional darkroom techniques useful considering that photography is increasingly digital?

1: Useful? Yeah. Necessary? No.
2: traditional darkroom techniques are still very relevant if the photographer is still using film, a number which might surprise you. Many still prefer to do their own processing in the darkroom over sending it out, and these skills are essential.

Photography on the whole is increasingly digital, but art photography is still very film-based, believe it or not. In such cases, these skills are necessary.

[BCampbell]

Hey Kurt,

I think it's great that you're considering this path. I see so many posts here regarding traditional, student-teacher learning where the poster thinks they can learn as well or better from advice on the web. Seems to smack of an "I know better" syndrome to me, though some people can self-teach well.

Probably the most important things you'll get from these programs are feedback from instructors and peers, and an immense pool of potential contacts that can jumpstart any kind of career you want. I took a single course over ten years ago and as I've gotten back behind the lens, I see the names of my instructor and other instructors and students around in the local photo community, and wish I had stayed in touch and developed those networks.

As for which program is better, it depends on what you want to do. Sure, the one transfers, but is that your goal? To go for four years (almost guaranteeing that you'll need an MFA after that)? Or to develop your skills and learn what options are out there? The Photo Arts program sounds like it is not useful on its own aside from the specific arts skills you'll learn (not say that's not useful), while Pro Photo course seems like it would better prepare you to start working after you graduate. Of course, in either case, you could (and would probably want to) supplement thos eprograms with a couple years of business school if you wanted to start your own business.

Is film processing training useful? Well, of course any training and instruction is useful, you're going to broaden your horizons and abilities. If you never use it again, I don't know. As I said, I had one course, so I did learn how to work in a darkroom (and spent a lot -- a lot -- of time there). I'm glad I had that experience, because to do that today is not easy outside of the classroom setting. I think it does give me a perspective that those who have never worked with film lack. Everyone will find their own path though.

[kurtwall]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

2: traditional darkroom techniques are still very relevant if the photographer is still using film, a number which might surprise you. Many still prefer to do their own processing in the darkroom over sending it out, and these skills are essential.

Photography on the whole is increasingly digital, but art photography is still very film-based, believe it or not. In such cases, these skills are necessary.

Thanks, Os.

There's a fellow in one of my meet-up groups who still does a lot of film work and schleps his medium- and large-format cameras around. I've also seen that fine art photography is still heavily film-based. Not sure I want to go the fine art route (some of what I've seen leaves me scratching my head), but I'm definitely interested in learning more about composition, form, color, and the like. Nothing in my education or experience, with the exception of music (which I pursued through junior high school, which was a long time ago), includes anything remotely right-brained. Yes, I'm a left-brain cripple.

[kurtwall]

Originally Posted by BCampbell

Seems to smack of an "I know better" syndrome to me, though some people can self-teach well.

Thanks, BCampbell.

I self-teach well to a point. If I have any virtue left, though, it's knowing my limits and acknowledging I don't, in fact, know it all. That's what teenagers are for.

Probably the most important things you'll get from these programs are feedback from instructors and peers, and an immense pool of potential contacts that can jumpstart any kind of career you want.

I'm not looking for a career change. At least not yet -- if the economy continues to tank, I've been practicing, "Would you like a flavor shot in your latté?". Seriously, I enjoy what I do to earn money (compute QA engineer for NVIDIA CUDA). I want to take better, more visually appealing, emotionally powerful pictures. I believe I can master the technical details. In addition to technical mastery, though, I want someone besides my wife to go, "Wow, great picture! How do I get a copy?" I want to develop a vision, someone to say, "Oh, that's a Kurt Wall picture."

As for which program is better, it depends on what you want to do.

Please don't ask me what I want to be when I grow up. I turn 48 next month and I still haven't decided.

Sure, the one transfers, but is that your goal? To go for four years (almost guaranteeing that you'll need an MFA after that)? Or to develop your skills and learn what options are out there?

Honestly, I don't care about degrees. I've done well without them. But if the effort involved in obtaining the degree teaches me things I don't know, then the time, effort, and capital are well-spent.

Thanks for the input.

[LoveDSLR]

I think in the 'Professional Photography' degree, you get applied Video & Photography while the 'Photographic Arts' degree offers Art, Video & Photography. Unless you wish to enter the professional photography field right away, the 'Photographic Arts' degree maybe a better choice.

As far as film-based training. It can be an one-time experience or a skill set if photography becomes a passion. You may like airbrushing and hand retouching more than Photoshop.