Formal photographic qualifications - any value?

[Roger S]

I've been taking photos for nearly 40 years, and I'm sure I will have developed some bad habits and lazy ways. In general I think what I produce is "OK", although I still need to get a whole lot better, but how do any of us know whether we're really good or not? What are the available ways to measure? Sales? I don't think so - in the UK people don't generally buy photographs as art, and most photo magazines tend to follow specific trends (heavy skies and graduated filters, anyone?).

Some of you may say "why worry - if you're happy with what you do, why should anyone else's opinion matter?" But isn't that why we post photos to the RFF, because we want judgements other than our own (and thanks to those of you who've kindly commented on mine)?

I wonder what you guys think of the place of formal photographic societies and qualifications in all this? In the UK I'd be thinking of the RPS (Royal Photographic Society), and I'm sure there are others in the US and elsewhere (I apologise for not knowing what these are).

I've aquired a few qualifications and bits of paper over the years, mainly because my job required it, but I've always been a bit doubtful about their value in real terms rather than just as career processes. But maybe I'm just an old cynic.

What do you think? Formal photographic qualifications - any value?

 

[Frank Petronio]

The very few and very limited academic and corporate photography jobs will require a Bachelor's Degree, and of course college teachers need a Master's Degree to be on a tenure track. But as far as any freelance or self-employment goes -- formal education or other merit-based qualifications -- camera clubs or the "Professional Photographers of America" Master status -- are of absolutely zero value.

Thank God! Most of these qualification and education programs are a way for the organizers to make money -- not you.

 

[monochromejrnl]

might be of value for self-esteem reasons if one's ego needs it...

however, i suspect the majority of the members of these 'photographic societies' are not working pros...

from my experience for the professional, the only credentials that matter are clients... this takes a combination of talent, luck, determination and some more luck....

the most sought after commercial ad photographers in Toronto on average have a couple years of formal training from schools most people outside of Toronto have never heard of... many are under 30 and most are under 35 years of age and i can't think of any that even mention where they went to school or what associations etc they are members of yet many of them make an impressive living with their cameras

http://www.markzibert.com/

http://www.thatsthespot.com/ - Matt Barnes

 

[oftheherd]

I don't do photography as a profession. I was once pretty good and gained some small reputation at my local level. What I say isn't from the perspective of a proven paid professional.

From all I have read though, results are generally what count. Generally you have to work you way into that acceptance. You aren't likely to walk into a magazine or a gallery and show a portfolio and walk out with fame and work guaranteed. You need to prove yourself at a progression of levels. I think that is true in most fields, even when education and certification are required.

I do think that formal education of some sort can help one to learn things more quickly. I took one photography course at the college level some 35 years ago. I did learn some things. I also devoured books and magazines, and experimented with things I read about. But all those things were for me personally to learn. If I learned, and if I had decided to photograph as a professional, they would have helped.

But the minor reputation I had was due to results I could produce that those around me could not. It had nothing to do with any education I could show, nor certifications.

And to tell the truth, I have seen others who could produce acceptable crime scene photos. But they could not "speak" photography. That is, they could not explain why what they did worked, nor defend what they had done from a photographic standpoint. Often in forensics, that doesn't matter. Only that the photograph accurately depicts what the scene looked like.

So again, I think it is results that count.

 

[Al Patterson]

I'm only a hobbyist here, but as an IT guy I've worked for 20 years without any formal certifications, and my degree wasn't in Computer Sciences either. Now I'm sure degrees and certification matter to some hiring managers somewhere, but so far I've done OK without them. So, I'll go with the oftheherd in the "it's the results that count" opinion.

 

[Al Kaplan]

The only time I've been questioned about my scholastic background was over twenty years ago when I offered to teach a new photography course at a small local university. I'd been doing ALL of their public relations and advertising photography for over twenty years at that point. They still have framed prints from my Miccosukee Indian series hanging in their library. I'd taught for a few years at another local college. "Oh no, we can't have you on our faculty unless you have at least a masters degree" they told me. I told them to go find themselves another photographer.

Photography has changed a lot over the years. Judging from the ads I see in trade journals like The Rangefinder the schools and seminars are eager to teach photoshop. The articles are all about post processing techniques and how to increase your sales.

The average corporate or editorial client is interested in results. Can you produce. How you learned is meaningless. If you want to take some courses try basic accounting. Most photographers have no concept of the fact that how they spend money on equipment and supplies has a long term impact on the bottom line. Since photography, more so than most fields, requires constant interaction with people, take some courses in psychology, social anthropology, and sociology. Communication skills are important. Use proper grammar. Don't send emails full of abreviations. "LMAO" has no place in a note to the art director. Clothes are important. Dress like the top people at the companies you're working for, not like the eccentric slightly deranged creative artist.

Have a great portfolio, but don't include things that you might not be able to produce on a consistant basis. Show them what you CAN do, not what was a random stroke of good luck.

 

[Gumby]

Al's (Kaplan, that is) last two paragaraphs hit the heart of my experience. I did not go the formal photographic education route, but a couple of my friends did. The difference between them and me is that they seem to have had a better understanding, much earlier than me, of how to behave around and satisfy "the customer". Art directors, portrait customers , etc. can be a fickle lot. The other way in which they were ahead of me was they had a much more refined portfolio upon graduation. Their portfolios were honed during theose art school years to reflect their breadth, knowledge, and the specialty-area that they intended to engage. In both ways I think they had a better start, but they also had to put up with quite a bit of abuse in the process. I guess that's what "paying your dues" is all about. In the end, I haven't done bad myself... but I ended up paying dues in different ways.

 

[gb hill]

I enjoy reading the bios of individuals to see where they have been & what processes they took to get to where they are at today. Many photographers I found to be self taught. Al is correct that one needs good communication skills to get in the door. Many Magnum photographers were at their beginning self taught or started in a high school photography class. The important thing is that they could produce. Today is different, It's post prossesing skills that's needed and IMO that's not photography to me, but then I'm old school so whose going to listen to me.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger,

I have long believed that formal qualifications are a complete waste of time, but equally, more and more young photographers tell me that times have changed and that nowadays it is easier to get that first job if you have a degree in photography. I can't see why, and I'm not sure how many of them have jobs or work, but I pass it on for the (very) little it is worth.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[rlouzan]

Roger,

Study things that will help your photography (advice given to me by a Pulitzer Prize photographer - many years ago.)

Examples:


Architectural photography - Architecture

Travel Photography - Foreign languages, art, geography, geology ...

Photojournalism - Economics, law, ...

Underwater photography - Archaeology, ...


Belive in yourself, and then find people that appreciate your work.

Regards,
RLouzan

 

[Al Kaplan]

One big advantage of being older is you can get away with crap that would have convinced people that you were totally whakko when you were 25. When somebody asks me what I do I tell them that I made my living as a photographer but I'm sort of semi retired now "but if you get down on your knees and beg me I just might shoot that job for you". When people ask me how I manage to have such a luxurient growth of thick curly hair at my age , I try to keep a straight face as I say "You gotta screw a
lot of young chicks and smoke a lot of pot!"

I carry around a toy monkey, Monkette. She goes on shoots with me, goes to city council meetings, accompanies me to dentists' and doctors' appointments, ran the mayor's re-election campaign ~ at least that's what she claimed in my blog ~ and if she's not with me I get asked "Where's your monkey?"

Yup, age has its advantages. For one thing, any woman under 65 now qualifies as a "young chick"...

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

The best class I ever did that helped my photography no end was a drawing course.

Since then I've followed art, architecture, ceramics, design, textiles, fashion, interior design, furniture... you need to get an eye and follow your own instincts.

Sure a photography qualification will show that you know about lighting, exposure, materials, techniques, development and the like. But I'd guess that after forty years you've got yourself pretty well educated in those subjects.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

I carry around a toy monkey, Monkette. She goes on shoots with me, goes to city council meetings, accompanies me to dentists' and doctors' appointments, ran the mayor's re-election campaign...

I can't decide if you're for real, or not, this time.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Of course you could consider using my darkroom and borrowing some of my lenses as the surefire stepping stones to success like this North Miami Sr. High student did forty years ago:

>>> Magnum is a very exclusive guild of 40 photographers, "a calling, a club, a knighthood," explained Nathan Benn, director for the Americas. ... <<<


I still run into Nathan's sister on occassion, and I speak with him on the phone. One of his 1968 B&W prints of hippies at a love-in is hanging on my wall.

 

[John Lawrence]

Sadly these days in the UK most photography jobs stipulate a degree or HND as a pre-requisite. If you apply and don't have the qualification your application will be thrown out at the first sift. Ergo you will not get the chance to show any potential employer your work.

Not only are the employers hung up on qualifications, but in a market saturated with photography graduates it's becoming increasingly difficult to get work. A very well known (and well qualified) UK photographer told me about the "Wealthy Kid" syndrome he has to contend with when tendering for jobs. He lives in a University City and finds that photography students / recent graduates with wealthy parents will often get jobs because their parents pay the employer to give th job to their son / daughter!

With regard to associations such as the RPS, SWPP, MPA, BIPP etc. then I would say if you're shooting portrait, wedding, social etc. professionally then these can be very useful. Customers seem to feel happier knowing that you are bound by a code of conduct and that they have someone to complain to should things go wrong.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Jon, I'm for real. HONEST! Google key words like Monkette, North Miami Mayor, Kevin Burns, North Miami Board of Adjustment, Al Kaplan, toy monkey, etc. in various combinations. The blog entries about the mayor's campaign consistantly got more hits than the Miami Herald's website coverage. When Kevin won by a little over 400 votes Monkette wasted no time in telling him that if it wasn't for her ability to manage the campaign he might not have been the victorious one. She got to sit at a table with the mayor's five year old daughter Autumn at the victory party.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sadly these days in the UK most photography jobs stipulate a degree or HND as a pre-requisite. If you apply and don't have the qualification your application will be thrown out at the first sift. Ergo you will not get the chance to show any potential employer your work.. . .

Dear John,

But that's as an employee. Are working photographers insisting on degrees in photography from assistants? Or just a good portfolio, enthusiasm, and character references? When I started in the 70s I knew a lot of photographers who would look with suspicion on photography graduates. Photography graduates had to be better photographers than those with degrees in other subjects, or with no degrees at all, because they were regarded as likrly to have less of a grasp of deadlines, client briefs and costs.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Frank Petronio]

I know of several lawyers who are better than most professional photographers. Sanders McNew can shoot circles around most.

I know of no professional, art-educated photographers who are any good at lawyering (unless they already have a law degree).

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Jon, I'm for real. HONEST!

I'm sure.

Quirky.

But, no sweat.

I do recall a portrait photographer who used to come to our home when I was about five years old. He had a monkey or something too. Recently my mother sent me some of the photos.

 

[yanidel]

Your portfolio is your best qualification in photography.
Your references speed up the time someone will trust in you.

I just came back from a great show here in Paris "American Photography in the Seventies" with the Winogrand, Arbus, Friedlander, I wonder how many of them actually had a doctorate in photography ?