The 'self taught' photographer

Is it simply too presumptuous for someone to call themselves an artist? Maybe they should just say 'painter' or 'sculptor' or 'photographer'. It's as bad as if they described themselves as 'popular' or 'likeable'. That's for the public to decide, surely? Or is it for art critics? Hell.
 
Obviously there are some occupations where the stakes are high and formal training is essential. For instance, I don't want my doctor or lawyer to be self taught. And I'd like to think that nuclear power stations are designed and built by people with some minimum level of certified knowledge.

But artists? What's that about? What's the worst that can happen? Sheesh.
 
There's a sociological substance to her argument, though.

If you engage in the world of galleries, numbered editions, prestigious assignment for magazines, special orders from special clients, then someone somewhere is always bound to ask you for a BFA or an MFA, simply because they want that "insurance policy" that having a degree theoretically grant.

Galleries want to invest in people who are transparently dedicated to the art world, because they fear one day you might decided that fly fishing is your true calling in life. Knowing that you are tethered to their economic power to make a living because the only thing you have is a BFA, they sleep more confidently at night.

They need to know you're on a leash, and that merely follows from the professionalizing of the "gallery artist" situation.

But I don't think it's a situation that necessarily create the best art, though. Just a more stable art market.
 
count me in the self taught realm, you can't teach vision or creativity I don't think. If you ain't got it...fake it ;)
 
Well, "My Bed" is good solid postmodernist, very much the state of art in the art. I personally see it as artistic equivalent of reactor #4 in Chernobyl: very poor job done by professional. Main difference is, in art world you avoid prison for what you did :)
 
PJRiley said:
I recently read an article about an artist who scorned 'self taught' artists. Her opinion was that you should have educational 'backup' i.e. a college degree before you call yourself an artist and expect people to pay for your work.
I don't agree. Aside from a correspondence course, I am self taught. I have a huge photography book library, and I study the work of other photographers I admire.
I learned my craft the hard way and I still do. When my work sells, I'm not the least bit uncomfortable, because I know the effort I've invested in my photography. (Money too!!:eek:)
How did you learn the craft, and what do you think of the artist's statement?
Click to expand...

I don't agree with the artist's statement.

But I am not like most people. I am an autodidact.

I did not just 'teach myself' photography in the traditional sense of picking up a camera and learning what I know from trial and error (although I did that too). I also have educated myself through extensive research into the history of photography, the chemistry of photography, and optical and mechanical theories as they apply to photography. I have an excellent, self-assembled library and I've read every tome in it. I pore over photographic periodicals from the late 1890's to the present, and I set up experiments to learn more about what works and what does not with regard to desired or imagined results. About all I lack is a strong mechanical ability, so I do not do well building camera parts myself (I envy those who have this ability).

May I recommend "Jude the Obscure," by Thomas Hardy.
 
mhv said:
There's a sociological substance to her argument, though.

If you engage in the world of galleries, numbered editions, prestigious assignment for magazines, special orders from special clients, then someone somewhere is always bound to ask you for a BFA or an MFA, simply because they want that "insurance policy" that having a degree theoretically grant.

Galleries want to invest in people who are transparently dedicated to the art world, because they fear one day you might decided that fly fishing is your true calling in life. Knowing that you are tethered to their economic power to make a living because the only thing you have is a BFA, they sleep more confidently at night.

They need to know you're on a leash, and that merely follows from the professionalizing of the "gallery artist" situation.

But I don't think it's a situation that necessarily create the best art, though. Just a more stable art market.
Click to expand...

Getting your degree is like purchasing your membership card :) Nobody would publish a history paper I wrote prior to my getting a degree. Look at all of the controversy over the "accidental" art, the art made by young children or elephants; I think people do not want to invest this type of art, for one reason or another. Just like I would have a harder time selling a “one-off accidental” exposure which just happen to be technically/artistically great. (I would post it here and have it pixel-peeped :) ) When you look at many of the great artists (Picasso, Van Gough, plus many many others) they had classical training in other forms of art, technical drawing, water, oil, different styles etc… And then they went off and did their own thing which made them great. People want to know you have that same depth, that you know art, and could do any number of things in any number of styles, but that you are creating this art to fulfill your own personal vision. This is why many artists feel like you need a degree, but I don’t happen to agree, I have very liberal opinion about what art is.
 
Self Taught????

Self Taught????

I always wanted to be a self taught neurosurgeon, but nobody stepped up to the plate for me to practice on. So, I taught myself photography. I also taught myself auto body repair and painting. I actually became quite good... but don't ask at which one.
 
you are born with talent.

people that have it either are wasting it or out busy using it.

neither class typically teaches in universities.

therefore:

who can you hope to learn from at a university, generally speaking...

I went to university and would pay four times my tuition to get those four years back, what a total waste of time. Oh, but good thing I have this degree...
 
Well, I am self taught in terms of 3D skill. I must have imagined the feature films, TV shows, commercials, industrial design pieces I did. Wow, all those years can't of existed.

The word for people like this woman are not polite, so I shall refrain.
 
The more I think about it, the more I suspect that no-one is self-taught on the technical side, but everyone is self-taught on the aesthetic side.

I see very little possibility of an alternative to either. I'm not going to re-invent the H&D curve, the dry plate or ISO standards, so I had to learn about these from others (in books, magazines and from other photographers). Equally, no-one can really teach me to LOOK at my own pictures...

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom