Do you need a degree to enjoy photography?

I'm intrigued that the title of the tread is about enjoying photography, while the content of the OP is about technical competence through training (or rather a failure for that to happen).

Does this reveal a belief that to be able to enjoy some activity, you must necessarily master its techniques; even more plainly that that the source of your enjoyment is in the mastering those techniques?

Common themes in discussions on forums like this suggests that for a lot of people that is true.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
One thing I don't understand is why anyone would do a joint degree? A few years ago one University was offering a joint honours degree in Forensic Science & Tourism. You can't get subjects or careers further apart, one is scientific the other social!
Click to expand...
I would suggest this a perfect combined degree for anyone considering a trip on the Orient Express or a trip down the Nile.
 
If you have an degree in "ology" doesn't mean you know everything or have the ability in that particular subject.

Did a trip down the Nile the other year stayed in Giza to see King Tut's stuff in Cairo museum, Valley of the kings and the pyramids. Then flew down to Luxor for the river trip up to the Aswan Dam and back. A trip I would highly recommend when the political climate calms down. Went to the Nubian Village as well as All the must see sights

Sorry about the wind noise on the mic
 
Last edited:
GatoAzul1968 said:
Going to University to gain a photography degree or not. You need to realise that it will cost you around £27,000 for a 3-year degree course, plus accommodation, travel expenses and spending. You can always take out a student loan, but is it worth it? A 1-year photography academy would have cost you far less.

Just my 2 pence.
Click to expand...

That's not the only route to a degree though. It is available for less.
 
realspeed said:
read the post by nick
Click to expand...
Indeed I had done before posting. But how are the details of your expensive private holiday and the accompanying home movie in sensible terms relevant to the thread?
 
realspeed said:
If you have an degree in "ology" doesn't mean you know everything or have the ability in that particular subject.
Click to expand...

Can you translate this into English please?
 
Blank_Canvas said:
One thing I don't understand is why anyone would do a joint degree? A few years ago one University was offering a joint honours degree in Forensic Science & Tourism. You can't get subjects or careers further apart, one is scientific the other social!
Click to expand...

I imagine if you were called in to help with a murder ina foreign country it might help ;) lol
 
Hum - Man Ray took photo's, in fact I have a rather nice book of his portraits. I guess you're referring to his Photograms. Do they count as photography?
 
Dunno but I enjoyed his images. They're at the v&a at the moment and displayed huge are stunning. Is he the photographer though, as they are google images. How does he get around copyright actually?
 
Byker28i said:
Is he the photographer though, as they are google images. How does he get around copyright actually?
Click to expand...

He's obviously not the photographer if they are Google's images and how does he get away with it?... perhaps not for long if Google want to do anything about it.

Musicman said:
Ah, but does Mishka Henner enjoy his photography?
Click to expand...

He would appear to enjoy using other people's photography.


Steve.
 
I'm actually tossing around the idea of doing a P/T photography degree by distance learning. My main goal would be to have a more structured and guided way of learning about the philosophy and art of photography rather than technique. I want to expose myself to more perspectives on photography as a tool for expressing ideas and for communicating experiences.
Is this even possible? Any courses that come recommended?

My entire formal education since mid high school (save A level English) has been scientific and I feel I've missed out on serious immersion in the expressive arts. I have no interest in a career in photography or the arts, I just want to learn.

On the other hand I sometimes worry that the naive mind is less restricted and I'd be compromising my own exploration by submitting to formal education. In the hard sciences formal education is a necessity but I can't see that being as true for the arts.
 
Philosophy and Art of Photography is something you can read about and learn for yourself if you do your own research. For sure, any course you undertake will signpost you to various areas that you may, or may not of found. Then you critically dissect it and compare and contrast with etc. Of course, there is never a right or wrong answer because it comes down to personal opinion and contextual bias. If this is what you want then that's great but you don't need to enrol on a degree course to do this. All the information is out there and it's not hard to find. If you want recognition of all the hard work that you've done and gain a formal qualification then this could be for you.
 
Last edited:
To have guidance and structure would be good though.

ghoti said:
On the other hand I sometimes worry that the naive mind is less restricted and I'd be compromising my own exploration by submitting to formal education. In the hard sciences formal education is a necessity but I can't see that being as true for the arts.
Click to expand...

This is interesting. My own experience of formal education, including History to degree level and Linguistics to diploma level, left me with the view that it's perfectly possible to allow the formality to guide and mould the instinct. This is particularly true when formal education is undertaken as a more mature person.

Additionally, having studied Maths to A level, I feel the arts subjects allow expression of personality whereas Maths, and I guess science subjects, don't. Having said that, I've known Phd. scientists who say that, at higher levels, personality does again become relevant.

And I'm not very good at Maths, which is probably a factor.

I feel there's more to say about this. I shall have a think.
 
Last edited:
There are plenty of books to be had about the history, philosophy, theory etc. of photography these days if you don't want to commit to a structured course..

These books and their reading lists might be a starting point - they almost form a curriculum :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411891/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i01?ie=UTF8&psc=1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411409/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411662/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
 
Ed Sutton said:
There are plenty of books to be had about the history, philosophy, theory etc. of photography these days if you don't want to commit to a structured course..

These books and their reading lists might be a starting point - they almost form a curriculum :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411891/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i01?ie=UTF8&psc=1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411409/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411662/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Click to expand...

Absolutely. That too.

As to the original question - no, of course not.
 
simon ess said:
To have guidance and structure would be good though.



This is interesting. My own experience of formal education, including History to degree level and Linguistics to diploma level, left me with the view that it's perfectly possible to allow the formality to guide and mould the instinct. This is particularly true when formal education is undertaken as a more mature person.

Additionally, having studied Maths to A level, I feel the arts subjects allow expression of personality whereas Maths, and I guess science subjects, don't. Having said that, I've known Phd. scientists who say that, at higher levels, personality does again become a factor.

And I'm not very good at Maths, which is probably a factor.

I feel there's more to say about this. I shall have a think.
Click to expand...
I have a PhD and work in research science and my take on it is that there is certainly a subjective component in deciding the direction of one's research, but the interpretation of research at the "cutting edge" is as objective a pursuit as there is in human endeavour. In short: your data must be robust and repeatable and your conclusions must be logical and withstand all rational attempts at finding holes or mistakes or biases. Although, I work in academic research. Industry has...er...different concerns than letting nature come out the way she is.
 
Oh yes, absolutely. I was thinking, and discussions I've had around this subject have been, more about theoretical physics and the creativity of high level Maths.

At that point, my brain explodes. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMN
Ed Sutton said:
There are plenty of books to be had about the history, philosophy, theory etc. of photography these days if you don't want to commit to a structured course..

These books and their reading lists might be a starting point - they almost form a curriculum :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411891/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i01?ie=UTF8&psc=1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411409/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/2940411662/ref=oh_details_o08_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Click to expand...

Certainly the last two are on my essential reading list of my course.
 
Byker28i said:
How does he get around copyright actually?
Click to expand...

As for the Robert Frank stuff, It's art, it's justified. It's not a copy of the original, it's a reworking with a different intent. Robert Frank doesn't seem to mind :)
 
ghoti said:
... I sometimes worry that the naive mind is less restricted and I'd be compromising my own exploration by submitting to formal education. In the hard sciences formal education is a necessity but I can't see that being as true for the arts.
Click to expand...
Essentially, perhaps it's of benefit to be exposed to influences - to material from others, which may show the breadth of possibilities and thus stimulate your own creative engine. Technique can be imbibed from various sources, many of them free. Your personality may help to determine your direction and expression.
 
Last edited:
droj said:
Essentially, perhaps it's of benefit to be exposed to influences - to material from others, which may show the breadth of possibilities and thus stimulate your own creative engine. Technique can be imbibed from various sources, many of them free.
Click to expand...

True, but theres nothing like having a tutor to guide you along the right path and have a structure to follow. You still find yourself wandering paths of exploration as a atricle links to another, and onto another...
 
Byker28i said:
True, but theres nothing like having a tutor to guide you along the right path and have a structure to follow. You still find yourself wandering paths of exploration as a atricle links to another, and onto another...
Click to expand...
Yes, of course, I'm not against it at all.
 
ghoti said:
On the other hand I sometimes worry that the naive mind is less restricted
Click to expand...

Then why is Flickr full of the same crap... no matter how long you spend staring at it?
 
Pookeyhead said:
Then why is Flickr full of the same crap... no matter how long you spend staring at it?
Click to expand...
Because there's a difference between a naive but curious mind and a naive and lazy mind. Too many people fit into the latter category.
I think a naive mind coupled with genuine curiosity and imagination might be a good thing in the expressive arts.
 
I would agree... but such minds usually want to share experiences with similar minds... and that is one of the factors that decides people on a degree in the arts. Despite a contingent of tory policy casualties thinking they can get an easy degree in something by taking pictures (morons), most candidates crave the creative environment it provides.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I would agree... but such minds usually want to share experiences with similar minds... and that is one of the factors that decides people on a degree in the arts. Despite a contingent of tory policy casualties thinking they can get an easy degree in something by taking pictures (morons), most candidates crave the creative environment it provides.
Click to expand...

I think this perfectly sums up my desire to study a photography degree, and my frustration that I cant find a supportive and shared creative environment locally. I know I can find support and help online and via distance learning, but I really crave the face to face human contact with like minded individuals
 
ghoti said:
I'm actually tossing around the idea of doing a P/T photography degree by distance learning. My main goal would be to have a more structured and guided way of learning about the philosophy and art of photography rather than technique. I want to expose myself to more perspectives on photography as a tool for expressing ideas and for communicating experiences.
Is this even possible? Any courses that come recommended?

My entire formal education since mid high school (save A level English) has been scientific and I feel I've missed out on serious immersion in the expressive arts. I have no interest in a career in photography or the arts, I just want to learn.

On the other hand I sometimes worry that the naive mind is less restricted and I'd be compromising my own exploration by submitting to formal education. In the hard sciences formal education is a necessity but I can't see that being as true for the arts.
Click to expand...

If you were looking to the technicalities I might understand it.
You can't learn the philosophy of photography (whatever that is), and art is subjective, so you can only learn someone else's perception of the art.
You have to keep shooting and find your own IMO.
 
viv1969 said:
If you were looking to the technicalities I might understand it.
You can't learn the philosophy of photography (whatever that is), and art is subjective, so you can only learn someone else's perception of the art.
You have to keep shooting and find your own IMO.
Click to expand...
The technicalities of photography are simple and intuitive. They don't rely on difficult ideas. You can learn them from any old book on the subject. After that it's just a matter of practice.
Exposing oneself to the debates and perspectives on interpretation, purpose, concepts, semiotics etc is a rather more tricky thing to do alone. To benefit from a debate you have to engage with it, and that requires other people. You're not just learning "someone else's perception" you're learning lots of different people's different perceptions and using those to challenge and develop your own perspectives.
But, on the other hand, I agree with you a bit. That's what I meant by bringing up the possible benefits of the naive mind.

To answer your question about "what is the philosophy of photography", well I guess you'd start with the question "what is photography for? why choose photography over other means of expression?" and you'd take it from there.
 
I see your point ghoti, I just think life's too short :)
 
ghoti said:
Exposing oneself to the debates and perspectives on interpretation, purpose, concepts, semiotics etc is a rather more tricky thing to do alone. To benefit from a debate you have to engage with it, and that requires other people. You're not just learning "someone else's perception" you're learning lots of different people's different perceptions and using those to challenge and develop your own perspectives.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

viv1969 said:
If you were looking to the technicalities I might understand it.
Click to expand...

No one goes to uni and undertakes a degree to learn technical stuff. You can do that yourself by watching youtube videos. However... what you probably won't have is access to huge amounts of facilities and equipment to practice with. Watch as many Youtube videos as you want, but you may not have access to the latest software, studio lighting, studios themselves, high end medium format digital gear, and let's not forget the expertise of the lecturers at your disposal.


viv1969 said:
You can't learn the philosophy of photography (whatever that is)
Click to expand...

If you don't know what it is, how can you comment on how you can learn it?


viv1969 said:
, and art is subjective, so you can only learn someone else's perception of the art.
Click to expand...

No.. it's not, and you wouldn't be listening to one person's opinion about anything. You'd be debating everything in a creative community of practice.

viv1969 said:
You have to keep shooting and find your own IMO.
Click to expand...

You have to keep shooting to practice, but few people prosper creatively working in isolation. Most will benefit from having a shared experience, some other like minded people to challenge you, and to debate with.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Exactly.



No one goes to uni and undertakes a degree to learn technical stuff. You can do that yourself by watching youtube videos. However... what you probably won't have is access to huge amounts of facilities and equipment to practice with. Watch as many Youtube videos as you want, but you may not have access to the latest software, studio lighting, studios themselves, high end medium format digital gear, and let's not forget the expertise of the lecturers at your disposal.




If you don't know what it is, how can you comment on how you can learn it?




No.. it's not, and you wouldn't be listening to one person's opinion about anything. You'd be debating everything in a creative community of practice.



You have to keep shooting to practice, but few people prosper creatively working in isolation. Most will benefit from having a shared experience, some other like minded people to challenge you, and to debate with.
Click to expand...

Heavens. Someone likes the look of their own opinions :LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top