Today on facebook I saw someone I went to high school with who is
currently a "photographer." Now the reason photographer is in quotes is
because she has no training whatsoever. Seeing this made me wonder,
why are we doing this? Aside from the fact that learning about
photographic processes is incredibly interesting, fun, and expressive,
is it possible that we are all going to school knowing that for
commercial photography it may not be entirely necessary? We are
certainly not getting degrees so we can call ourselves photographers
because you could do that right now and no one would give a shit (except
for me apparently). Seeing someone out in the real world functioning
as a photographer without a degree and being paid for doing so really
made me feel like shit. So I have decided, we need a new term for
ourselves. The title "Photographer" has been so diluted that now all it
means is that someone owned a camera at some point in their lives.
So? What should we call ourselves so that people know we aren't just
fucking around. We have degrees (or will very soon), the world needs to
know that we take our shit seriously!
Love Kurt
8 comments:
Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino didn't got o film school.. But George Lucas and Francis Ford Coppola did. Getting the degree isn't a guarantee AGAINST other people sneaking through the system. If they do, and they have good work, then good for them. They might not ever need to use the tools they would learn at a university, but fortunately for us, we have those tools, and they only add more facets to the jewel that is our talent and education.
That was so cheesy it was physically uncomfortable to type out, but you get what i mean.
Kurt, I think you over thinking the situation. Yes everyone else in the world who owns a camera can call themselves a "photographer" (notice lower case), but does this mean that you should not take pride in what you do and what you want to pursue in the future? I think not. In fact I think the term "Photographer" is a very sacred thing, I think it means you have the "skills" to make a successful photograph, I think it means you are knowledgable about aesthetics and elements of design in order to take your photographs a step beyond what those around you are doing, and most importantly I think it means you have vision. Does any of that mean you have to go to school to learn such things? In my opinion no, I think school is necessary for some and completely useless to others when it comes to working in any creative field. In todays day and age all the information in the world is available on these damn computers and guess what, ITS FREE! I think there are a fair amount of people in this program that dont need schooling to be competent photographers in the world but who just wants to be competent and get by.
What school provides me is a way to work for myself as well as work within parameters which in my opinion is invaluable. There is such a small margine between good photography and great photography and I think school in the long run can help me bridge that gap. I think harking on the fact that everyone and their mom calls themselves a photographer is just bringing yourself down and you should hold yourself to a higher standard and become a true Photographer.
(On a side note, there is also a HUGE different between photographers who get paid and photographers who make a living with a camera, just because someone gets a monetary supplement for taking,creating, capturing, whatever images does in no way mean they are making a living doing what they are doing. I would be surprised beyond belief if your friend actually makes a living legitimately with his camera.)
I suppose what I am trying to say is that if you are a counselor you have to have a degree and a license. If you don't have either of those things you can still be a "counselor" but you have to call yourself a Life Coach. I think there should be similar situation with Photography. If you have a degree in photography you get to call yourself a Photographer, but if you don't have a degree you have to call yourself a...visual artist? Something like that? I don't know, I guess it just stresses me out that my title when I graduate will be the exact same as someone who never went to school and chooses to take pictures for a living. But I was just ranting because I was bored and pissed off.
Who cares. We aren't going to school for the title of "Photographer." We make images, we learn about photography, and we build connections for when we get thrown into the real world. We are guaranteed 20 people giving us feedback and opinions on our work whenever we show, we learn to take criticism, and we know how to talk about work. This is why we choose to get degrees in photography, not for a piece of paper saying we are now "photographers."
I am in complete agreement with all of the above. Something to think about is that we have access to all this amazing equipment that most photographers can only dream of owning. If I had never gone to school, I would have never bothered packing around a 4x5 in the middle of winter. But now I know how to do it, and can better appreciate those that do. I’ve tried things I never thought I would like. I know what lighting sucks, and what I want to buy because I got to try it out first. And like John was saying, I have a much harder shell on my back getting grueling critique from my peers and professors. You don’t quit just because someone doesn’t like it.
There are famous architects that did nothing more than an apprenticeship in Europe. Financial advisors that merely have a good knack for numbers. As the stigma of needing an official education is falling away, titles no longer mean as much as they used to. And although it may seem unfair that people can make an awesome living w/o spending the big bucks for a diploma, or call themselves things they didn’t earn, this shift also means that the focus is no longer on a title/degree, but what you can do. Thanks to your education, you can probably do a lot more than others that share the same title.
And as far as a title goes, if you want to make 'arsty-fartsy' technical, call yourself a Creative Visual Engineer and Producer. :)
Ashley I love the title you came up with, that's brilliant. I also think there have been some amazing points made to this conversation. I want to thank Kurt for bringing this to the table because I believe it is something that all of us have thought about at one point or another during our school years.
Unfortunately I am not as good with written words as I am with spoken words and don't want to have my reply resemble an incoherent rant. So Kurt (and if anyone else is interested) I would love to discuss this more in depth over coffee or a happy hour cocktail sometime.
Just thought I'd share this quote & article I recently found. She is a writer (now) but she has studied (and received degrees in) many things, including photography. About becoming a photographer, she wrote, "I could see myself getting closer and closer. Over time, what was on the film and the photographic paper more and more resembled what I'd imagined when I looked into the viewfinder. And I saw how, if you steadily worked at something, what you don't know gradually erodes and what you do know slowly grows and at some point you've gained a degree of mastery. What you know becomes what you are. You know photography and you are a photographer. You know writing and you are a writer." She said it took her years to "know" photography. Full article here: http://the99percent.com/articles/7092/Mary-Jo-Bang-On-Learning-Self-Discipline-and-Taking-the-Road-Less-Traveled?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+The99Percent+%28The+99+Percent%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
Post a Comment