One of the common refrains I hear from those that intern for me is that they felt that their college was a waste, and they should have come through my program, or a similar one, and that the real world experiences far better prepares them for the freelance world.I can see their point, and understand that, to a degree, it may be true, but that degree is worth a great deal. But what degree?
(Continued after the Jump)
First things first – graduating from college is critical. Don’t be an idiot and think that it’s not worth it. So many people I know say that getting your degree is the ultimate test in being able to demonstrate you can finish something you started. I agree with that sentiment.
Recently, there was a discussion on a photo association listserv about the qualifications for a teaching position.
Faculty members must have teaching experience at the college level and are required to maintain active participation in their field of photography.Active participation? I can’t say I know a lot of professors that would fit that bill. A few, but not a lot.
The perfect candidate for this job is someone who has an MFA in photography, plus commercial and teaching experience.And here’s where I, along with others on the listserv had a problem. This school requires a Masters? Surely this applies in fields like English, the Sciences, and so forth, but the arts? Maybe Art History degrees, but for the field of photography, I just don’t see it.
In the schools of today, in large part, the inbreeding, tenure debates, and self-congratulation that goes along with being an academic is part of the problem with todays’ photographers that enter the real world with a diploma, $100k or so in debt, and no way to pay that debt off. Few schools are preparing their students with the tools they need to succeed in business, since freelancers are the new staffers.
I have a few colleagues, and professors at places like RIT, and Brooks, and so forth, that have said that my book is on their required reading list. If you know of others, please post them in the comments. I am not saying that my book, per se, is the end-all be-all answer, but it’s at-least an indicator if the professors at the school even care about the issue of their photographers as soon-to-be self-employed.
Please post your comments by clicking the link below. If you’ve got questions, please pose them in our Photo Business Forum Flickr Group Discussion Threads.
Originally published on Photo Business News & Forum on September 2, 2008. Comments are closed; this post is part of the archive.
Case 2: Our precious university faculty voted that all faculty should be on the same pay scale. That means that a PhD in Computer Science was worth the same amount as a PhD in English, Art History, or some other dime-a-dozen field.
Case 3: In the CS Department, out of 7 full-time faculty, only 2 had actual real-world work experience in the field.
Any wonder that they had (and are still having) a hard time attracting good faculty?
Make it a 3-year contract, and you’ll see energy and integrity begin to come back.
At root, the whole Academic Institution, that exists for itself, for harvesting importance +funds, and status among its own kind, but doesn’t exist for the students god given worth
( remember that the original universities were places where students hired the teachers they wanted? They didn’t teach you that part of history? Convenient, isn’t it? )
is the problem.
Ditch ’em.
Business colleges ought to replace universities completely: the unemployment rate would go down in step with the commie institution’s reduced consumption of our kids potential.
They destroy our kids through debt, through BS “teaching” that hasn’t got any use or any integrity, and through training our kids to NOT succeed independently.
And stupidly we subsidize them.
Also, pay ought to be tied to commercial worth.
“artists” can die because they produce nothing of commercial value.
Creatives, sure, so long as we’re working, but painters?
What have they ever done for our economy?
English? “starving writers” seem familiar?
Boot ’em off our subsidy gravy train and let ’em work just like we do or at least make way for people of worth.
Why should WE pay the price for the useless?
Moronic scum.
Talking Pictures: John Szarkowski on the good, the bad and the flat in American photography
by Holly Myers and Tom Christie – LA Weekly, December 6, 2006
Thank the marketing majors for making people believe they need 10X stuff just to make a photo.
In defense of the University, they never claimed to be a commercial photography program and encouraged students who want that to go elsewhere. (All students don’t get the message) However, professional principles are relevant to any photo career whether it is journalism, commercial,fine art, etc. The fundamental tenant of “know you are valuable and know what that value is”, applies. If they fully understand that, they can apply it to any career path they choose.
Photographers get into the field because they like photography, not because they want to run a profitable business. It is only when they realize the necessity of being able to do both are they able to have a career in field. People often say to me, “Your job seems like fun.” I say when I am working it is often fun. The problem is that I have to run the business side to get the fun part. I don’t mind because I recognize the value. But given the choice, I would rather be taking the pictures than shopping for health insurance plans.
I once asked my dentist which toothpaste HE recommended. He said, “I recommend toothpaste.” Along those lines, I recommend a college degree… in most anything, and preferably liberal arts. After that figure out how you want to earn your living, ask practitioners for their recommendations, and follow their advice. It may not be formal education.
It’s already on the road to ruin.
Tenure, in turn, is based on criteria that help colleges remain accredited (publication, research, service on faculty committees, etc.) rather than staying current with the field (which teachers of subjects like photography must do if their teaching is to remain relevant).
(And all talk of “sinecures” aside, without tenure, a college teacher is the academic equivalent of a migrant laborer.)
The fateful turn came when graduates of trade schools began to slip in earning power compared to those with academic degrees…even in fields such as photography. In rather rapid order, former trade schools, like Brooks Institute and RIT (where I taught briefly in the late 1970s) sought accreditation to grant academic degrees…and thus were caught up in the dilemma described above.
As in so many other things, the root problem lies in institutions, not individuals.