I recently decided to take...

[pziasd]

...some formal training in photography. Our instructor at the local community college is (allegedly) a professional photographer for 15 years. During one of our discussions on equipment he told that alot of what he bought when he shot film he doesn't use since he's digital convert. What ever you want to do you can do or fix in PS.

In my opinion Photoshop is a tool and not a substitute for talent.

When you take an image film/digital you should practice the basic principles of photography with every shot and not use PS or any other software to 'fix' what you should have done point of the camera.

He told us that we didn't have to make prints of our homework, the bueaty of digital is he can load the images on his laptop view them there. Our last assignment require us to shoot the equivelant of two rolls of film. Lets see, 48 exposures times 8 students = 384 images. He's going to load them on his PC and critque each students assignment...in the two hour time we have for class?? Prints would be an easier way to view each students assignment, we can pass them around to each other and have an open discussion. But for 8 students to huddle around a laptop and TRY to view 384 images is not at all practicle.

He also states that he likes digital because there's the LCD display tha t he can look at while he's shooting and does so often. I agree with that to a certain degree. But if you need to view that LCD screen more than once or twice while shooting you have very little skills as a photographer.

If I hired a photographer and saw him looking at every or every other image on the LCD screen, I'd get the feeling that I spent money on a photog that didn't know what he was doing.

I shoot tons of photos for the company that I work for of the volunteer efforts of our employees. Things move very quickly and there isn't time to play with the LCD screen looking at each image. I have a deadline to which I have to get those images to Corporate Communicates for publication on the intranet, newsletter, etc. If I had to depend on PhotoShopt to fix or tweak them, I'd never get them submitted in time.

I think my instructor is bogus...what do you think?

[icdapoakr]

well i dont think he's bogus. i look at my lcd after every picture to see if the composition is right, there are no shadows that i dont want there, and if everything i want is in focus.

he does seem a little to reliant on digital though. a bit obsessed even. there are some things i like to do in real life that would i never be happy doing in photoshop like playing with the lensbaby and infrared. it feels too cheap to do them in photoshop

is it too late to get another photography teacher or is there even another one?

[pziasd]

Originally Posted by icdapoakr

well i dont think he's bogus. i look at my lcd after every picture to see if the composition is right, there are no shadows that i dont want there, and if everything i want is in focus.

he does seem a little to reliant on digital though. a bit obsessed even. there are some things i like to do in real life that would i never be happy doing in photoshop like playing with the lensbaby and infrared. it feels too cheap to do them in photoshop

is it too late to get another photography teacher or is there even another one?

This is what they call a continuing education class...no credit points or GPA is earned. They hire who ever is available. I'm not sure what criteria the use in hiring but he's all we got.

He doesn't go by an agenda either...he rambles on and on about his 'pro' experience...

[CaptainTom]

YOu usually get what you pay for.

I bet this CC prof. costs you very little, and you seem to be getting your monies worth.

The info he is putting out is probably valuable to most of the students who are neophyte photgraphers with little interest other than operating their new camera to get a picture of their kids or grandkids. You seem serious, and whould search out a more "traditional" instructor.

[pziasd]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

YOu usually get what you pay for.

I bet this CC prof. costs you very little, and you seem to be getting your monies worth.

The info he is putting out is probably valuable to most of the students who are neophyte photgraphers with little interest other than operating their new camera to get a picture of their kids or grandkids. You seem serious, and whould search out a more "traditional" instructor.

Time and money...I've gone back to school to finish my degree and the class I needed to take was the same time as a math class that I also needed to take.

I'm sure I'll get something more out of this class when we move forward. I'm not sure where I'd look more professional instruction without leaving Houston or that wouldn't conflict with my academic studies.

[Bill]

He does not seem bogus at all.

I am aware of no requirement that says effects obtainable at the camera must be done at the camera and no other place. If there were one, break it. It's OK.

No need to think that every picture is going to be critiqued in class. A number will be bracketed for depth of field, white balance, or shutter speed. Others will be duplicated because someone walked in front of the subject. Others are left undiscussed for lack of interest, but not all. So now were down to 16-24, 2 or 3 a student. That's OK.

What did the instructor say when you or the others mentioned the difficulty of viewing these pix on a laptop?

Looking at the LCD is just a modern version of taking Polaroids. Years ago, a print ad was shot the house I then lived in. The client was a national clothing manufacturer. Big agency. Top photographer. Probably a dozen people were there. The waste basket was full of debris from the Polaroids. The client wanted to see some variation. So did the art director. And the photographer. Pretty typical. After all, nobody had been on the actual set with the actual models. Now the camera would be tethered to a laptop and every shot examined by parties, sort of like your class.

Your experience is more that of a journalist or event photographer. Excellent skills are developed when you are on deadline. You now have the opportunity to work on other skills in this class. Like using PS to even out white balance on shots taken under changing light. Even if you were in the field with a color meter and bushel of Wratten filters, keeping up with the light could be pretty difficult unless you had a static subject. PS is definitely the way to go.

Your class is probably for everyday people shooting everyday stuff. You may be able to find what you are looking for in the credit classes of the local community college or U of H. Other seminars are available from Nikon and Canon, not to mention those put on by PPA, ASMP, and other professional associations. Seminars are mentioned regularly right here on TPF. And many seminars are online. Time and money affects us all, of course.

I hope your experience with the class improves because you sound like the motivated, eager student that most teachers prefer. My own experience with adult education classes has been good. Schools usually request feedback from students because nobody wants a bad teacher.

Bill

[Jim Victory]

I certainly don't know what his intention was with his comparison of film to digital but I can relate the comparison of PS to work in the darkroom having shot film for about 35 years before digital.

I had to be drugged kicking and screaming into the use of PS vs. the darkroom but there is really not much difference when it comes to the manipulation of an image between the two.

As to looking at the LCD on the camera I use it quite often, not to look at the shots, but to use the histograms to make sure my exposure is right and to adjust it if necessary. I shoot in conditions where the light is constantly changing and it is a must to make sure the exposure is right so I don't have to do much processing when I'm finished.

It is not much different from the handheld light meter I used shooting film.

I could also imagine the cost of developing and the logistics of passing 384 prints around the class to be taxing as well.

Give it some time and see where it goes. Get what you can out of it and move on. You may want to hook up with some people on the forum in your area for shoots and the sharing of knowledge to get what you need.

Just because someone teaches photography doesn't necessarily mean they understand it or even good at it and that goes for Pros too.

[AndrewCCM]

Man.. I feel like such a loser. I actually look at my LCD quite often while on a shoot. Mainly for closed eyes and things of that nature...I need to practice hard on my skills to be sure that people don't blink in group photos and such..

Tongue in cheek...

Enjoy the class. If you get something out of it great. If not, oh well...I cannot tell you how many professors I had in college that I did not agree with on certain topics. Don't get me started on my Philosophy instructor...I digress.

[pziasd]

I still say that Photoshop is not a substitute for talent...I think he's using Photoshop as a crutch

Thanks for the opinions...

[AndrewCCM]

Very possible. Is this a photography course or a Photoshop course? If Photography, then yes perhaps he is focusing on PS a bit much...

Good luck. Hopefully it gets better..

[Murph]

See, and I almost never look at my LCD, but thats a hold over from my film days. Those that do, are fine with me, its just that I do not look at the LCD. As for fixing it in photoshop, well thats all fine and well, but if the photo was not good in the first place, you can only do so much in photoshop. It does sound like you are getting your money's worth, take what works for you and ignore what doesn't.

[vcrifici]

The result is what counts, not the equipment or the photographer’s style of making the picture.

Ansel Adams was a deliberate pre-conceiver, and studied the ground glass on his view camera before he snapped the shutter. Henri Cartier-Bresson was a precise moment shooter and snapped his shutter only when he thought the action was right. Both photographers produced marvelous photos.

Maybe your instructor is the Adams type. Your style of shooting sounds more like the Cartier-Bresson type. What’s the difference between adjusting contrast & brightness, dodging, burning, tilting the easel to correct perspective, multiple negative printing, tone separation, solarization, split contrast printing, etc. when done in the darkroom or when done in Photoshop? I’ll tell you the difference. Photoshop is faster, more precise, easier and less costly than doing it in the darkroom.

Digital is here to stay, my friend. Kodak knows it, along with many other respected film manufacturers. They are all cutting production of roll film and film cameras. Soon there will be none. Like picture tube TV’s, they are all being replaced with flat screen LCD’s

The bottom line is: You can still shoot tons of photos with digital, just as you can pre-conceive each shot carefully by composing it on a digital LCD screen. The result is what counts…

[icdapoakr]

well. i'm about to enter my first year of college and i'm going to lamar university where keith carter is the head photography teacher. score.

[Ray]

His technique and workflow doesn't match with yours, definitely bogus.

[BobbyC]

Originally Posted by pziasd

If I hired a photographer and saw him looking at every or every other image on the LCD screen, I'd get the feeling that I spent money on a photog that didn't know what he was doing.

What utter nonsense! It is the duty of any professional to ensure he/she is getting the shots. Obviously one wouldn't look at the screen when there are shots to be taken, but anyone that didn't use a tool like this to ensure they are getting what the paying client wants is doing a dis-service to the client in other words, acting in a non-professional manner. I guess those high dollar polaroid backs we used to buy were just for amatuers that didn't know what they were doing?

I spent many hours in the precious darkroom that many seem to want to cling to so bad, but I'll never go back to it, why would I so I can take 3,4,5 times longer to get the same results as I get now in the computer? Some people use these tools to create something beyond a snapshot, not as a crutch for bad photography.

I will cencede that your "teacher" seems to be very lacking based on your other comments, I just couldn't let this particular comment go unanswered.