I want to discuss photography at an educational level, and in particular at the Diploma Level. This is particularly pertinent for me right now, as I am completing a Diploma of Photography this year.

Historically, photography has clearly been what you would call a specialisation. Students were taught photography on a technical level first and foremost – how to measure and expose for the light in any given scene. They learned about film and how to develop and print, and they learned about perspective and composition and the myriad other technical and artistic elements of photography. As any serious photographer knows – there is a LOT to learn to be good at this craft.

Now of course, as we move into the digital age, things have changed dramatically. Until recently, computers were not even part of the curriculum. In a few short years, the darkroom will be gone (in some places, it already has), and film will finally be a thing of the past. These days it’s all digital capture and Photoshop. Fair enough too, in one way. The advantages of digital are abundant and obvious. I still think there is a role for film in the curriculum, but that’s not really what I want to talk about.

It’s more unsettling to consider the other changes to the way we learn photography in the current curriculum. I would have to say that what we are learning now, at least at my particular educational facility, means that we are no longer specialising in photography. We are now expected to be photographers, graphic and web designers as well as small business managers. We seem to spend more time learning all the other aspects of photography, like Small Business, Photoshop, Dreamweaver and Indesign than we do learning about the actual taking of photography. We are given a lot of photography assignments, but are expected to research and complete them almost without any instruction (OK, we are in our second year, but we still have a lot to learn). Clearly, the overall emphasis of the Diploma is to produce all round skills in the area of small business, photography and computer based applications that are used in the photographic / graphic industry. But when we are talking about a two year program, that means our skills as photographers are going to be much less than if we studied photography alone. And it’s photography we came to do. I already know a fair bit about computer programs and I ran a small business for years. Others have no intention of becoming graphic designers or small businessmen. They want to be specialist photographers.

But I suppose that’s where we need to look. Is there a need for specialist photographers any more or does the market expect photographers to be able to do all the other stuff we are learning? Clearly the curriculum has been heavily influenced by the industry telling the institutions that students need small business and computer skills. The time of specialist photographers seems to be passing. But what I think is being ignored here is the fact that it’s actually quite limited what you can learn in two years. Personally I think it dilutes the education down towards worthlessness. I think that to maximize the usefulness of a Diploma of Photography we need to be spending the bulk of that two years learning about photography, and when I say photography I’m talking about what goes on from behind the camera looking through the viewfinder. We need hands on instruction day after day. Not just a bunch of assignments thrown at us. I think small business and computers should be on the agenda too, but in a much smaller way than they currently are. Photoshop is an amazing program, but the way we are being taught photography means most students are learning how to correct mistakes they should never had made. And while Indesign is no doubt a valuable tool, how are we as photographers with about 50 hours of instruction in the program supposed to compete with graphic designers? I realise it’s supposed to complement our skills as photographers, but this sort of approach makes a Diploma of Photography into not much more than an introductory course. If the course was four years, and you had the same mix as we do now, I would better understand the approach taken, but as it is, all the course seems to be doing is unleashing into the world after two year a bunch of students who know a little about photography, a little about Photoshop, a little about Indesign and a little about small business. An ex student called the place a Photography sausage factory. I’m beginning to see his point.

And I haven’t even mentioned the other important things we are NOT learning. Things like learning to critique photography, how to best implement an effective DAM (Digital Asset Management) workflow and gaining a really solid understanding of colour management.

After looking through RMIT’s BA in Photography Program Structure, I realise I should have went to uni instead…

[tags]photography education, diploma of photography, TAFE, teaching photography[/tags]