thinking about the direction photography is taking.. The photography course at the college where I work started out as an education program that covered many facets of photography, chemistry, physics, optics etc. Students learned about chemical process monitoring and they maintained the E6, RA4, C41 and other B&W processes and machines, they learned how to use microscopes and undertook microscopy, they learned about high speed and flash photography and took great pride in developing these skills. They learned about the mechanics of cameras and some built their own specialised cameras - swing lens panoramics and the like, they learned about light and undertook UV, IR and filtered light forensic type work. In all, the course was designed to teach people as much about the field of photography and it's applications as possible and different streams lead to different specialisations. Commercial photography was also a specialisation with it's own stream, it was very popular but it was not the ultimate end to many students.. many of who'd come to this college to learn specific skills to enhance their jobs and careers - doctors, ophthalmologists, dentists, police officers and the like. These students had need for special skills and commercial photography was of no interest to them whatsoever. We also trained graphic designers who learned on bromide cameras with half tone screens, and wet processes being a part of their training too and as important as design concepts and layout. Airbrushing was a component of photography as well as these graphics courses and was extremely popular. Many things and many processes were shared between the two courses, but with the improvements in computer imaging programs, graphic design was headed in one very clear direction - visible to all but the most myopic crusaders, graphic design was truly to benefit enormously from the digital age. In time the bromide cameras went, the processors stripped and thrown away and now kids with no idea of how light works and how colour and light interplay sit in front of Macs churning out work at a phenomenal rate. Some of it is good, some bad, and some truly spectacular. The computers really have freed them from some pretty mundane mechanical processes and works that would have required some of the highest skills, attained only by the most dedicated experimenter with a staunch heart and a good eye are available to the masses. it brings a tear to the eye.. Back to photography. The computers found their way into our world too. Scanners first and then digital cameras. Students began to learn the various incarnations of Photoshop and the Mac OS's. Due to the time allocation required for the development of these skills, other areas of photography teaching was reduced. The wet processes and maintenance were dropped from the syllabus, optics went next then microscopy was reduced. The stereo photo assignment is now a hand held walk through with few students comprehending what it is they are actually doing. Sensitometry is a shadow of what it once was and it's purely a density not colour matter now. Students were required to provide their own 35mm mechanical camera for the certificate course, medium format for the diploma and some even purchased 4x5's (or larger) for the certificate course. Now the requirement is for a 35mm with manual controls for the entire course. We provide the D100's for the digital stuff and a small selection of MF cameras and there's a whole truckload of 4x5 gear to play with.. not that it gets used for anything beside an architectural assignment and a bit of close up work. Students use the college's Mac's, few having anything worthwhile at home. They bleat that computers are expensive (!!?) but grumble about the lack of advanced facilities available to them. None have digital cameras but all want access to the three D100's, at least until they make a mistake and decide they hate digital. They seem happy with the two Epson 7600 banner printers even though a 4 year old RA4 hanging in the digital darkroom remains unfaded while 12 month old Epson Ultrachrome prints beside them have faded to a nasty orange. Some students have returned to printing RA4 from negs, but they are in the minority. The C41 processor is now gone, the D76 4x5 deep tanks have passed away, the 16 colour enlargers have dropped to 4 and the myriad of black and white enlargers scattered across many darkrooms have coalesced into 40 enlargers in two communal darkrooms. The course is now a commercial course only. Few students use mechanical cameras, none know of any MF cameras beyond Bronica, Mamiya and Hasselblad. Canons and Nikons fitted with Sigma zooms abound. They all buy 'Pro' films (because they're 'professional') and none test their films. Where once I'd see students hovering over light tables picking the best shots from rolls and rolls of perfectly exposed, perfectly focussed shots now I find them seeking a well exposed one from among a bracketed collection of shots. Maybe these last few years haven't seen the best of them going through, I don't know, but the calibre is not the same. They proceed out into the market arena and undercut the hell out of existing pro's.. Our larger outfit in Perth folded recently - they hadn't a 4x5 shot in years... I bought all their 4x5 gear at 1/10th it's value! No customers were even prepared to spring for MF and 35mm work was getting thin as buyers wanted digital work and these guys hadn't moved there yet. Four pro labs have gone and E6 processing is a bit of an anachronism in our town now. This pro outfit also did video work but they'd lost all that to a local editor with a $1000 handy cam who was picking up the work for next to nothing as a sideline to his editing. One Perth electronics wholesaler who used to provide 3 months catalogue work have popped in a digicam, a couple of lights and some youngster to press the button - they do the whole job in house now and there's no need for a photographer, an AD - nothing. Photographers were once the force which pushed quality over output. These were the guys who would explain to customers that while smaller formats were 'acceptable', the larger would have a different 'feel' to it, irrespective of reproduction size. They were the people who marketed themselves as being able to provide 'the look' or 'the atmosphere' as opposed to 'a good shot'. Newspapers have always had hand drawn sketches of products to sell stuff and they work - 'I want to buy a hammer, oh looky here, these people are selling hammers' and off the customer would go to buy a hammer, but to sell perfume?? No. here is where a photographer (or an AD?) would really push for quality.. and one photographer over another not just based on price. Digital seems to be the photographers undoing (IMO) as the oft marketed hype is that digital is 'cheap and quick', so.. the customer expects cheap and quick! Hell, once they see a 'pro' with an AF, AE camera shoot and delete pics until they get the right one they'd have to be utter morons not to realise they too could do this after outlaying a few hundred dollars themselves! Scribes were once necessary in society. The good ones with a creative streak are now known as 'writers', others as journalists and a few enshrined themselves by forming a protected club and calling themselves lawyers. But since readin' and 'ritin' rose to a state where anyone could do it (even me ;-) scribes lost their place in the world and they are now gone. I wonder if we writers of light will follow the path of the scribes. karl
