Techniques or Aesthetics first?
This is rather like which came first, the chicken and the egg.
Both have to be taught, but if one over-weighs the other then students
will learn nothing because they will get bored - they want to get out
and take photos!
Perhaps self-criticism - in the "correct" sense of self-evaluation
leading to the desire to improve - should be first.
I have students who on starting generally are "ignorant" of both
techniques and aesthetics - rank beginners!
So I set projects which are designed to stimulate both areas.
I then encourage self-criticism as a mean of stimulating interest in why
one photo works well and why another variation doesn't work quite so well.
This then leads to the student appreciating the need to understand
composition and at the same time technique.
I build on that.
But a knowledge of all techniques and aesthetics is unnecessary and
probably impossible unless you are fully immersed in photography to the
point of obsession.
As probably most of us on this site are!
Roll on September - another 50 or more of eager beaver 16 year-old
students and cameras from utterly basic P&S digicameras to sparkling new
dSLRs and a setting called AUTO!
Howard
karl shah-jenner wrote:
Alan writes:
Herschel,
There are two definitions for the word. The only one I have in mind is the second: "evaluate." A critique of work one uses in a class has nothing to do with being severely judgmental. One would presume (hope!) the instructor's opinion is informed, respected, and eagerly sought after! Once ground rules are understood the instructor doesn't have to timidly tipy-toe around delicate feelings. It is simply about learning to talk about a picture in a way other than its technical success or shortcomings. Look at it this way - a commercial photographer should have an advantage if they can communicate better with their customers and employees.
AZ
