Bill wrote: >In the early 1970s I taught two classes on photography to first year graduate students We used Instamatics to teach the students how to see and frame an image. Cameras and film were cheap and the university provided everything. Arguably, digital may have many advantages over film, but for a novice I tink film is an easier entry into the art of image capture and rendition. i'd be inclined to agree up to a point, these days digital image capture devices are ubiquitous and as they always say, the best camera to have is the one you're carrying. My photography classes were part of an advanced diploma of science course, teaching medical, dental, forensic and police specific stuff as well as chemistry - making chemical processes, optical physics, electronics and so forth - all the things to make lenses, chemicals, flash equipment and the like, to service the industry in manufacturing and support - we had optical dispensing courses as a sub unit along with cinematography, and in with the 2 dozen zeiss oil immersion microscopes we even had a scanning electron microscope! It spanned 2 campuses and was quite the place to go in it's day with literally thousands lining up for the 30 part-time positions when they were offered. In later years when digital came along the old guard were driven out, the science watered down then abandoned, the philosophy of science (trust nothing, question everything) eliminated in favor of 'Listen To Your Betters' .. the chemistry and physics dropped and while still an advanced dip sci in name, students emerged who couldn't even tell you what pH meant. Sad. There were few of those courses in the world and despite the enthusiastic acceptance of digital, few teaching knew anything about what lay under the hood. Heck even with relevant electronics tie-in, the electronics was dropped. All too icky. Much neater doing everything on a computer and just paying for The Right Software without having to learn complicated things like data recovery or even comprehend stuff like protocols and algorithms. Digital is quite a bit more advanced than film, yet it seems there's less interest in fully comprehending it than film where learning about the tech stuff was a desirable goal for students. One tech put it well - the receptionists were sent on regular training courses when they switched from typewriters to PCs, every new bit of software warranted further training - the techs were just expected to pick up the changeover from servicing typewriters to repairing and maintaining computers and networks. I learned my first computer language back on punch cards, I've learned a few over the years since, and I'm kinda over learning new computer-y things. Film felt much more rewarding. |
