Dear Friends, A man has opened a "school" for digital photography instruction in the same building where I work. I wonder about the potential for success. This man has written several articles in leading photo mags and done imaging for some mainline advertising. The courses are from raw point and shoot beginner to more advanced digital SLR usage. The school started only a week ago and has time to grow or shrink. My concern besides advertising this school is "how many people will want to go to such a school" in the first place. His images in the gallery section of the business are just fine. He appears to be a good instructor. I still wonder, will people spend a week(or whatever it comes down to as courses are developed) to work with intermediate to advanced digital photography? Any feedback will be appreciated. Why do I post this message in the first place? The answer is I would like to see him be successful. Feedback here might just give me something to pass on...no names, just feedback. Thanks for any comments. God Bless. TomDart.

...hmm. Around here, I see lots of highschool classes, and adult ed, teaching analog film and darkroom. I know folks here will disagree with me, but I think these analog classes are misguided. It seems to me, it is now much easier (and less expensive!), for the beginner to learn digital. And for the majority of the folks out there, digital is all they will EVER need to know. In my view, teach digital first, and save the analog for those truly motivated. Also, the market is right; lots of folks buying digital equipment, and wanting to learn how to use it better. At the high end, I see "digital" photo-vacations to exotic places! Personally, I love analog, use it myself, and am aware of the need for "manual" mode, and the smell of fixer. But I think this teacher has the right idea.

Yep I would just love to go... Matter of fact, I was just saying this tonight. I need to go to a Digital Photography class sponsored by one of our local colleges, yes the local college has digital photography classes here... I am just now learning my new digital camera. I know it has a lot of features that I can't use yet, and I know they can teach me. I want to be able to use this cam to it's fullest potential, so yes I want to go... Brenda :)

Misha, I think you have it backwards! ;) Film first, learn the film camera first, and when you figure out what all of the buttons are on that new digital cam, they will make sense... Maybe. ;)

IMHO the basics of all photography is the same. Think of lighting, composition etc etc. The medium is somewhat of lesser importance, although it can have a huge impact on the end result. I would think a more general 'photography class' has more potential than one specifically geared towards digital only.

What is a friend? A single soul dwelling in two bodies. - Aristotle
-= Glass Eye Photography =- -= My Rendo Gallery =-

I'd definitely go.The main purpose though is to learn more about the camera settings to my specific camera.My main interest would be macro with digital,and this can be quite hard not knowing focal info and lighting.

"The happiness of a man in this life does not consist in the absence but in the mastery of his passions."

RE Nilla, at first my response would be as yours. Thinking into what is out there, I see a bunch of "point and shoot" photographers, either digital or 35mm. Just maybe seeing quicker results than film requires while learning a bit of digital editing and image improvement might encourage the creative ones to explore more of photography. That could certainly lead to film...no, I will not say "back to film" but simply to trying film and all that is offered there. As for digital, I believe this has brought more folks to photography than imagined. Expanding the personal abilities by knowing limits, camera controls, etc. all based in a solid "basic photog" program should improve the stuff out there. We may never see results of such classes but surely the student(like I might well be when it comes to SLR digital) will find expansion of self in a way more encouraging perhaps than film offers alone without the digital added in.

Most of the taking of the photo is the same; the divergence comes after you store the image, whether on film or in a memory card. And it's possible to shoot on film, and then get high-resolution digital images from the negative. If I want reprints, it may be better to scan and send in the datafile to a digital-print lab. On the other hand,a bit of knowledge about the other side, whatever the emphasis of the course, would be a good thing, The difference between screen and paper is a lot like the difference between a transparency and a print, and also different in some significant ways.