Photography Schools/MFA

[Brian Ellis]

precisely what john said.
i know it'll be alot of money. if i can get scholarships, the better-

but i'm not wanting to teach after. if it is a means for money, then sure i wil have a crack at it. but it is more for me to produce the work i want to whilst working in the enviroment that fits/under the supervision of my favourite photographers. i don't think i'd get the same experience elsewhere-
maybe an MFA isn't the best option. but if i'm furthering my education i dont' want to do a certificate or something when i already have a BFA

as for what i do afterwards, i have no idea.but at least an MFA might help.

Don't know what you want to do afterwards? No problem. How many people even in graduate school know what they want to do afterwards and, more importantly, actually do it for the rest of their lives? If you want an MFA, can afford the price, and can gain admittance to a good program by all means do it. The fact is most of us don't end up doing whatever we do because of careful plans we formulated in our youth. We end up doing it because of coincidences, chance encounters, and various unpredictable turns that life often takes.

[rdenney]

About? I don't believe that photographs have to be about anything.

I find it interesting that this particular debate topic comes up often with photography compared to the other arts with which I'm familiar. For example, only non-composers keep asking a composer what the music is about. It is what it is--if it doesn't communicate in purely musical terms, words describing what it's "about" will not help.

The composer Ralph Vaughan Williams, for example, was asked what his shattering Symphony No. 4 in F Minor was about. Most thought it foreshadowed war (it was first performed in 1937). Many called it his "War Symphony" in later years. All that angered him. It was a direct outgrowth of previous works. His response to such questions about what his fourth symphony was about: "F Minor."

As a refugee from architecture school lo these many moons past, I found that most of my architecture professors (at a highly regarded architecture school) were interested in me finding my own vision, as long as it was a vision they understood. If they could not relate to it, they would not acknowledge is as vision at all. "I loved it six weeks ago, but in the end I just couldn't relate to it, man." That's teaching? When it comes to art, probably yes, and that's why students should go to schools where the teachers create the sort of art that moves them. A couple of my art professors rose above that, and their skill was forcing me to see clearly. They did not care how I represented what I saw, or (relevant to this discussion) what I chose to look at, as long as they could see what I was seeing clearly. But they were exceptional in my experience.

C. S. Lewis delved into the subject of defining art in his book An Experiment in Criticism. He complained that too many critics define art in terms of how well it conforms to their expectations, rather than seeking to understand the impact it has on others. Lewis defined art in terms of how it was received, not how it was delivered. If it was received as art, then it was art, no matter who else might or might not have liked it. One problem with much art these days is that we believe it must be tortured to be meaningful, which I find baffling.

We can each have our own vision, and our job is to portray that vision clearly, no matter what medium of art we choose. Having no vision is just as bad as being unable to portray it. But there is no requirement that the vision we have happens to coincide with someone else's opinion of what vision should be. If there are people who receive our work as art, then the art stands on its own, unhelped by where we did or did not go to school. If we believe school will give us the tools to express our vision with clarity, then it's probably worth it. But if we have no vision, school won't help.

That's why I was a refugee from architecture school--my technique was good but I really had nothing in particular to say at the time. As I've gotten older, though, I'm finding my voice.

One final point: It is not the purpose of an undergraduate education to prepare one for the job market. Those studies are wide ranging for a reason. They prepare us to be educated people, and the world needs educated people. Few educated people (assuming their education isn't merely nominal) have trouble finding their way in life, no matter what they choose to do to keep body and soul together. A master's degree, on the other hand, is a job-training degree. It's sole purpose is to teach advanced craft. That's why it doesn't have all those other "BS" courses. It's called a "Master's Degree" for a reason. I learned much more about the work that I do in my master's program, but much more about how I do work in my undergraduate studies.

Rick "jack of all trades, master of none" Denney

[venchka]

Kirk gittings is on the mark. The University of New Mexico. The best of the best of North America is within a few hours drive. You will never lack for subject matter. The school has a fantastic set up, both wet and computer. The weather is nice. The food is great. The people are nice too.

[ditzydeezy]

Sorry to be riding on this thread, but I'm currently half way through my BFA in photography in Singapore, and I am looking to transfer to the university of New Mexico to finish my BFA.

I know their MFA program is great, but what about their BFA?

[frankwturner]

Hi,
I want to ask a similar question but about good photography MFA's outside the U.S. (mainly to save $$ and also because I could use a break from my home country for a bit).
I imagine that such programs are a lot more scarce. I'm open to anywhere, but right now am looking at Concordia College in Montreal. Am very interested in strong programs in Canada, Mexico (I'm fluent in Spanish and Portuguese) and anywhere the U.S. dollar is strong.

How are the programs in Australia and NZ? UK?

And if anyone knows of scholarships/grants for MFA and photography study that would be huge.

RE: ICP in NY, I did some Summer classes there a few months ago and spoke to a lot of the year-long certificate program students. Most were a bit unimpressed with the bang for buck ratio, particularly in the General Studies track and the admissions office is quite disorganized. But there are some great teachers and facilities there for sure and a lot of top working photogs have come out of there, particularly on the PJ side. The program is very easy to get into (they are not doing well financially).

Thanks for everyone's help!!!

Frank
www.frankturnerphoto.com

[Kirk Gittings]

Sorry, but I am not knowledgeable about programs outside the US. I went to graduate school in Canada, but that was over 25 years ago and I have not kept up with current Canadian programs.

[Greg Miller]

there seems to be this giant split with reasons to get MFA's. for me, i'm in it for the experience. to work under someone i admire. and just to be in the location of where it's all going down.

i checked out hartford, sounds pretty good. but couldn't find anything on the mfa in photography despite finding some portfolio websites claiming they had their mfa from hartford.

As an alternative, why not contact photographers that you admire and ask to intern for them? This would give you what you are looking for, but without the tuition. Plus, in addition to refining your vision under this person, you will also get to experience first hand everything about what it takes to run a real business.

[J Ney]

So far i've just had a look at a few places online- SVA NY (apparently amy stein teaches part time?), UCLA, UCIrvine (my old tutor Joyce Campbell taught there. and a recent friend told me its free?),

I graduated from UC-Irvine in 2003 (biology) and the impression that I always got when I was there is that they are much more focused on their science / engineering programs rather than their art/humanities program. Things may have changed since then but I do not think the school is as dedicated to the arts as some other schools.

If you're looking alot at the UC's about UC Riverside? I've heard they have a robust art program.

[Kirk Gittings]

Guys, James has not posted on this thread since May.

I was responding to yesterdays question by a Frank Turner:

Hi,
I want to ask a similar question but about good photography MFA's outside the U.S. (mainly to save $$ and also because I could use a break from my home country for a bit).
I imagine that such programs are a lot more scarce. I'm open to anywhere, but right now am looking at Concordia College in Montreal. Am very interested in strong programs in Canada, Mexico (I'm fluent in Spanish and Portuguese) and anywhere the U.S. dollar is strong.

How are the programs in Australia and NZ? UK?

And if anyone knows of scholarships/grants for MFA and photography study that would be huge.

RE: ICP in NY, I did some Summer classes there a few months ago and spoke to a lot of the year-long certificate program students. Most were a bit unimpressed with the bang for buck ratio, particularly in the General Studies track and the admissions office is quite disorganized. But there are some great teachers and facilities there for sure and a lot of top working photogs have come out of there, particularly on the PJ side. The program is very easy to get into (they are not doing well financially).

Thanks for everyone's help!!!

Frank
www.frankturnerphoto.com

[Greg Miller]

Aaargh. I hate when that happpens. There needs to be a lock on threads that have been idle for more than 30 days...