I've always found it interesting that so many schools in the US (and others) have photography....that I think is a good thing. (talking schools not colleges and universities)
OK... I think I might have phrased the title a bit better, self taught should mean as in "self taught" as in NO FORMAL TRAINING,NO TEACHERS,CLASSROOMS CURRICULUMS/MODULES/WHATEVER THE TERMS IS. I am interested in how the work (and whole philosophy around photography) and what the ratio of the active members(those that responded anyway) of this forum differs from NON FORMALLY and FORMALLY trained, the "yes and no" option would include, workshops and other similar training.
As someone that not been formally trained, I sometimes I have to wonder how and what "influence" a Teacher/lecturer has/might not have on a person's photographic work... and the whole being part of a group of students....does this have an effect. I understand that if you read a book, the author is "teaching" you in some way, but just because I have read a book by say Ansel Adams or Andreas Feininger does not mean I have nearly been "tought" by them, books unlike face to face teaching/training, must impart some very different ways of approaching one's photography, IDK....
I am not saying one makes you better than the other, just trying to figure out the difference reflected in peoples work/philosophy, if any....
Last edited by Ricus.stormfire; 12-14-2012 at 04:55 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: some clarification added