What sort of education will aid me in becoming a professional architectural, interior, or portrait photographer? I realize the importance of practice, continued learning, and keeping a portfolio, but I feel that I’d like a formal education in some manner.
I would remove from the list of fhotoace brook institute. It cost like a great school, but most of their faculty doesn´t even have a Masters degree or have a B.A. from the school. Also is no regionally accredited, so the credits can not be transfer to a real university.
My recommendation are:
Rhode Island School of Design
Rochester University (NY)
University of New Mexico (that is my alma mater)
California Institute of Arts
School of Visual Arts (NY)
Arizona State University
I have a 3 print piece, custom matted,(by the artist) on Polaroid media. *Not an instant camera type polaroid. This is a high end medium used strictly by professionals.
It is a darker interpretation of architechture–Walt Disney’s Concert Music Hall.
It is a very limited edition, one of only 25 in the world, including one owned by the architect of the Hall, Frank Gehry has one is his art collection.
The photographer, Mr. Jim McHugh, is of People Magazine, and Architectural Digest Fame. His collection recently appeared at the ArcLight in Hollywood.
This piece is the series of (3) images which appears when you enter the website www.jimmchugh.com.
Take it to some art galleries, especially the one that specialized in photo art. Ask them to put them up for sale. You will have to pay them a commission of course but that may still work out to your advantage.
I have a 3 print piece, custom matted,(by the artist) on Polaroid media. *Not an instant camera type polaroid. This is a high end medium used strictly by professionals.
It is a darker interpretation of architechture–Walt Disney’s Concert Music Hall.
It is a very limited edition, one of only 25 in the world, including one owned by the architect of the Hall, Frank Gehry has one is his art collection.
The photographer, Mr. Jim McHugh, is of People Magazine, and Architectural Digest Fame. His collection recently appeared at the ArcLight in Hollywood.
This piece is the series of (3) images which appears when you enter the website www.jimmchugh.com.
Take it to some art galleries, especially the one that specialized in photo art. Ask them to put them up for sale. You will have to pay them a commission of course but that may still work out to your advantage.
i want to be in a big city environment like London/Manchester/Liverpool but im not sure which course is best ? im mainly into doing still life work and architectural photography any help????!!!
Before you can specialize in a particular field of photography, you will have to spend a few semesters learning the basics and in reality it is later after school that you really can learn the business of architectural or still life (similar to studio product photography) photography, usually by working as an assistant to a successful pro for a few years.
The goal of a photography education is to provide the student with all the skills necessary to be able to produce images in any field of photography, using any camera (film or digital) on demand. Learning specialties comes much later
When I was attending a proper photo school, my major was industrial/scientific photography so I got to learn all the cool stuff like shooting IR, UV high-speed strobe, photomicrography and much, much more. I worked as an investigative photographer, medical photographer, industrial photographer and worked for a wild animal research institute based upon the skills I learned while in school
Now many years later, I find myself working for magazines shooting mostly advertising, sports, editorial and fashion work … a far cry from industrial/scientific photography.
All this to say that the basic skills necessary to provide perfect images on demand is the same, no matter what field you shoot in. Yes the equipment may differ, but after attending any good photo school, you can use any camera at any time under any conditions.
Just take all the courses offered in your school, attend seminars and workshops and eventually you will have the skills you need to pursue your "dream" job
If you can join a professional organization as a student member, you can start your networking while is school and be just that further ahead.
I am in high school and right now im in intro to photography and i need to have 10 of my best shots on CD by thursday
I just kinda decided to apply so thats why im in a time crunch lol
im in 10th grade btw and i use a canon digital EOS rebel DSLR camera. but some of these are with a normal digital camera which is allowed.
here are some pictures im thinking about entering.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3869683948/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3989175970/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3989175666/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3988420563/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3988419787/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3989174566/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3988419095/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32048172@N04/3988418963/in/photostream/
Which ones should i add??
and no those arent all of the pictures im looking thru just some of them that i thought looked neat for the architectural feel that i want to put in some pictures of.
thanks
The last one is very nice, I’d definitely use that one. (:
Some of them are average, I suggest using some kind of photo editor to enhance the color and make a few adjustments.
Also you might want to put a copyright on in case there’s some photo thieves out there. (;
I’ve only been into photography for close to two years, I have just came off of an Olympus E510 to an EOS 50D.
Most of what I do is outdoors/landscape, low light indoors, architectural, evening city-scape shots etc. One of my biggest gripes with the E510 (other than the nasty white balance control, in which Custom WB mode was no better), was it’s noise factor and high light clipping. I have found that my new Canon exceeds the Oly in these areas but high light clipping is still something the photographer battles (even with full frame cameras).
What are some your best methods for controlling high lights if you are an amature with no metering gear ?
I use a Canon EOS 50D, and like the 40D, there is a high light tone priority mode but this reduces my ISO expandability option and I cannot shoot in ISO 100 when using this mode. Most people I have talk to do not use this feature. Is there a more preferable method for reducing high lights? I have found, that under exposing wasn’t always the solution, as I would also end up with too dark a scene/subject while doing this. For example, if I took some shots along the coast on a foggy/cloudy day and light being as poor as it is on those days, underexposing would only resul in too dark a scene, yet grays in the sky become too white, loosing the detail in the clouds. The closest thing I have found was spot metering but this delivers me a mixed bag of results, perhaps because the meter jumps around like crazy and I’m not exactly sure where I should be locking the exposure in on. HDR is great but are there any more "on the fly" solutions? Perhaps tweaking out contrast settings?
There really is not a solution to your problem. The basic problem is you are using DIGITAL. it is just an unfortunate truth that digital has MUCH LESS dynamic range than negative film. The highlights are the worse to overexpose with a digital sensor. That is why the HDR thing is catching on so much, though agreed, it is not a useful feature in general shooting. You just can’t always be on a tripod and take the time to do several shots at various exposures.
You may want to get a graduated neutral density filter to help control blowing out skys or other extremely bright areas. It is all you can do except expose for the highlights, but then you will often have much too dark midtones and lost shadows.
Basically, you are dealing with a technology that is just not there yet in broad dynamic range.
steve
I’ve only been into photography for close to two years, I have just came off of an Olympus E510 to an EOS 50D.
Most of what I do is outdoors/landscape, low light indoors, architectural, evening city-scape shots etc. One of my biggest gripes with the E510 (other than the nasty white balance control, in which Custom WB mode was no better), was it’s noise factor and high light clipping. I have found that my new Canon exceeds the Oly in these areas but high light clipping is still something the photographer battles (even with full frame cameras).
What are some your best methods for controlling high lights if you are an amature with no metering gear ?
I use a Canon EOS 50D, and like the 40D, there is a high light tone priority mode but this reduces my ISO expandability option and I cannot shoot in ISO 100 when using this mode. Most people I have talk to do not use this feature. Is there a more preferable method for reducing high lights? I have found, that under exposing wasn’t always the solution, as I would also end up with too dark a scene/subject while doing this. For example, if I took some shots along the coast on a foggy/cloudy day and light being as poor as it is on those days, underexposing would only resul in too dark a scene, yet grays in the sky become too white, loosing the detail in the clouds. The closest thing I have found was spot metering but this delivers me a mixed bag of results, perhaps because the meter jumps around like crazy and I’m not exactly sure where I should be locking the exposure in on. HDR is great but are there any more "on the fly" solutions? Perhaps tweaking out contrast settings?
There really is not a solution to your problem. The basic problem is you are using DIGITAL. it is just an unfortunate truth that digital has MUCH LESS dynamic range than negative film. The highlights are the worse to overexpose with a digital sensor. That is why the HDR thing is catching on so much, though agreed, it is not a useful feature in general shooting. You just can’t always be on a tripod and take the time to do several shots at various exposures.
You may want to get a graduated neutral density filter to help control blowing out skys or other extremely bright areas. It is all you can do except expose for the highlights, but then you will often have much too dark midtones and lost shadows.
Basically, you are dealing with a technology that is just not there yet in broad dynamic range.
steve
hey everyone,
in ur opinion , why do u think photography is important
specially architectural photography?
Humans are very visual creatures. Sight is a very impacting sense for us. It allows us to experience things through images. A good photo can evoke any number or combination of emotions. It’s a moment in time that can never exist again.
It’s important to me because capturing images helps people remember. Whether it’s a loved one that has passed, a period in a child’s life, or a world changing event photography can capture it in a way that no other medium can. It can give the entire story or leave the viewer to draw their own conclusion. It must tell that story based solely on visual impact. That’s a great challenge and responsibility to those of use that have decided to make this our creative outlet. It keeps me on my toes to always try to do a better job of capturing fleeting moments.
As far as architectural photography goes: Architecture changes with the times. It can reveal a great deal about a group of people or a specific time period.
I am a senior photography major and I have to do an art show in order to graduate and I want to do it on architectural photography. But I don’t want to have you typical house in a field or skyscraper in the city. What can I do?
Here is a link to what some of my photography looks like
www.flickr.com/allenposey
Your shots of buildings (I found four before becoming discouraged) are far too contrasty, over-saturated and shot with little or no appreciation of architectural form and texture. To be a successful architectural photographer you need to have at least some knowledge and appreciation of your subject. I see little or no evidence of that here. I would seriously suggest that you rethink your show subject.
I am a senior photography major and I have to do an art show in order to graduate and I want to do it on architectural photography. But I don’t want to have you typical house in a field or skyscraper in the city. What can I do?
Here is a link to what some of my photography looks like
www.flickr.com/allenposey
Your shots of buildings (I found four before becoming discouraged) are far too contrasty, over-saturated and shot with little or no appreciation of architectural form and texture. To be a successful architectural photographer you need to have at least some knowledge and appreciation of your subject. I see little or no evidence of that here. I would seriously suggest that you rethink your show subject.