Re: The value of the handmade

  Hi Richard,
  I agree with you- I'll keep this short- I have to leave to get the usual
0620 ferry to go to work-will get back at 1830.
  (Some of us do work).
  Always,
  Susan
  www.susanhuber.com
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Richard Sullivan" <richsul@earthlink.net>
  To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
  Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 8:27 AM
  Subject: Re: The value of the handmade

> Joe,
>
> I was never able to get enough information to make any real judgements.
>
> The main thing I saw was that most schools were integrating their
> commercial digital into the Fine Arts program. There is a movement afoot
at
> our school to move the Fine Arts Photography program into the commercial
> area. The Dean of Business and Technology came to the Faculty Senate to
> confront me on this issue since I have taken a lead role in it. (Why a
Dean
> is allowed to debate faculty in a faculty senate meeting is another
issue
> entirely!!) Anyway, he said we should not be focusing on training people
to
> go to UNM (U New Mex) and get MFA's but focusing on a European craft
model
> and two year digital photography certifications so people can become
> wedding photographers and actually earn a living.
>
> I went to a two year college and got an AA before getting my BA. They
were
> called Junior Colleges then. Things have not changed much. I am not
> impressed with the general trend of things. Grade glut? You betcha! It's
> the attitude of the Dean that is becoming more and more prevalent. I
don't
> have a problem with a trade-tech college, that is a great idea but when
the
> areas are mixed like they are at our school, then there are conflicts
like
> the attitude of the dean.
>
> Off topic probably. I suspect we should totally divorce technology from
the
> aesthetic issues, it's so much easier to understand that way.
>
> --Dick
>
>
>
>
> At 10:23 AM 3/16/2005, you wrote:
> > >>> richsul@earthlink.net 03/16/05 10:27 AM >>>
> >
> > >>We teach digital photography in the Fine Art Photography Department
> >and
> >they teach it down the hall in New Media Arts. Both units have their
own
> >
> >galleries For what it is worth the differences in output is stunning.
> >Everyone over there is Jerry Uelsmann. Media Art's work is largely
> >combinational images or images that have had lots of detail removed,
> >lots
> >of smoothing over, or applied filters-- in a word its Photoshopped to
> >death. They teach Photoshop, we teach digital photography. I am an old
> >fuddy duddy and believe that much of art comes from imposed restraints.
> >The
> >painter has to deal with the fact that the canvas has edges and that it
> >is
> >not infinite. My other complaint is that much of the work is related to
> >building an image that has internal conflicts or things out of context.
> >I
> >once mentioned this to a friend of mine visiting, not knowing she had
> >moved
> >to digital work. The first print she showed me was "Fish in Outer
> >Space."
> >This mind you is a two year college so the we are really still down at
> >the
> >basics. For me I expect students to work first in a traditional way,
> >learn
> >to deal with the constraints of a straight image and not have the
luxury
> >of
> >digging through a box of crummy negatives and becoming the next Jerry
> >Uelsmann.<<
> >
> >Richard,
> >
> >A while back you surveyed the list on the topic of school photography
> >programs and their orientation towards traditional photography and
> >digital programs. I found your above description of the different
> >orientations between programs at a single school interesting and
> >pertinent to some political stuff I'm peripherally involved in at my
> >workplace.
> >
> >Can you (or have you, do you plan to) share the results of your survey?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Joe
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----