Hacker News Reader

Comment by rbritton | Hacker News Reader

$170k for a photography degree is asinine. I am a photographer, and the field is more like 90% business and 10% photography. If nothing else, the years of running the business have taught me that people don't necessarily want the ultra-artsy approach tendered by those liberal arts schools -- they will, most of the time, pick the standard, face-forward, simplistic pose.

I went to college and it sure wasn't for photography. Photography just happened. I have a BS in Computer Science, and I also have no debt resulting from it. Rather than pursuing a software developer job, which I expected I would be doing, I opened a photography business and have been quite comfortable. Software is now just my hobby, but it's a very useful one.

Knowledge of business and accounting will get you far further in almost any industry than a specialty degree will.

View on HN

What do you think of her portfolio?

http://www.allisonbrookephotography.com/#/client/content_pag...

I like what I see.

Decent, though I'm personally not a fan of the faux coloring or the frequent tilting that seems to be the trend lately. But, she's in the Bay area. That's one of the most saturated markets in the US, and some of the best photographers I know are there. The competition would be very, very tough.

Regardless of how good her portfolio is, I think the point he was trying to make is that you don't need a degree in photography to be a good photographer. My brother-in-law does some of the best corporate photography I've seen, well respected in his field, and he got an unrelated degree.

I think his point about business knowledge is a good one. If you want to be a successful photographer, you're probably better off getting a degree in marketing, communications, or business management, and minor in photography.

This reminds of the argument that you don't need to a degree in CS to be a good programmer. Sure you don't, but it helps.

Regardless of her portfolio, I spotted two typos on her intro page alone.

people don't necessarily want the ultra-artsy approach tendered by those liberal arts schools -- they will, most of the time, pick the standard, face-forward, simplistic pose.

This is a problem with most practical, art-based practices (except at the high end). The customers don't have a good critical eye and will frequently choose a photographer or artist by price, prestige, recommendation, or by merely liking one of their earlier pieces - rather than on any technical merits.

I suspect someone with no photographical experience but strong business savvy could make a good go of being a professional photographer with the right equipment and just a little training in basic technique. I'd love to watch a TV show about such an experiment - it'd be like Faking It.

(And before I'm accused of cheapening a whole industry with the last paragraph, I believe the same about my two industries - publishing and programming. There are more than a few "copy and paste" developers making good money out there. It ain't noble, but it can work.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com