I do have to agree that a plain old photography course should be taught in the digital medium. Quite simply, it*s the dominant medium for those who take snapshots and those who do photography for a living. If people are going to have digital cameras in their hands, that that*s what they should use when they learn. Whenever there is a paradigm shift, there is always a tendency to include the older approach *because it*s the best way to learn*, Unfortunately, it*s mostly the older generation trying to recapitulate their learning path for the new kids. The better approach is to work up some new pedagogy appropriate to the new techniques. I*m not saying playing in a darkroom wouldn*t expand your understanding of light, exposure, etc., but it*s no longer the best way to start. You have to learn on the tool you*re going to use. Of course, the language will change as well. If the APS-C sensor sticks around then younger photographers will think of the 50 mm as a short telephoto. To me, this is as it should be. Hell, I*M starting to think like that.
>>> Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/4/2007 10:28 PM >>> There are some minor benefits to teaching photography the old way, but it's quickly becoming an anachronism. For today's photographer learning digital processing is much more important than learning to work with chemicals. That's a dead end. You can teach exposure without having to force students to shoot with antiques. Just set up some heavily weighted exposure compensation situations and make them work for their knowledge. Studying Latin is more productive than studying film photography. Paul On Aug 4, 2007, at 6:44 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
