I wrote Mr. Baumann, executive editor of the Evansville Courier & Press, in regards to the article in News Photographer. He quickly returned my email with the following response:

Daniel:

Certainly photojournalism takes extra effort to perfect the discipline, but when someone interviews with me and hasn't read a book (except in school), doesn't have a hobby and can't discuss world issues, I find that person to be boring. A boring person may be able to make pictures for awhile that are interesting, but it's not long before they start to shoot the same pictures over and over again. Randy Olson had a degree in the Classics. Tom Ondrey graduated from Harvard with a degree in business. Bob Lynn wanted to be a sports writer. Steve Mellon was a sports writer and local news reporter before turning to photography. Several of the other photographers at the old Pittsburgh Press had undergraduate degrees that were leading them toward architecture. Two other graduated with degrees in psychology. All of them had a life outside of photojournalism. It made them interesting people. I hope this clarifies my position. Good luck.

jbruce

Within the March 2005 edition of News Photographer magazine can be found an article by Jenni Kolsky Goldman, photojournalism professor at Cal Poly Pomona. The article, entitled "The First Job Out of College: What Are Editors Really Looking For in a Recent Grad?" laid out what current photojournalism students must strive for in order to better their chances of being employed as a photojournalist upon graduation.

Much of the article was information that students should already know. Internships are a must (at least one, not too many). Many students need to improve their writing skills, especially when dealing with captions. A good portfolio is like a good first impression and should include sports, news, and a picture story. Avoid cliche photos in your portfolio. And photojournalism schools are helpful, but there are only a handful of "good" ones (SJSU being mentioned among a few others).

There was one part in particular that caught my attention. J. Bruce Baumann, executive editor of The Courier & Press of Evansville, IN was quoted as saying

We are looking for people who don't have tunnel vision, by that I mean people who think about more things than photojournalism...and people who have interests besides newspapers. When somebody tells me that all they do is photography and all they want is to work on newspapers, I don't think they have a life. I am looking for someone who has a life.

This struck me for two reasons. Initially I took it from an educational context. I related it to the instruction at Brooks, which focuses solely on photography at the expense of other subjects or even current events. Taken from a broader standpoint, it seemed as though Mr. Baumann was simply stating that students should not let photojournalism take up their entire life. Students should have other interests, hobbies, etc. Is this to mean that Mr. Baumann discourages students who are completely dedicated to their craft? Aren't we always taught that the best results come to those who put in the most effort? Is this view shared by many other professionals? Shouldn't a photojournalist carry a camera at all times?

While I agree that one cannot be totally consumed with photojournalism at all times, it seems that the role of photojournalist is not something that ends when one clocks out at night. Using the tragic landslide at La Conchita as an example, if a photojournalist happened to be vacationing in nearby Montecito or Santa Barbara, I would assume that is it likely that the photojournalist would rush over to La Conchita and begin recording events there. By assuming the role of photojournalist, one must be prepared to cover the unexpected. It does become your life.

After leaving Brooks, I had to find a school that would allow me to pursue a degree in photojournalism while receiving the type of education that I desired. I ultimately chose San Jose State University after corresponding with the Photojournalism Professor, Dennis Dunleavy, through email.

In corresponding with Professor Dunleavy, I got a better sense of what SJSU was all about. I learned of their history as an active NPPA Student Chapter (previously supervised by Jim McNay, now head of the Visual Journalism program at Brooks), the coursework involved in earning a degree (which includes a great deal of journalism and mass comm classes), the types of speakers that come to speak at SJSU, and the type of community atmosphere that is fostered among all students within the photojournalism program. Professor Dunleavy also extended an invitation to a Photoshop workshop that was held before the start of the school semester.

I have been attending SJSU since the beginning of the Spring 2005 semester, on January 25, 2005. So far, it has met every expectation that I had. As mentioned previously, I take classes in Mass Communications and Journalism. These classes last 16 weeks as opposed to 8 weeks, and allow for a greater amount of material to be covered. I have been forced to read the news daily, subscribing to countless RSS feeds and leaving CNN on in the background. Professor Dunleavy as well as the more senior photojournalism students have all continuously offered their support to not only myself, but all of the newer students. Though the photojournalism classes are not as intensive technically (photography classes are available for those who need to learn more about operating a camera, lighting, etc), students build more lasting relationships with the instructors.

While SJSU may be lacking in the latest technological equipment, it very successfully accomplishes what all colleges strive for; the sharing of ideas and building of friendships. Discussions range from current events such as Terri Schiavo, to blogging, to file sharing, etc. And now that I am a SJSU student, I feel that I too must add to the conversation.

I became interested in photography about a year and a half ago. After researching the options that I had, my family and I decided that I would attend Brooks Institute of Photography. At the time, we felt that Brooks offered the best opportunities for future success despite its high cost. We had also read praise of its photography department and felt that it would translate over to the visual journalism program despite its relatively recent development (now going on approx. 4 years). Like any school, Brooks had both its advantages and disadvantages.

The advantages of going to Brooks were what initially attracted me to the school. Most of the instructors at Brooks are professionals who have detailed knowledge of the profession that they are instructing on. As a private school, Brooks is able to provide the latest technology including G5 Macintosh’s with the latest software installed (Adobe CS Suite, Final Cut Pro HD, etc). The school also provides students with a large collection of photography and video equipment to checkout and use for assignments. Also, because the curriculum at Brooks is extremely focused, students would graduate within three years. Perhaps most appealing was the speakers that Brooks gathered. Every two months Brooks announces four or five speakers for their Special Speaker series. The speakers range from POY's, National Geographic photographers, college POY's, and so on.

However, Brooks was not without its pitfalls. While an advantage in some ways, the fact that instructors were also working professionals would also result in a lower quality of education. At times instructors were unavailable (even to teach the class) because a photo shoot or assignment was more important than assisting the students. Also, many of the general education classes left students not only wondering why they bothered to show up, but also calculating just how much per minute they were spending to attend class. I heard stories of students in Math class learning how to calculate tax and tip. I sat through a psychology class where Freud and Jung were briefly summarized and no mention was made of modern psychology, the DSM IV, etc. Of course, I should have expected this with each class lasting only two months and Brooks being privately but not nationally accredited.

There was one problem that I found most troubling while attending Brooks Institute of Photography. Rarely, if ever, was I asked to keep up to date on current events. There are no classes that will teach students about political science, history, mass communications, and other subjects that I feel are extremely integral to the field of photojournalism. These subjects are necessary not only because photojournalists deal with news and events everyday, but also because knowing such information can lead to better image making. A photographer could simply show up, know the proper technique, and capture an image. However, it would seem to make more sense that photojournalists know some background information. This would allow for better insight into what type of image would best tell the story, not only from its current standpoint, but historically as well.

This is not to say that Brooks is a bad school. It can be perfect for some. Those students who want to focus solely on technique and not have to worry about "other" classes will find Brooks very attractive. That type of education was simply not what I feel best suits my desire to learn, nor do I think it prepares me enough for the real world outside of taking pictures.

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

Archive of Spartan Daily front pages I have laid out, most recent on top.

No Need to Click Here - I'm just claiming my feed at Feedster