• Previous message: Tmcnorf: "Re: jewelry"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi everyone-

We'd really like to hear your thoughts, suggestions, and criticism on the
move to "go digital" in our high school photography program. It's a tough
choice for us, but we feel we're making the right move. But we'd love your
thoughts!

We are planning to knock down our darkroom walls in the not-so-distant
future (2-5 years?), and keeping only only one or two enlargers. It is
doubtful we will ever go 100% digital, but we are interested in switching
from a 90% chemical emphasis to a 90% digital emphasis in our high school
photography program.

Here are our reasons for going digital:

1) The consumer market is moving in this direction. Just as camcorders took
over the Super-8 movie cameras twenty years ago, so are digital cameras
taking over the 35mm market. Professional movie-makers still use film, but
the rest of us now teach and learn the basics just fine on a camcorder. The
same will hold true of digital cameras in the near future. We will need to
adapt to anticipate what skills students will need in the future.

2) Digital cameras allow students to shoot a series of images, evaluate the
results, and then reshoot all in one short class period. The feedback loop
is much shorter than with conventional methods (especially for my
pre-darkroom intro photo students, who must wait two weeks for their film
to be processed.) A faster feedback loop means faster learning. Instead of
giving only 3-6 photo assignments to a one-semester photo class, we could
easily assign 15 or more projects.

3) "Film" is free, and students can take as many photos as they need to.
There are no consumable costs until the student chooses to print. Right now
we have to charge $100 per student to take our darkroom photography class,
in order to cover the cost of all of the consumables (film, chemistry,
paper, etc.) This fee could be slashed by $80 or more by going digital,
allowing students of lesser means to take the course.

4) Retouching, improving contrast, and generally improving an image is
faster, easier, and more flexible using a computer. As we all know, we can
do things with an image on the computer that simply cannot be done in the
darkroom.

5) We hate pouring darkroom chemicals down the drain.

Can you think of any more good reasons?

There are also some arguments against going digital:

1. Unlike 35mm cameras, which most families own, only a handful of students
own a digital camera (yet - this is rapidly changing.) This currently means
that we would have to provide them and allow students to take them out
overnight (or longer.)
    However, we can use this to the benefit to the program. Since many
poorer students cannot take darkroom photography because they don't own an
SLR (a current prerequisite), we will be levelling the playing field for
the financially disadvantaged.

2. Digital equipment is very expensive - a digital camera comparable in
quality and controls to a $250 SLR currently costs $600-$1000.
(Fortunately, we already have easy access to a computer lab with Photoshop
4 installed.) Prices are coming down rapidly, of course, and I am pursuing
grants to fund this project.

3. The quality of digital prints is (arguably) poorer than chemical prints
from 35mm film.
We are currently using a Nikon Coolpix 950 and an Epson Photo EX printer,
both of which I am very pleased with. In my opinion, the results are
comparable to (and sometimes superior to) traditional prints using 35mm
film. Using a photo printer with photo paper, you have to look VERY closely
to tell that it's not a 35mm print. The quality of the print under a loupe
isn't really that important for us at the high school level, anyway. When
teaching a 15-year-old how to see light, how to use light, how to compose a
frame, how to tell a story with an image, how to communicate visually, how
to work with the elements and principles of design, etc., I find that the
digital camera is a better teaching tool than a 35mm camera because of its
speed - the learning feedback loop is much shorter.

What do think about all this?

Thanks for your advice -

Chris Baer
Art, Design, & Technology Dept.
Martha's Vineyard Regional High School

---

• Next message: Bunki Kramer: "looking for a social studies/English listserv......"
• Previous message: Tmcnorf: "Re: jewelry"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 08:30:06 PDT