Foto, I’ll give you my insights. In 2008 I started a certificated program that was 60 units. It took me 5 years since I was working full time. That was the second time for me, I took 45 units in the old days!! LoL
I can tell you one thing, no amount of studying on your own, no matter how disciplined, can give you what you learn in school.
The vibe of 20 other students(yes kids) doing the same assignment in a completely different way can’t be replicated on the internet, let alone seeing 20 critiques per night.
But be prepared, the assignments are designed to task you and come fast and furious. What you’ll learn is invaluable.
When I went in I was already doing professional shooting(it WAS my second time) and came out shooting several levels above that. My command of using light and strobes was very high after that. I would recommend brick and mortar school to anyone over anything internet if you’re serious. I wouldn’t want an internet brain surgeon!!! LoL
Of course if it’s heavy on PP, it’s were everything is headed, commercially.
The courses are designer to get you a job, and indeed you’ll make many connections. Mine was all photography thus I’m weak on post.
If you have the time and can afford it, GO for it!
This link is one of my favorite photographers, you’ll probably be doing stuff like this. He is heavy into post. This young guy is amazing!!!
Good luck!!!
SS
http://www.davehillphoto.com/work/15768/composites

I found an art school that has a BFA. They also have a certificate which is about half the work of the BFA. The BFA is in digital photography as well as the certificate also.

I already know quite a bit about photography and the associated post processing software. But I looked at the course descriptions and I think I could learn a tremendous amount more and really take my photography to a new level.

What do you guys think? I’ve been taking “pitchers” LOL for many years but have never really felt like I was totally proficient. I know it’s hard to know everything but I need to discipline myself if I’m going to learn from like YouTube or other instructional Internet classes.

The problem is I won’t make myself sit down and learn unless I’m striving for a grade and I have other people that I’ve teamed up with in a project that I don’t want to let down. This is why I think going to a college for photography would force me to learn.

Opinions?

I found an art school that has a BFA. They also have a certificate which is about half the work of the BFA. The BFA is in digital photography as well as the certificate also.

I already know quite a bit about photography and the associated post processing software. But I looked at the course descriptions and I think I could learn a tremendous amount more and really take my photography to a new level.

What do you guys think? I’ve been taking “pitchers” LOL for many years but have never really felt like I was totally proficient. I know it’s hard to know everything but I need to discipline myself if I’m going to learn from like YouTube or other instructional Internet classes.

The problem is I won’t make myself sit down and learn unless I’m striving for a grade and I have other people that I’ve teamed up with in a project that I don’t want to let down. This is why I think going to a college for photography would force me to learn.

Opinions?

I’ve been setting the camera to f5.6 and adjusting the shutter speed until the only thing that is exposed properly is the open window. Then I leave the f-stop where it is and take nine shots one stop apart each from dark to light.

How do you think taking three shots would compared to taking nine shots? Am I doing overkill here? If I could take three shots and get the same result post processing would be much easier. It takes my computer eight hours to process the photos from one house in either light room or infuse.

I'm not sure why you refer to this as a "new" technique when it's been around for years, unless you mean that it's new to you, then I understand.

Regarding in-camera HDR, I just checked my Canon 6D2 and the in-camera HDR gives you a choice of +/- 1, 2, or 3 stops, or letting the camera automatically choose the three exposures. The result takes just 2-3 seconds and, of course, is a jpeg, but that's not such a problem for HDR images if you think about it. I don't use it much but I might try it out more in the future. I'm not sure which cameras have this feature and which do not.

Oh, but I have mentioned it ( JPEG) - and if you do not stick your nose up at it - it works ! The magic IS in the exposures !

It is not a lot about anything - and that is the beauty of it ! - IF you OPEN your mind .... and get away from Canikon...... ..........I am also a Canon user - but not a fanboy for anything - except progress and efficiency in photography......

Bottom line, Sony makes it MUCH easier ....

..

I am planning a trip to Namibia, and currently shoot with a canon 5DM4. My longest lens is 70-300L. I was thinking about upgrading to the 100-400L II ( and adding a 1.4 extender) and then I thought about getting a second ( back up ) camera body, maybe the Canon 7DM2 instead. That, with it’s crop factor, would give me almost the same reach as the 100-400 with a 1.4 teleconverter. I could then have a camera with a landscape lens, and one with “wildlife” lens mounted. So, here is the question..How many of you travel with a back up camera, and is it the same model or type as your primary, or would you travel with one camera and a longer reach lens? Any advice would be appreciated. I am trying to make a purchasing decision that will serve me well not only this trip, but for future travels as well.