Dan Ellis Loc: St. Louis, Mo

I was just wondering if any of you remember or used the Famous Photographers school which was a correspondence school that was somewhat popular back in the 60s and maybe 70s. I did sign up for it and did about half to two thirds of the lessons before quiting. It was broken up into 3 large books each of which had several lessons in it pertaining to different aspects of photography. Students would read each lesson do an assignment usually sending in a sample of your work like homework and have it reviewed and graded by a staff member giving suggestions on how to improve ones work. The one lesson I got the most value out of was a lesson on composition which was the best I've seen anywhere since. Its founding famous photographers were people like Eisenstadt, Avedon and about 10 others who were deemed to be best in their field. I don't remember the price but it was worth it. There was also a famous Artist course which my Aunt took and I got something out of too. Just wondering.
Of course most of my photo education came from just doing and quite a bit from military training too during the Viet Nam war. Also working a variety of photography jobs.

Beowulf Loc: Aquidneck Island, RI

Yes, I remember it, but never enrolled in the course. I think he original "Famous" school was the Famous Writers, followed by the Photographers and Artists courses. I remember the Artists course was featured on matchbook covers, where you were asked to copy the matchbook's illustration and submit it for consideration to see if you had artistic talent.

les spencer

And...so...

Denny45acp Loc: Sparta,Michigan

Was this the same as NY school of photography.

KTJohnson Loc: Northern Michigan

Was it something like this?

(Download)

Dan Ellis Loc: St. Louis, Mo

It was nothing like a real college course where one could get a degree. But in my opinion it was just as effective and a much better value than a college degree. I say that because did take several college courses in photography and in looking back consider them completely worthless. I have also worked with people who had college photography training and it did not make them good photographers.

User ID

Uh huh. That matchbook nonsense was the reason I saw the entire “Famous” lineup as laffable.

There was also New York Institute of Photography who had a full page ad in Pop Photo: ”Thanks NYI. Thanks to your course I’m now making a good living photographing Rock Bands and Custom Vans”. Equally laffable.

Denny45acp Loc: Sparta,Michigan

Its not what you learn but how you apply what you learn

User ID

Most college photo courses are as you described. Too artsy fartsy. No meat and potatoes. Most of them even use film, which does little to teach you real 21st century photography. Acoarst film is a very artsy domain these days, especially considering that the students were all born with cell phones in hand :-)

KTJohnson Loc: Northern Michigan

The New York Institute of Photography course was exactly what you described. Absolutely no college credit, just the fancy looking piece of paper at the end if you finished all the assignments. I thought it was a good introduction to photography, especially if you actually read all the different sections of the course and did what they asked. It gave me a good understanding of the basics.

From then on, the best way to learn was ... shoot & evaluate ... repeat. I'm still doing that.

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Impressive 😮😮😮😮

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Do you mean these guys? (please see attached image)

Here's a link to the story:

https://hyperallergic.com/317553/work-by-irving-penn-and-other-teachers-of-the-famous-photographers-school-emerges/

5 young guys that worked with me at my first studio job all chipped in (including me) to take the course. We all studied the books and collectively did the assignments. We were poor kids, just starting out and could not afford to pay for it individually. We didn't care about the certificate, we just wanted to glean the information. As books go, they were among the best!

Just after that period, three of us entered the service and ended up in Vietnam. One of my cohorts in our "study group" was killed in action. His kid brother was gettg into photography so we gave the books and all the study material to that young fellow. Whenever I hear about the FPS I get a sad feeling.

I was, however, fortunate, in that later on, I did get to attend several lectures by Phillippe Halsman and Ezra Stoller.

NYI, back in the day was a great school. Many great photographers came out of the residential program- I don't know too much about the correspondence courses. NYI and German were both in New York City and their program was straight-up nuts and bolts- practical know-how!

My coming from a "blue-collar" kinda family, I always, in the beginning, looked at professional photography as a "trade" and realized as I progressed that it can be done artfully. So, it was gonna be my trade and my job. NYI was the trade school for me. My first employer went there and encourage me to enroll. Later on, I took the colour printing course at Germain. I was still in High School so I had to do the night courses. Most of my teachers were working pros who were moonlighting as instructors.

After my stint at the service, I spent all my savings and GI bill benefits at RIT in the applied photography program.

So, I did my time in classrooms but what I learned "on the job" can not be taught in the classroom.

Practical photographic education is difficult to find. The fine art programmes at most universities seem to be turning out more fine arts teachers than working photographers. In New York City there were many vocational high schools. The High School of Industrial Arts had a photography program. Sadly, at the time, the vocational school had an undeserved stigma. Snobbish or misinformed parents looked upon them as reformatories. I was accepted there but my parents and guidance counsellor in middle school disuaded me and said I could take up photography in college. Bad mistake! Nowadays, many skills and trades are taught in community colleges with high tuition rates, and the courses are not as good or practical. I know because many of these graduates came to my studio to apply for work- BAD NEWS! The philosophy, artistic principles, art history, and all the artsy=stuff is all good but you can't teach talent, work ethic and creativity- you and only hope to encourage those and help students maximize their potential. It's hard for them to do without the basics- the nuts and bolts!

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

Yep, I did that in the early 60's but even then I thought it was a bit outdated but covered the basics very well.

OnDSnap Loc: NE New Jersey

Yup, NY School of Photography. Made it through.

ELNikkor

I grew up 15 minutes from RIT, visited there and Brooks Institute in Santa Barbara, CA. Determined that, if I wanted to be a photographer for a living, I'd best just buy equipment and teach myself how to use it, rather than pay for a school after attending which, I would still need to buy the equipment anyhow! (Couldn't afford both...) Made a wise choice to be a teacher for a living, a photographer for avocation, being more of an artist than a businessman; no regrets.