Re: Message VS Medium--It Ain't the Camera

[Fred Ward <fward@erols.com>]

re: David Almy message:

Thanks very much for the nice compliment about me and my Geographic
days. After writing and photographing for National Geographic for 28
years, I do have some observations:

1. It is certainly true that from the 1930s to the 1960s or even 1970s
that the photographers were an eclectic group with no common background.
Things then changed a bit as more and more colleges and universities
offered photography courses and majors. I noticed that more staff and
contract photographers came in with at least some formal training along
the way. But, as always, it was the natural visual talent that made the
difference, and not the courses.

2. I have told this story many times in talks, but it is short and worth
repeating. When people asked me what kind of training I had in
photography, I would say, =93I was at the University of Florida from
1953-1959 (early by any photo class standard) getting a BA and MA. As an
indicator of the quality of photographic instruction then, the U of F
had one photo course on campus, in the art and architecture dept. I took
the course one semester and was hired to teach it the next. So much for
high standards.=94

3. Geographic had a close relationship with RIT for years and most of
the lab and technical folks hired were RIT graduates. Geographic liked
hiring young RIT people.

4. You would not want to be at Geographic today. Since 1991 they have
fired half their lifelong employees and hired kids to take their places;
they cut their photographic staff from a high of near 30 down to 2
staffers (firing the rest); they have recently hired 3 more to give it a
photographic staff of 5 only now; they just announced that all
photographers on contract will see those contracts terminated in June.
Everything will now be done by freelancers without benefits,
retirements, health care, office space, etc. =


Be glad you are where you are. No one left at NGS I know is happy.

Fred Ward