Digital Photography has the power to bring out the creative streak in us all

In psychological circles it’s long been recognised that there is a strong creative streak in us all. Society, and the often limiting demands on those around us, quite regularly quash these urges by failing to understand this simple truth. But the expression of this inherent creativity can create an outlet which has the power to make people feel more positive about their lives and can help us all relight an indvidualism that the western world quite often tries to extinguish.

Unfortunately many people grow into adulthood thinking that “creative” is something that only those with education, money or an “arty” background can afford to get into. Even worse, they often think that all creative expression require a natural talent along with great skills learned over many years.

Certainly, a sculptor needs to be taught about all types of stone and other hard materials and the effect that different tools have; a painter needs to know the qualities of various painting methods and how they apply to various surfaces; even a seamstress needs to have an intimate knowledge of threads, needles and materials before a quality piece of clothing can be produced.

There is one area of creative expresession where a wide skill base is not required however and that area is Digital Photography. Anyone can be creative with a digital camera and get good results, immediately. To get great results may take a little more time and training.

Whatever way you take your shots, using the automatic settings, or through the more complicated manual ones, the power of digital means that you have to spend less time worrying about how the shot is going to turn out and more time concentrating on the composition of the final shot.

I truly believe that Digital Photography has democratised creativity. The fact that the sales of digital cameras has exceeded the sales of film cameras for many years simply underlines this view.

You don't need a degree to become a professional digital photographer

We think that people with the right qualifications are the best for the job, always. Is this true? I have no doubt that a Brain Surgeon needs qualifications before he or she can open up my head and do what needs to be done. I have no doubt that an Airline Pilot needs qualifications before they can sit in the cockpit and lift a hundred people into the air. But digital photography?

What are qualifications anyway? The dictionary states that:
QUALIFICATION is an 'Act of qualifying; state of being qualified; suitable quality or characteristic; legal power; ability; modification; restriction.'
QUALIFIED is 'Having qualification; competent; limited; modified.' (the words in bold are my emphasis)

What underpins our belief that qualifications are essential before a good job can be done is our belief that schools and colleges are competent in 'qualifying' their students. This was true to a great degree when film was king. Knowledge about film photography had been been built up over the course of 150 years. The tutors had been taught how to teach film but they haven't been taught how to teach digital. Digital photography is less than 10 years old essentially and they haven't had the time or the inclination to build up the new knowledge required.

Most college tutors rubbished digital photography in its early days and continue to rubbish it to this day. They have ignored the elephant in the room for so long that they are not in a position to prepare students for a digital photography world. They would rather talk about film photography.

So does that mean that the only good photographer is a film photographer? Well if the colleges are turning out confused and ill-prepared digital photographers it would seem so. But the truth is that digital photographers are teaching themselves. They are becoming competent through their own ability and drive, through books and discussion boards (such as www.photographyireland.net), through magazines and specialised courses (such as Digital Beginners Digital Photo and Photoshop Courses) but they need to leave the guilt behind, the guilt that tells them they are not properly 'qualified'.

The plain fact is that they are much more qualified than the 'Qualifers', the college tutors. The digital photographer of today knows and understands much, much more about digital photography. They have ability and are competent in their chosen discipline.

Maybe they should ask the colleges for a job?

You don't need to know about film to be a good digital photographer!

There is an opinion out there, usually very strongly expressed!!, that you have to know all about shooting and developing film before you can become a good digital photographer.

This is nonsense! Understanding film will teach you nothing about digital photography, other than understanding exposure (which is no bad thing).

Let's face it, many people are snobs and the more scared people are the more snobbish they become. Those who would have you believe that "Film is King" are those who usually know very little about digital and are afraid that all their knowledge will come to nothing, that category is usually occupied by older people. The other category who believe "Film is King" are young people who have been taught by older people who believe "Film is King". This second category come under the influence of teachers and tutors born in a different age. The problem is that schools and colleges can only put on courses that their teachers can teach, and teachers can only teach what they know. So if you only know film and are afraid of losing your job/status to a younger, more 'digital friendly' teacher then you will use all your powers of persuasion to do down digital photography at every opportunity.

Collectively I call these people "The Photography Taleban", in other words any belief outside the strict interpretation of "Film is King" is heresy. Of course the only way to deal with heretics is not to understand them or to change your point of view, just kill them. Problem sorted.

Well the problem is not really sorted, because film is not king anymore. Film is dying on its feet and will not be available for much longer. It is already very hard to get certain types of film and developing chemicals that were widespread a few short years ago. Film will be long gone before this current crop retire and they will have to learn the new way because they will have to. What will happen then? Simple, the new mantra then will be "Digital is King", even when the rest of us have moved on to the replacement for digital a few years down the line.