In the art world photography doesn’t hold the same respect as painting or sculpture. I’ve had professors who’ve made this opinion obvious. People who pride themselves on having extensive knowledge of art history and the skills involved with “real” art completely disregard photography. But we don’t talk about all mediums in the same way, there are different skills, and elements, and styles. So why can’t photography be added to the conversation? A phrase you often hear is a person has “a good eye”. It could be an eye for painting, or drawing, or film making, or photography. Because everyone sees the world differently, especially artists and this is expressed in their art. Photography isn’t just snap shots, there’s thinking and planning and effort. The subject matter and materials are taken into consideration to achieve the desired effect. It isn’t the same as more widely accepted arts it just requires a different eye and thorough knowledge of the medium.
Many photo 1 classes don’t actually teach you the right way to work with 35mm black and white film. They show you the very basics then make it more of an art critique class, where the focus is on themes and content. By the end you’ll have a better understanding of composition but you’ll actually have low-quality photographs. You have to take a more advance photo class to learn how to do it properly and effectively. The chemicals used require an exact process in order to develop the best negatives. Intro classes don’t go into depth because people who aren’t invested won’t be interested in all the test that have to be done before you can take good photographs. Not all cameras are the same and not all film is the same. Multiple tests need to be done to determine what conditions should be used for each camera and sets of film. Not teaching this right off the bat means you have to relearn everything in an upper level class. It’s a disservice to the serious photographers that want to learn and adds to the misconception that all photography requires is pushing a button.