The content of the course is good and I feel it would be beneficial for beginners or those who want to top up their technical / academic knowledge on the subject.

I found the terrible editing of the lectures distracting though, and it felt like no one bothered to over-see the final version that was published. I also don't think the fact that one has to pay so much to access the assessments, which many other courses don't do at all, is conducive to creating a strong engagement in the course. I wouldn't for example be encouraged to take another course from this series (not sure if one is offered).

The first week and the final week are interesting.But in fact the week 2 & week 3 are kind of boring and those information could be easily acquired online, which I did not see the reason why I take this course for 2 weeks just study those knowledge.In contrast, the first and final week are focusing on how we gonna achieve a "good" image in a more dynamic way where we need more helps from tutors. If i could I would not recommend this course to a person who actually already had a habit of taking photos.

I thought the professors were very sweet and clearly make photography accessible to all - at any skill level. However, I think some of the talks were quite dry and we spent too much time on certain elements and not enough on others. IE Not enough time talking about the ISO - Aperture - Shutter Speed triangle and when you want want to lean into each.... Too much time talking about Vantage Points. A 16 minute video on how to find the right vantage point seemed a bit exhausting.

The iPhone camera learning is severely out of date. They're teaching iPhone 6 camera as I write this and I have an iPhone 15 Max Pro which is immensely better. They really should keep that section updated. Also the AI kept telling me that my work looked a lot like another's work and would question if it's mine and NOT let me submit it. Totally frustrating. Other than those two things, good basic photography information here.

This was a good course in that I learnt a little more about technical features of a camera. Picture taking, framing, subject, light, etc... was not as strong as I had hoped. It was bothersome that a lot of the discussions are years (three or more) old. The fact that the professors don't even look at the assignments is bothersome as well. It is all left to the students and frankly that is not enough.

Good course for someone looking to understand the basics, while developing a understanding on how deep the hole of Photography is. The one issue I have with the course is not the teaching, but the testing and peer grading. The wording of Projects is somewhat confusing and hard to understand. Plus some of the peers either don’t know what they are doing or they are just looking to score you low.

I feel like a lot of important things like the exposure triangle and the relationship between different settings could've been mentioned. Otherwise, I enjoyed the course, some things seemed a little unnecessary but they might actually come in handy sometime. I liked how this course gave me confidence, about myself as a photographer.

The course was nice but it was too much theory on it. What they gave a briefing in the intro video was not implemented properly as they told it would be for all the people whatever the device they use but they only focused on DSLR, not on phone. I didn't learn anything which I can implement in the field as such.

The Course is good and teachers have passion, which is nice. But Prof. Peter Glenn's videos are too long and slow, and the concepts presented could have been delivered in a more concise manner. The audio is also very low for his videos.

But good course anyway, thanks

There were some technical challenges that made this course not as fun. The content was good. If you make the assignments easier to submit (for example: provide a box to write a statement as opposed to uploading one) it will remove frustration and increase enjoyment.

Expected more in depth explanations of the inner workings of cameras, light metering, white balance, and how to deal with different (light) situations and less about the instructors' favorite shots of theirs and musings on vantage points and framing.

The lectures are very good. The hands-on tasks are great to learn by doing. The peer-review of this tasks is very poor quality, because there is no professional feedback and if someone is misusing it, it's not possible to report it.

This course really discussed an overview on photography, however, I think the outline and discussions can still be improved, specifically in terms of compressing the contents to highlight the basics and the most important points.

Very basic content, not that helpful - states what to pay attention to, but scarcely "how to". Also is very static, uses very little illustrations / animations / visuals, which is a shame for a photography course...

The content is helpful in learning to use the camera and understand terminology, but it is somewhat, if not totally, a false representation of interaction with the experts. There is absolutely none.

The course would be great if only everybody could fully participate. As I cannot pass quizzes and submit assignments not having purchased it, I have less motivation to carry on :(

The content, although very basic, is interesting, and some of the teacher's insights do stimulate discussion, but the video quality is low, with non matching slides, etc.

Good course to start with the basics of photography. Group assessments can be hit or miss given varied experiences of other students, but overall a good place to start

It was quite confusing with unlocking next weeks work, and the filming of the videos were poor. Eventhough everything was understandable

The sound of the videos was most of the time so bad, that i couldn't understand what the professors were saying.

Pros:Good concepts. Peter Glanding is a very good teacher.

Cons: Too short and concepts explained too quickly.

Was unable to get a peer review for a few of my assignments, which made the assignment past due.

The course is very well articulated, but I find that it has a very slow pace.

not really possible to give a higher rating.at the moment too many problems.

A little bit basic. expected more depthness into technical areas.