What is the controversy around using a photo as reference vs making art from life?

This is something I came across recently as I'm getting a school application portfolio together. They specifically ask that you send mostly observational art that is not from a photo, however, they also want complete works, not just sketches.

I think part of that is just a way to avoid low-effort submissions, but I was coincidentally just reading a bit about the debate on whether the best artists of centuries past used aids to essentially trace their subjects, and whether artists like John Singer Sargent used photos as references.

I'm really curious to see what everyone's different opinions on this topic are. I personally can see how using photography in an age when it was brand new could seem like cheating, but from a modern perspective, I feel like it is a great, almost essential way to be able to maintain a constant perspective, lighting, and to study your subject as long as needed. I would, personally, draw the line at tracing, but I also agree with some perspectives I've read that say being able to trace something doesn't equate to being able to paint well. But then where WOULD we collectively draw the line?

So, what are your thoughts?

Edit: I want to clarify that I am not questioning what the schools are asking for, or asking this question in terms of why the school is asking for observational art. That is just how I started thinking more about this topic. I'm asking the question in a much broader sense, but I would be interested in anyone's opinion on observational art for school, the professional world, practice, for fun, or anything else. It is just an interfering topic to me because everyone can have a different viewpoint, and there isn't really a wrong viewpoint.

Update: I want to thank everyone for all the comments! This has been enlightening for me. I have gained a pretty good understanding of the importance of drawing from life at least sometimes, as well as a deeper understanding of why using reference photos that you didn't take (even if they are on free to use sites like Pexels) may be a good show of technical skill, but not much creativity. I hadn't intended for this to be as much about my own art as art in general, but I will undoubtedly be changing the way I create my own paintings.

It sounds like nobody really feels negatively about the ways in which artists like Sargent may have used photos to help them, and that makes me wonder if there isn't really as much controversy as people writing articles about it make it out to be. Maybe only people who don't actually make art have a problem with it.