BEFORE YOU START TO READ RUN, DON'T WALK, TO JOHN KRICFALUSI'S SITE WHERE HE TALKS ABOUT HIS IDEAL ART CURRICULUM FOR ANIMATORS. IT'S SIMPLY THE BEST THINKING ON THE SUBJECT THAT I'VE EVER SEEN IN PRINT!What I'll try to do here is put down a few thoughts on the state of art schools in general (which includes traditional colleges offering an animation/art program) and animation courses in particular. The biggest recent change in animation curriculums is that they're almost all computer-centered. Every school wants to be known as cutting edge, preparing students for the jobs of the future and all that. As a consequence drawing courses have diminished in importance and now you can graduate from art school without being able to draw or paint. That's an historic change! Imagine that! The practice of hundreds of years reversed in my own time! How did such a big change come about?
Well, the computer obsession is the obvious first answer. That's odd because the favored animation of art students -- what they watch for recreation and inspiration when they're not being forced -- is anime, which is 2D. Students seldom watch 3D for fun unless its video game graphics. You get the feeling that they don't really like 3D all that much but they're persuaded that learning it is the only way they'll get a job. Is that true? Who gave them that impression?
The obvious answer is, "The box office told them! 3D is the only animation that makes money!," but is that true? 3D has been in TV animation for well over a decade now and what are the most popular animated programs? The answer is "The Simpsons," "South Park" and "Family Guy," all 2D. OK, south Park is computer animated, but it's deliberately made to look like it's not. No computer TV that looks like computer TV has been a prime-time hit. 3D has beaten 2D at the cinema box office but what was the competition? "Treasure Planet?" "Home on the Range?" These are executive-driven films are not at all what I would call fair competition.
My own guess is that high school teachers and art schools turned things around; high school teachers because they scared their students to death with the "college-or-scrub-toilets-for-a-living" rhetoric, and art schools because they took in so many non-artists that the foxes are beginning to rule the hen house.
The upshot of this irresponsible advice in high school was that every student who wasn't academically inclined went on a frantic search for colleges that offered easy degrees...and what college is easier to graduate from than an art college? In unprecedented numbers non-artists flooded art schools and they were backed up by big, tax-payer-backed student loans, so they were not turned away. How will these students pay back those loans? Remember when art schools had strict entrance requirements?
The influx of non-artists into art school is changing the nature of art school. A lot of students don't feel comfortable with traditional art and are much relieved when they can bail out into computers. Very often non-artists run art schools and they tend to repeat the non-artist mantra: "Everything will be computers right around the corner." That's only a half truth. 3D certainly is the future of animation but good animation programs are not by a long shot right around the corner.
Present-day 3D programs like Maya are clunky and unresponsive and there's no relief in sight. Art schools should be preparing students for a longer transition period but instead they're putting all their eggs in one futuristic basket. Maybe that's because 60s-type people run the schools and that generation was obsessed with what used to be called the "generation gap." They watched their parents lapse into irrelevance and they learned the lesson... on pain of death don't fall behind the trends. Unfortunately for them the anticipated trend in 3D was slow in coming. Today, all these years after "Tron," 3D animation is still expensive, insensitive to cartooning and expressive acting, has difficulty creating appealing characters, and is hard to use.
Even so, the fantasies of non-artists about how art should be done can't be ignored. They're training the next generation of artists and that'll have its effect. We still have to meet the challenge of anime, which is the immediate threat on the horizon, and that battle will likely be fought with 2D. My advice to young animators is to learn how to draw, cartoon and animate effectively, in addition to whatever computer skills you can pick up. If John K ever starts a school then kill to get into it. That's the real article. One day 3D will be as easy to use and creatively useful as a common pencil, and we'll all wonder how we got along without it....but we're far from being there now.
By the way, my own experience with art school management has been the opposite of what I've described here. Everybody I've worked for has been an artist, sometimes really good ones. Good art schools with competent and idealistic managers do exist and they're worth seeking out.
43 comments:
So your comments have nothing in common with your own teaching experience, or...? I understand you used to, uh 'Profess'.
last year a 3D animator called mohammed saeed hareb started a cartoon called FREEJ besides being the first nationaly made cartoon (of course the animation itself is outsourced to india :P) it was actually a pretty good show. was. this year mr.hareb is having trouble, money trouble ,despite coming from a relativly wealthy family, merchandising dosen't seem to have worked for him he's moved on to sponsorship how many times can you mention a company's name during a show before it starts to lose it's luster? like, twice
it sucks, a show jumps the shark just second season!
3D is expensive and cumbursome i'm taking a class so I should know. and you know what there are no 2d classes in dubai it's like i live in a country made up entirly of animation execs (they certainly plan the roads that for sure one of the most dangerous cities to drive in) you know let's just teach the most hip and happenin' thing! ugh! i have to teach myself real animation from betty boop vids and preston blairs book in my free time :(
if john k. does start his animation school, inshalla , I am gonna hitchhike to america just to get taught by him.
exactly what is the budget diffrence between a 3d show and a 2d one btw? you know after i learn proper animation (and work in a studio for awile) i do plan to come back and show my own country what for..
Hey! You got the scrub the toilet thing from me, didn't you? Although I said the counselors would scare you into thinking without college you're McDonald's bound for life!
William: No, I had fun teaching. I just couldn't help commenting on what seems to be happening across the country.
I hope you and everyone else will forgive me for my oppressively serious tone over the last few days. I'm in a mood where I feel like yelling at the hair on my computer screen. Why I feel that way I can't even guess but it never lasts very long.
Man it would be cool to attend a school run by John... if for no other reason than I know it'd be done right for once!
I really think you hit the nail on the head Eddie with your assessment of how a typical art school is run. It's all about learning programs and then you're out the door! Where, may I ask, is the art?
Usually I sign in, but I'll have to remain anonymous as I agree with you Eddie. I'm about to graduate an art school, and let me tell ya, all you do is work on the computer in the most un-artistic way possible.
Hmm, I was going to rant about my school in this paragraph, but whats the point? What's done is done, I still love to draw, so hopefully it'll work out!
It's a bummer when I've learned more from blogs, videos, and friends than I have from school!
My advice to anyone who is looking into art school: DO YOUR RESEARCH!!! You'll probably get more if you spent two years at your folk's house reading blogs, forums, books, and watching videos. Instead of $100,000 for tuition, invest in pro versions of flash, photoshop, after effects, maya, and a power-house computer. All of that might cost what, $10,000? A much better deal!
You mention the generation gap problem, I think it's still the problem. To the boomers, 3D is this sexy new thing, it's The Jetsons finally arriving. To my generation (born in 84), we have grown up during the rise of 3d and it's not really a huge deal to us. We can pretty much take or leave it (and most have left it). In fact, the majority of 3D fare is produced for 8-year-olds, who don't know the difference anyway! But the boomers are still reeling from this sexy new invention, and I think they're the ones insisting that it's going to be The Future.
Ug ug ug. The school that I went to wasn't like the kind you describe here, but it also wasn't particularly good at anything. In fact, I would have to say that ciriculum University of the Arts (NOT the Art institute) geared specifcialy AGAINST it's graduates getting a job in the professional animation world. There is little emphasis on 3D, and barely any teaching of flash. But somehow, at the same time, it manages to also not focus on drawing, or prinicapls, or really anything at all. Graduates from my school sort of know how to do lots of things, but don't REALLY know how to do anything. They clutter up the schedule with a bunch of mandatory nonsense classes that really have nothing to do with going out there and getting a job, and everything to do with being a kooky old hermit living in a garage and churing out crappy little personal films and trying to enter them into crappy little festivals. Not that there's anything wrong with making things for yourself and entering festivals, but...I WANTED TO GET A JOB!
I've learned infinatly more from reading your blog, and John's, than I ever did in 5 years of school.
Sorry....I just get a bit upset when I think about it....
I was reading an article about a year ago in Computer Graphics World where they talked about 3D feature animation and they said studios are realizing that 2D fundamentals are more important than knowing the software. Last time I looked at the job listings, Pixar requires 2D experience to apply for an animation job, no 3D experience necessary.
Off topic, my favorite web comic, Sheldon, had a recent blog post with a link to the picture gallery of the World Beard and Mustache Championship 2007 and was intrigued with the interesting styles in the freestyle categories, and wanted to share.
This post really rocks, and it's chillingly true. This trend is not only happening in art schools in the US, but it's happening in all for-profit, post-secondary education schools.
However, I think this trend is slowly beginning to reverse because these schools want to remain competitive.
Many of these schools had their reputations sullied because of a variety of things, including: their practice to accept anyone
that can come up with the money to pay the tuition (regardless of their abilities), their practice of hiring anyone that can talk as instructors (many of them are suprisingly low-paid), and the instructors' lenient grading because they're pressured to "prevent the student from dropping out of school", and the instructor is blamed if the student drops out of the school.
The problem with this approach is students who were not qualified for this field of study paid boatloads of money to go to school, and they were shortchanged out of a good education because they either had instructors who weren't experienced in the subject or instructors who had a relaxed grading structure (instructors who handed out As when the students should have been getting Cs). When the students try to get a "real job", the employers notice that these students are not qualified or talented enough to do the job, and both the employers and the students blame the school.
What these schools are starting to do is get stricter with their standards. They're changing how they get accredited so their credits can be transferred to traditional universities. They're actually hiring instructors with industry experience AND the proper credentials. They're also auditioning the instructors to make sure they can present materials. They're getting stricter with admissions criteria so students who aren't really cut out for the work are being weeded out before these students waste their time or money.
I think that in the next 5 years, the quality of education will improve, and the number of unqualified students at a school will reduce.
From Hasdrubal
Eddie, you should be thankful not to be in college today. Drawing is not the only subject which is not being taught. They don't really teach sculpture, computer science, 3D animation, calculus, physics, history.......or anything else either.
The reliance on computers is not entirely the problem in art departments. Drawing instruction was on the decline as far back as the early 80's, when the computers couldn't do squat. Back then I was often berrated by my instructors for using human and other forms that actually represented real objects. The instructors wanted nothing but blank white canvas minimalism, and designee-looking rectangular repeating patterns of colored mat board. They demanded the students to turn out work that was as crappy and nihilistic as their own. John is correct about hippies being the problem.
Some of your other ideas on computer 3D aren't exactly accurate. 3D toons are not expensive to make. It's possible to make them at home, by yourself, on a computer without an executive there to drive up costs. It's possible to turn out self taught animation that looks at least as good as the old Gumby & Pokey stop action toons. The fact there are no 3D cartoons on TV is also executive driven. As you and John have often noted, execs are unwilling to allow training for any type of artists, pencil or computer rendered. Be aware there are less clunky rendering programs than Maya. Execs love Maya and other clunky programs because they drive the costs up.
Their logic is to waste as much money as possible to inflate their value to the their corporate masters on paper. Drawn animation made overseas gives them a better opportunity to show off how much money they can waste. If a studio were properly managed, 3D toons would be cheaper than drawn animation.
Please don't get me wrong, I would never wish for drawn animation to disappear.
I don't think high school teachers have anything to do with it. This is why I think it is the way it is:
1. Any school can teach it. Well, not really, but that's what a lot of schools believe. They can get a computer lab, some educational licenses and someone who knows how to use the program, and then they can teach. Lots of people are surprisingly enough willing to believe that if you can create a simple 3D model, it's good work. Try to do a drawing of a cellphone and get to teach 2D animation. Hah! You wouldn't be put in the faculty, you'd be put in the first year of lifedrawing class. Well, with 3D, you WOULD be put in the faculty. Even though it shouldn't be, it LOOKS more technical, and schools think this means they can teach it in the same way as they can teach programming.
2. Computers and internet and a luxury life changed people's beliefs. Youth (of which I am one) is pretty darn spoiled today, and the computer is very much a part of their lives. To cross the barrier from using MSN messenger and MS Paint to using Photoshop and then Maya seems smaller than learning how to draw. Few people these days seem to take the difficult path. Also, a lot of how we get in touch with animation happens on the computer and the internet. I got into animation through first wanting to be a 3d modeler/game designer, then commercial CG artist, then CG character animator, and then, through doing some simple bouncing ball tests in 2D (drawing a circle isn't that big a barrier), I discovered the joy and the artistic possibilities of handdrawn animation and took up drawing. In short, the computer makes animation seem more accessable. If you loved animation in the past, you really had to be dedicated to get started and even believe you had a shot in the business. Enter computers and the internet, and it suddenly opens up to a LOT of people.
I guess I was lucky that my animation school put more training in 2D animation then 3D. I suppose that's because two of the better 2D animation studios in Canada, Collideascope and Copernicus, are right in our backyard.
Our Life Drawing instructor specialized in Classical art and taught the basic skills needed to create good hand drawn animation. Our Animation instructor was a background artist (she worked on the wilderness scenes in "Prince of Egypt" along with a lot of animated Canadian TV shows). Only one instructor specialized in 3D (she did 3D modeling for businesses).
I learned a lot more from books and blogs then I did in class (not to say I didn't learn a lot in class as well), but it was good to have those deadlines and critics to keep you going.
Bravo Eddie, Bravo! It's about time someone said this and made total sense about it too! I can't wait till John starts his school. If he does it'll be great if you can teach it too. It's too bad most art schools are keeping the basic drawing skills at a minimum now. :(
Even most former Disney artists I have known are animating in 3d now, such a shame.
I agree with you Eddie. Non artists are spreading like wildfire through these schools. Im currently attending Illinois Institute of Art in Chicago. One thing about this school is its a for profit school, so they will take basically anyone who applies. They get as much money out of these non artist students as early as possible with gen ed classes. After they have been there a couple of years they start taking the core classes. Then these students realize that they cant draw and have no talent and end up dropping out. I think the dropout rate here is over 60%. By that time they have spent $50,000. Good for the school. The handful of really talented students that go here will most likely get jobs.
My major is titled, "Media Arts and Animation." Its broken up into basically half 2D and half 3D. Lots of video and audio and other supplemental classes as well. They need the 3D and computer software classes because they cant guarentee any sort of placement in the 2d field. The same reason they dont offer photography. They cant place people in these jobs. With the 3d and technical classes, they have a better chance at placing artistic and non artistic students in the industry.
I was talking to Bill Plympton at the John and Bill show and I asked him for some advice for student animators. He said to obviously have good drawing skills and learn as many programs as you could. Specifically Flash, Final Cut Pro and Photoshop.
I dont think learning lots of programs will hinder anyones abilities, just expand on them. It also inhances ones computer literacy. If you know 10 programs in and out, you can pick up another one so much easier.
One good thing about the 3d and technical jobs is that they are here in America. More options for animators.
My brother in law just graduated from one of those fancy CG animation schools, and he sends his reel to PIXAR and they reject him. So he calls, asking me why he didn't get the job there. And I ask him who else he submitted his reel to? "No one." So I look at the reel and I see photoshop polish, afterefx tricks, but no drawing ability. I don't wanna crush him, so I tell him ALL the guys I know at pixar can draw. And paint. And design. And board. They're well rounded classical artists. He says, "I can do that stuff." He thinks manipulating photoshop and laying a texture on a model makes him an artist, but he won't take drawing classes because he says "I got my own style." Yeah, I call it the "I-don't-know-how-to-draw-so-I-ape-that-anime-crap" style. Sigh. This is why there's so much bad stuff out there.
On another note, I had to respond to Hasdrabul, who said brackets...
"As you and John have often noted, execs are unwilling to allow training for any type of artists, pencil or computer rendered."
This is a super super incorrect generalization. I've attended free weekly life drawing classes at every studio I've worked at: WB, Disney and others. Painting workshops, story seminar, etc.. Most execs want the talent to be the best it can be to make them look good. Seriously.
Hasdrabul continued..."Be aware there are less clunky rendering programs than Maya. Execs love Maya and other clunky programs because they drive the costs up. Their logic is to waste as much money as possible to inflate their value to the their corporate masters on paper."
Where is this insanity coming from? Or is this sarcastic? Execs try to do it all as cheaply as possible with the best outcome to make themselves look good. They usually don't waste money unless ego battles are involved. I've seen is dozens of times.
Hasdrabul keeps on..."Drawn animation made overseas gives them a better opportunity to show off how much money they can waste."
Huh?
hasdrabul: "If a studio were properly managed, 3D toons would be cheaper than drawn animation."
We're getting there, but not yet. Those Nerdcore shows: Dragon-boosters and StormHawks are making a case for cheap CG. The next thing will be the CG Star Wars show.
Hank
Everything in this post is completely true, when I think about it. The only CGI cartoons that visually appeal to me are the ones made to look hand drawn. I wonder if Flash will ever become easy enoug to use that it can become mainstream, and create cartoons that look hand-drawn- even FHFIF has something...un-natural about it.
And nice use of "an historic"- I didn't think many people followed that grammatical rule nowadays.
And if anyone wants, go see my updated blog, it has some more UK comics stuff on it (Shameless promotion over.)
Anime is quietly taking over the commerical animation marketplace. I visited the local Best Buy yesterday and found that one half of an entire very long display aisle now contains nothing but anime DVDs. The percentage of anime to western 2D and 3D animation seems to have quadrupled in the past four years.
Well, Mr. Fitzgerald, I have to commend you for being pretty on the ball here. I just recently graduated from a large chain of art schools, and like any other school that's growing, they're a business, and part of that business is letting in as many people as possible. That's not to say that the students aren't to blame at all.
I could go on a rant about corporations or something like that, but it's been done to death by people more eloquent than I'll ever be. But I will say this: You're right, most people who graduate from these schools aren't that great at drawing. In fact I wouldn't rate my skills that high as far as drawing goes in regards to where I was when I graduated.
Once some people hit the computer, it's all over for them. They never pick up a pencil until they get to their portfolio class and then they FREAK OUT because they haven't drawn in close to a year and a half. I guess that their rationale is that they're in art school, they didn't come here to work hard.
A lot of people don't realize that being a good artist, be it painter or animator or whatever, is a lot of work. It's just that it's hard work that's fun if you really love it. People get to these schools, realize they don't like drawing, realize they don't like animating, but by the time they realize this they're halfway through the curriculum, so they figure that they might as well finish out.
I was a student for three and a half years, and a teacher's assistant for an entire year, so I saw an entire rainbow of people, from people who were super dedicated and talented, to people who hated animation and didn't want to do it, to people who loved animation and just weren't getting it, to, and this confuses me, people who WEREN'T good at animation or drawing, didn't draw often, barely even liked doing it, but were convinced that they were the greatest artists in the school.
I sort of ended up ranting, but I'd have to say that it's worth the money if you're willing to put the time in yourself.
Don't leave out school ownership as a key problem.
A lot of schools are strctly for-profit entities that have no real agenda besides the bottom line. They will do whatever however to increase profit. Education means nothing to them. It's only what they have to claim to provide in order to make money. The same people who own your art school may also own a nursing school, an auto mechanic school, a chain of burger joints...
If you want to pick a school, make sure it's not owned by THESE GUYS, or anybody like them.
From Hasdrubal
Hank, don't even mention George Lucus.
He has big plans to out-source to Singapore or Malaysia. He should be banished to a galaxy far, far, away, with only a toy light sabre and an animatronic duck to eat.
Geez, Eddie! To hear you anyone would think that the hippies won. You'd have to be raised on a commune to expect a college faculty to place your interests above their own. Competent, dedicated art teachers are rarer than hen's teeth. How old/shitty would YOU have to be to consider teaching full-time?
OK, the middle class is shrinking. Parents today accept that their kids will be living in the basement well into their 20's. They're much more likely to go for a degree course in computers than to send Jr. to college to learn to draw cartoons. The Classical Animation program at my alma mater now offers a degree in applied arts. That means I can't lecture without a master's despite any mastery in the application of the art.
Kids, if you want to animate, you've got to learn from each other while you're in college. And draw, draw draw. At least, that's what we did (those of us who didn't go into teaching). You'll never regret learning to draw. People who can't will never understand what they don't know & you'll never be able to explain it to them. I don't care if they have a doctorate in CGI.
If you want to animate at Pixar, remember they have their own proprietary software. A little general knowledge about CG will help, but they will train you.
It was Michael Eisner & Jeffrey Katzenberg who announced the death of hand-drawn animation. That's why we call it 2D. Because it's deficient one "D", get it?
I'm insulted by the inference that I'm impressed with the technology. It's the 21st century, already. Where's my goddam flying car? AND WHAT'S THIS HAIR DOING ON THE COMPUTER SCREEN??!!!
i'm currently attending the art institute of california for animation. the unfortunate part is that i'm stuck here until a school comes along that teaches me what i NEED/WANT to know (that is also affordable), although if John opens a school i would give both my kidneys and a pint of blood every week to be able to attend!
what's been happening at my school:
the teacher says, "i think this class is supposed to be about this. i'm going to try and work some animating into that somehow." that's how often we get to animate over the last 6 months. i have been doing my own animating outside of school, of course. so i dont see why i am paying 1600$ a class when i am literally teaching myself. it seems like i am paying them that much just to use the facilities, which arent even that great. my sch...i mean "educational establishment" is LITERALLY a hallway with some computers and desks...and a ping pong table outside. for my 2d principles class we literally animated on top of computer keyboards, because there was no animation room. and still, i pay 1600$ per class....
PLEASE GOD LET JOHN K OPEN A SCHOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!
Miss: I cn't get over the fact that you're writing from Dubai. That seems like the most exotic place in the world.
Taber: True, so true.
anon: Good advice! Well, good if you're a strong-willed self-starter.
Brilliant: (sigh!) So true!
Andreas: I'll look it up!
Jennifer: I agree mostly, but proper credentials for a cartoonist doesn't necessarily mean university degrees. If it did Bob Clampett wouldn't be able to teach.
Hasdrubal: A great screen name! are you sure 3D cartoons are that cheap? I'm comparing it to the kind of acted, nuanced and multi-character animation that 2D does. I've seen lots of what was reputed to be cheap 3D films but they were all very limited in what they attempted.
"Cars" must have cost a fortune. But anyway I know what you mean. It makes a certain kind of film doable on a budget.
Dungeon, Benjamin: Interesting!
Callum: According to John FLASH can do animation that comes close to the traditional kind but you have to do a lot of drawings to get that effect.
Hank, IDRC: Interesting! I like business and I don't see a corporate conspiracy but you have to admit that they make an awful lot of bad decisions.
I'm not exactly answering what you said but your comments made me think of John K's complaints about TV networks. He says they should never attempt to do their own animated shows but should buy them from suppliers whose companies are run by artists.
In a similar vein, advertizers make a mistake when they attempt to do their own commercials. Corporations just aren't suited for that kind of work.
Tom, Ian: We better get something good out there or we'll all be reduced to anime consumers soon.
Pappy: A master's degree!?
Erik: Geez! I'll pass your letter to John!
Ryan: Very interesting! Do you really think the 3D jobs will stay here? You may be right but I think we'd be safest by doing genuinely funny content that has a uniquely American sensibility in the acting and humor.
...I like business and I don't see a corporate conspiracy but you have to admit that they make an awful lot of bad decisions.
Spoken like a true optimist...
I like business too. I dislike corporations and I dislike unethical douchebags. You will find more unethical douchebags in the corporate world than anywhere. Why? Because that's where the money is.
Don't think of it as conspiracy. Think of it as opportunism. Some people are very attracted to opportunism. I'm not making that up, am I?
It helps to put corporations into real perspective.
Blehhh...
I hate it that I spent so much money on art school tuition--all borrowed and payed back over the course of what seemed like 90 years--only to be surrounded by lazy, spoiled, untalented rich kids. I was led to believe that my art school of choice was "really tough to get in to", so when I got there, thrilled to pieces to be one of the chosen, and started noticing that most of my classmates completely sucked, I figured either I must be the most talented artist in the universe, or standards had fallen due to budget constraints.
I wondered where all the talented students had gone; should I have applied to RISD? Cooper Union? Art Institute of Chicago? SVA? (Ha ha! Just kidding!) Pratt? Well, as I came to meet talented art students from other schools, I discovered that they were all noticing the same thing I was. It turns out that there just aren't that many of us. And art schools are teaching everybody to use Photoshop and Flash and all that crap because they are tired of being accused of not preparing their students for stuff like getting a job.
It's very annoying to pay $40,000 to go to school and then not be able to get any work drawing naked people or making color theory pictures with that paper that cost a million dollars and weighed more than a fire hydrant and if you looked at it the wrong way it got greasy and ruined and there was only one sheet of it because it was a color theory box thing. (Some of you know what I'm talking about. I hope. Oh, God, I am so old.)
And yet, being forced to draw every single day (Sundays excluded--one must have hobbies) for three hours straight for four years did actually help. It didn't help me get a job, but if that had been my main goal, I would have gone to medical school, which I hear is really easy to get in to.
And another thing: when I was there, my school didn't even offer animation classes, let alone cartooning, which was viewed as a notch below clown paintings on velvet. Now I bet they're all over that shit.
i.d.r.c.:
Gosh, I feel bad. It's easy to forget that a corporation is a person, too.
The Lucas produced upcoming CGI "Star War Clones" animated series was done in Lucas's new Singapore studio, built to exploit the cheap local labor.
It took me years to pay off my tuition loans for Calarts but it would have been a lot tougher if I hadn't received the various grants and scholarships that people like the Disney family made available to us. It probably paid for half of it. I also had work study. Those were good deals;
I'm sorry so many art students have had a lousy time. I certainly had some frustrations, but with the benefit of hindsight(some of which came while I was still there)it became apparent that any art program is going to produce some frustration as well as being (hopefully) satisfying and fun--and teaches you.
For all the costs I would never trade the experience. The most important element was the group around oneself, both teachers and other students. A lot of them made a profound impact on me, and I certainly learned a lot from them that I never could drawing at home or in classes like the ones I attended at NYU(traditional art classes). This isn't all fuzzy nostalgia talking, but real, epiphany-style examples of other people's work staring me in the face on a daily basis; every damn design class(and story, and character design etc.)I probably learned more from what other people put on the wall to solve a problem as I did from solving it myself.
And btw, Calarts isn't all about 3D only at all...if you look at the links on my blog many of the recent graduates do the most sublime, beautiful and original 2D work I've ever seen. 3D is a form only. And frankly I do feel it's getting better and better, but that's another topic. Not everyone in animation school becomes and animator, though most of them animate their films and they can and do learn timing, squash & stretch, silhouette value, color-all sorts of things--where they ultimately gravitate--story, visdev, layout, etc--depends upon the individual.
I hate anti-business, anti-corporate, anti-capitalist modern thinking.
Spoken like a true grocery clerk.
I'm not surprised that you have again come to an inane conclusion.
If you had something insightful to say, that would be a surprise.
I have sound reasons for everything I say. You have weak mythology.
Nothing you said makes any real sense but I don't have the time or the inclination to try to explain that to you. All indications are that it's an impossible task, anyway.
I am over 30 years your senior, vastly more aware, enlightened and experienced and I resent your insolent and superior tone. The only subjects about which I could learn something from you are Anime and bagging.
But being fundamentally generous of spirit I will recommend a book to you. It's called, "Unequal Protection." Read it before you address me again. Then I may accept your apology, but only if you understnad what you read.
i.d.r.c.:
I'm certainly even older than you. There are insights that come with great age. You gain a certain historical perspective in the face of death. You figure out why only old people drive Oldsmobiles.
The philosopher Nietzsche held that the great purpose of humankind is to prepare the way for the Superman.
"Superman is constantly changing and in a state of rebirth and growth. He determines what is good and what is evil, not allowing religion or society to determine these things for him. The Superman finds his happiness in this way. He uses a reason that is independent of the modern values of society or religion. He determines his own values. This creation of his own values gives him joy, and in order for the Superman to cope with a changing world, the Superman must constantly change. This constant state of change is a constant source of joy, leaving little or no room for suffering. The Superman does not believe in an afterlife or the power of the soul over the body because he does not believe in religion and has no proof of an afterlife or a God. Therefore, he makes the most out of this life, not depending on a reward in Heaven or a punishment in Hell for what he has done on Earth. The Superman does not pity or tolerate the weak. He feels that human compassion is the greatest weakness of all because it allows the weak to restrict the growth of the strong."
(from A Primer on the Superman for Young People):
http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/great/projects/Knowles.htm
The modern U.S corporation satisfies all the requirements. It is an immortal multi-celled organism with all the rights of citizenship except the vote. It stands above politics because both parties exist to serve it. It's next great project is globalism. I'm sure everyone has noticed the trend of levelling out wages & benefits between the 1st world & the 3rd.
Globalism means nations are obsolete but we in this country all make a contribution simply by doing nothing.
I know what you're thinking. The echo of Nietzsche's remarks recall Nazi propaganda. The philosophical mistake the Nazis made in hijacking Nietzsche was to interpret his factual statements for moral ones (or for that matter, national ones). This is way beyond good & evil. God is dead. Long live the Superman!
When I was in art school, I the students with real drawing ability in any given class amounted to about 3% of any given class. If spizzerinktum's experience is any guide, this may well be a constant in art colleges. There really just aren't that many talented individuals, which is why they stand out. Or should, in a fair world, in a good way.
I wrote a long rebuttal to everything I.D.R.C. said...
It's not possible for you to rebut what I've said. You've already demonstrated a gross propensity to misconstrue it, and to attribute ideas to me that I don't have, simply because it better fits what you have stated that you hate --a staatement that was nonsense to begin with.
For example, I never said I hate corporations, I said I dislike them, but twice you have stated that I said I hate them. Perhaps for you that is a meaningless distinction but in reality it's not.
One thing I do I hate is ignorance, especially when it combines with youth and arrogance.
I could go much, much further in dissassembling your mistakes, but I just don't want to.
The wise and seasoned reader will recognize my comments about corporations as food for thought, and take the opportunity to challenge their assumptions, if neccessary. Jorge, on the other hand is giving us a lesson in what NOT to do.
This is not my first day online. It's not even my first decade. I am well aware of what happens when the tightly-held dogmatic beliefs of a fanboy-cheerleader-type are chllenged. Facts make no difference to them. They will state the same half-baked circuitous beliefs over and over, no matter how effectively you counter them. Many never grow up.
By the way, I invest in the stock market. I have money in a few banks. I am not anti-business, as you have stated, but I am anti-corruption. That's a good thing.
I only hope that someone will take this opportunity to discover Thom Hartmann. He is one damn fine American and a true patriot.
Yet another blatant logical error from the noisy little boy.
Sorry for what must seem like my puzzling silence refarding the replies to this post. It's a little hard for me to speak candidly about this subject because I teach sometimes and I don't want to bite the hand that feeds me.
Eddie, has much changed wrt Art schools since this was posted?
When I taught digital animation techniques at CALARTS in mid 90's, I discovered, then, that studios wanted people they could plug into various work roles, __not__ students trained to be independent filmmakers, which CALARTS was biased towards.
Most small (and many big) FX companies hire contractors given a paycheck and little else. Tight deadlines prohibit most on-job training (I worked during day, learning software/drawing/3D at night - 20 years of 14+ hour days took its tole.)
IMHO wrt tools, 3D still remains a media requiring intensive, mostly technical training. MAYA in particular's popular with big studios because it's reprogramable for specialized use (You'll need C++, Python or MEL training). Toon Boom's the 2D animation toolset right now, but while more artist friendly than MAYA, it too requires technical chops to master.
I applaud you, JK and the other true believers who remain active in this business! There are still a few great opportunities out there for those who can find or trip into one!
kurtwil: Thanks for the interesting comment. So far as I can tell, animation departments focus more than ever on 3D and suppliment it with a little figure drawing, design and animation history on the side. That's not a very good curriculum in my opinion.
Post a Comment