The best art schools are selective, because a lot of people want to attend- and they want to attend to learn the advanced stuff, not the basics. The art school has the right to pick who they feel is most likely to succeed at their course. It is a huge waste of the school's time and resources, and more importanlty, on the paid-for tuition time of the other students, to use time out of a course intended for people with a high skill level, on teaching the basics, when the people who the course is intended for already know that stuff.
That is why they need a portfolio- to sort out who is ready for what level of training- and if they only offer advanced training, this means that the majority don't make the cut.
You can pick up even advanced skills by mucking about, and referring to the internet. If you need structure, set yourself a structure and stick to it- if you can't stick to it, you may not be dedicated enough to be suitable for a course anyway.
I doesn't really work that way, dedication and discipline are to different things. Many people are dedicated enough to learn, but not many are capable of teaching themselves, end even if you are, you will never learn as much as you can through instruction.
Instruction can be found by other means though- with something as popular as art, there is a huge amount of material available, largely for free via library or online, that is there to teach people. There are online boards, where you can get good feedback on your progress, which I'd say is 90% of the benefit of courses. The other 10% would be the materials and tools available, but you can buy a lot of supplies with the money you'd spend on attending an art school.
I've had very good luck with books, the internet, and simply watching skilled people work... my experience of art classes was that it's often a waste of time, with most of the time and the teacher's attention spent dawdling about at the pace of the worst students, so they'd 'catch up' so most advanced topics are barely glossed over.
I've had a much different experience. The downside of the stuff your talking about is that, with something as popular as art, is that there are so many different material meant to aid you that it can be somewhat jaring for a person to find what will work for them, and that can lead to someone giving up. With a class you are able to get aid from instructors who have experience with your strength and weaknesses.
*nods* I guess teachers vary, and people have very different learning styles. I tend to enjoy the research and find it to be a quick way to assimilate new information, and am usually aware of my weak points, so I find the negatives outweigh the positives for me, but I can understand if that's not the case for you.
To get into ANY college, you need to have a certain skill set. You HAVE to have your basic math, language, etc.
Well, same for art school. You have to have the BASICS before they will finish you.
You can't take someone with no talent or natural inclination- someone who gets through high school without ever drawing a line- and turn them into an artist in four years. It takes at least that long just to get good at the basic IDEAS of art.
People who aren't already 'good' artists do not have the skills they need to proceed and be finished, therefore they are not allowed in school.
Just like someone who drops out of 9th grade isn't getting into a university.
If you want to go to art school and you don't already have basics in art, you have to go and pay for those classes out of your pocket wherever you can find them and get the basics down.
Just like you'd have to go get a GED or equivalent before you could got to school missing math or whatever.
Princess-RufflebuttFeatured By OwnerJan 16, 2013Student General Artist
You need to have basic art skills for them to teach you at a higher level. Just like how you need A's for college for them to teach you higher levels of the subject that you're studying. Art is no different. Art school isn't for teaching beginners, art school is for teaching talented people how to turn art into a stable career.
It is to change you from a hobbyist to a professional. You need experience and talent to be able to become good enough to graduate it. It's almost like those retards that came to teaching school to become and English teacher AND THEY EXPECTED TO BE TAUGHT ENGLISH THERE.
Maybe part of the reason is that they want to see you being able to put in the time and have that basic amount of attention on your own free will. This is to make sure they are teaching to students that actually wants to learn?
If there's no potential, there's no sense in forking over the money to go to an art school (unless it's a for-profit school, which doesn't ask for a porfolio) I've seen some people who go to art schools under the pretense that they will learn how to draw at a pro level in one semester (seriously, it was hilarious). Needless to say, they drop out.
No one is saying they can't learn, but the schools aren't going to take you in if they don't see the potential to mold that want to learn into something that can be marketed If anything, I would have that over a for-profit school that would take your money, give you a degree, and you still aren't all that skilled in the end.
Some schools that are considered the best, are for-profit. Every school just wants you for your money, some just for different things, and for a "college" to be a "real" college, there are rules that they need to follow.
VaniBunFeatured By OwnerJan 16, 2013Hobbyist Traditional Artist
For-profit schools do nothing to improve the quality of it's school. All of the money that you put into the school goes to someone else's pocket. The reason so many people drop out of for-profit schools isn't because it's hard, though for some that is true, it's because it's damn near impossible to pay for often. MICA costs as much as a AAU, a for-profit school, but it allows grants, loans and gives out huge scholarships to people who need it. AAU has been known for having trouble with the financial aid department, often rejecting loans, grants, and scholarships once given to a student, causing them trouble with money. Students have been kicked out for not having enough money because they never could resolve the problem with the financial aid office. They don't care if you are a good student or not, you don't have the cash, good bye sucker.
Yes, I have heard some negative things of the Academy of Art's financial aid department, and yes it is possible that the school only does care that you're paying your bills, but I doubt this. Like I said before, to be accredited a school must follow fairly strict guidelines, that entail the keep up with certain things and put money towards certain stuff. These guidelines are put in place to protect student from schools that would be negative to them in this respect. Plus, not all non-profet schools are innocent, I've heard that CalArts has done some pretty shady stuff in the past. So really every school has some negative and some positive things about them, and when you think about it, these schools probably wouldn't be around as long as they have if they where so terrible.
Every school wants your money, but they want results more If they just wanted your money, why would they need your portfolio? For-profit schools don't always require quality control (prime example: Art Institutes).
I myself am headed off to the ANU School of Art next month to study Furniture. If I'd never even put together two pieces of wood before, how can anyone expect me to be able to keep up with the material? Basically if you have a good foundation you can get pretty much anywhere. You wouldn't go to France not knowing how to speak French, would you?
I'm pretty sure that a lot of people go to France who can't speak French.
But at any rate, yeah if it isn't something that you're very interested in doing, then you probably would do well when studying it. But let's say that it is something you want to do, something that you have wanted to do your who life, but you aren't the most skilled at it, then going to school to study it would be a good place in which to hone your skills.
I'm just making an example. You're a lot better off visiting a country when you can speak the national language. That's the main idea behind a portfolio, to show that you have an interest in the subject material. Specialty schools exist for those with a specialty interest. Though certainly being good at what you're hoping to get into improves your chances. Actually, when I went to my art school interview I also put Ceramics as a study preference. I admitted to my interviwers that I had never done anything with Ceramics but I did tell them that I was interested in studying it, so I guess honesty helps too.
Well for starters, because art isn't something you can study and suddenly be skilled in.
Art school is extremely demanding. If you can't hold your own against people who have been practicing their whole lives for that portfolio review, take the general art courses offered by colleges in adult education. They're first come first serve for people of all levels.
You don't go to art school to become an artist. At best I'd probably say you go to learn to steal ideas from your peers. But you sure as hell have to know what you're doing by the time you're accepted. They cannot and will not just give you talent.
There is a difference between Talent and Skill. A person can be naturally talented at something, and be able to do it very well. To become skilled at something, is though practice, working to become better at something. I art was not something that could be learned or studied, then there would be no point in art school. A person who wishes to become a doctor, probably cannot preform an operation before taking years of classes.
Practice, though. Not study. Which is why art is something you don't have to go to school with. I mean even those of us IN art school know it's a giant load of shit. None of us are going to leave with good jobs and most of us will spend much of the year searching for employment. Luckily, we're a hopeful bunch and some of us do succeed so we all keep trying.
It's not as if you sit in a classroom and study or gain art skill whatsoever. You might as well do one of those "100 word" drawing challenges, because that's about as much guidance as there is. The only difference is, then you have to hand the drawing in and someone will subjectively view it and assign it a number deeming it's worth.
If you are so pessimistic towards art school, then why do you attend it in the first place?
I honestly do not believe that there is no point in going to art school in order to improve skills, and that every person feels the same as you do, I am sure that their are plenty of self trained artist that wish they had the opportunity to go to school. And not to mention that there are many people who want to go to school because they cannot teach themselves, and you are more likely to learn something (anything) if you are given guidance by a person who already knows what you are trying to learn.
You don't need to be a good artist to get in, you need to have the potential to be a good artist. You need to show that you have actually tried the stuff you're interested in learning and you're not just some high-school drop out who thinks art school will be an easy-out with their parents who want them to go to college.
As someone who is in her second semester of art college, I can tell you that we have a lot of not so good artists at my school. That's not to say they don't have a ton of potential, but they didn't come in all that good.
They want to see potential, dammit. They wanna see if you got the moxie and art brains to benefit from their classes! They wanna separate the gifted from the not so gifted. The artists from the Hipsters! They can't give you talent, they can only teach you how to utilize it, like biotics.
Answer me this. My sort-of nephew is four and a half. He's got no passion for art and draws like a four year old probably does - I say probably, I've never seen him draw anything, he has that little interest. Now, imagine yourself in the shoes of the heads up. Would you bring him, or someone like him in, knowing that there's no drawing skill or passion, and knowing there's no way he'd leave in three years time as a highly skilled artist? You couldn't even turn that around even if you were Phoenix Wright.
It would be saving time time of both the person in question, and the people trying to teach someone very difficult to teach if they weren't allowed in.
Well probably not, it's the passion thing, because even if a person isn't that good at something, they can still get better if they work at it, but doing so requires that it is something that you want try and get better at.
Imagine it mathematically. We have to get to, say, ten. Now, three years of Uni only bring you up by four, regardless of your starting point.
Now imagine that you started at one. You're now at five. Five is average, and that's great, but it's not ten. Now imagine you started at five instead. You're now at nine! All the extra time bringing yourself to five beforehand really paid off and now you're pretty much almost there.
I suppose that's what I mean. If you can do it to a certain level beforehand, then it's a lot easier to get to where you want to go.