i agree with everyone!! programs seem to be focussed on pure theory, or simple craftsmanship. i went to a “real” art school, (rhode island school of desgn), and found absolutely zero hands on training in software etc but a lot of theory and traditional media.
on the other hand, i have later gone on to teach at a commercailly oriented software training type school, and was dismayed by the lack of focus on art itself. it was as much up to the students to learn how to make good art on their own as it was up to me to teach myself software at RISD.
fortunately i’m smart enough to read the manuals and use web forums to teach myself what i cant fgure out, but it all takes valuable time and i’m sure i would know even more about maya had i gone to a program focussing just on learnng the software for 4 years.
but then we have all seen people with no eye for basic art but a lot of time spent learning a program, it usually makes me wince… its not one or the other, my favorite art has both. i think thats why a lot of people on these forms still look to the european “old masters” , their practice was about excelling in every area… i think to receivce really balanced training in america you should go to a fne arts school, then take a technical course, but who has the time or money.
hmm I guess it depends on the school. As I too live here in the UK I am pleased to tell you that I am on a pretty good art course. two of my art teachers are allways encouraging us to read around the subject and look at the old masters techniques. My art tutor Peter Beard runs the BTEC National Diploma at the college I attend and he has made sure that we are taught to draw. We have life drawing classes. We have learnt about line, tone and a little about colour theory.
). I hope that’s going to be enough to stay clear of the Ebvil CWI of Doom shudders again