<p>i have a hard time believing that the super-motivated 4.0/2400/club officer/awardsawardsawards cc kids could also be accomplished artists.. i myself have great academic standing and am very motivated, but i'm not one of those kids that joins a club to be officer or mindlessly seeks out awards.. i have great grades, high scores, etc., but i'm also a great artist (most natural talent, but i do practice a lot) and i feel that it (art) defines me in many ways.. muchhh more than any score or grade. but this is conflicting, because they're quite opposite talents.. in many ways they're not. most accomplished artists are very intelligent (naturally, iq scores, genius status), and i feel that most super overachievers are average/slightly above average intelligence (i do not measure intelligence by booksmarts, studying, motivation, or education.. it's about innate highly abstract/advanced reasoning ability and perception..i've studied this, "what makes a genius" stuff)..maybe about a maximum 120 IQ (ballpark), possssibly 130.</p>
<p>anyway, i was wondering.. how are you balanced w/ you creativity/artistic accomplishment (now, i don't mean having taken lessons your whole life and learning technqiues.. i mean having an artsitc perception and picking up a pencil to draw a very realistic drawing without any instruction) and your overachiever academics</p>
<p>My artistic ability is null. I was better than everyone else at drawing in kindergarten, but I think I've actually gotten worse since then...</p>
<p>My stats are maybe a little above average on here, though my ECs aren't very good.</p>
<p>But I would say that my reasoning ability/pure talent is either the best or second best on this site (I know I have no proof...). I think I just can't draw because no one ever told me as a child that art was important--in fact, people told me art was worthless.</p>
<p>iin77, wow, someone's a little arrogant ("But I would say that my reasoning ability/pure talent is either the best or second best on this site"). </p>
<p>I'm somewhat of an artist, but I'm more into printmaking & 2D art, like painting and drawing.</p>
<p>I'm an artist, right now I specialize in photography. I first started out with abstract painting, progressed to realistic painting, and switched mediums to black and white photography. Even though I can draw, I have never really liked it. BTW, I have a 4.0 (but I don't have a 2400). The majority of my ECs are all artistic based.Super-motivated kids who are artistic do exist. Why not have the best of both worlds?</p>
<p>I do a lot of black</a> and white photography, but I wouldn't say I'm an amazing artist. I like drawing, painting, and graphic design, too, but not as organized activities.</p>
<p>blairt - Don't know if I will answer your question as you wanted, but will try. My senior D is very artistic, always has been. At 18 months she could draw perfect human faces (blew us away!). Has sold her artwork (mainly watercolor florals) for several years, donating thousands of dollars to her favorite charity. Said charity had her do two paintings that they turned into holiday cards and sold 5,000 of these cards in a national fundraiser. A quote from one of her college essays - "Watercolor has always been my favorite medium because of its delicate and precise nature; therefore, I found flowers, with their gracefully intricate composition, to be the most appropriate subject of my painting efforts. For five years, I have brought vibrant irises, sunflowers, roses, tulips, and daisies to life on paper in an effort to convey hopefulness, a feeling so foreign to those..."(afflicted with the disease she raises money for). She also is 1st in her class of 278, is concertmistress of her school orchestra, a three time state qualifying violinist, president of NHS, and a two time state qualifying singles tennis player with a 2200 SAT (perfect 800 CR) and 33 ACT. People tell me she is a rarity. For her, art gives her a place away from the rigors of academics and all the other things she is involved in. Presently, she works with an art professor at our local college, as a way to escape the public high school she attends and hopefully give her something to look forward to each week as she eeks her way toward graduation. Nothing provides her more peace than spending hours on a painting, or picking up her violin and losing herself in the music. She would like to take art classes in college, if even to just experience college art, but doesn't plan to major in it. Still, the college art department is part of every college visit we make.</p>
<p>I'm not sure what exactly you're asking, so if I'm wrong please ignore, but: I balance poetry and schoolwork by drawing boxes in my head. Now, over here, some particular time or assignment or occasion is Poetry Time. Another one is Schoolwork Time. They're mixable, anyway: my artistic tendencies definitely seep into my academics, and I think the extra perspective enriches them.</p>
<p>THIS IS SUCH A PRETENTIOUS THREAD AAAAH. Not that it's a bad discussion to be having, I think it's interesting, it's just I suddenly saw what it looked like from the outside, and hahahahahaha.</p>
<p>How is this thread pretentious? Artists rarely get recognized and I think it's great that there's finally a thread for them. </p>
<p>Compare that to highschoolers (RSI, other science-y things) doing research at universities. They get a lot more recognition than people who pursue art. I think the passion is about the same, just in two different areas; one absolutely gets more attention than another, especially in the college admissions process.</p>
<p>"most accomplished artists are very intelligent (naturally, iq scores, genius status), and i feel that most super overachievers are average/slightly above average intelligence"</p>
<p>I know what you mean about average-intelligence overachievers, but that whole statement is a pretty broad generalization.</p>
<p>"now, i don't mean having taken lessons your whole life and learning technqiues.. i mean having an artsitc perception and picking up a pencil to draw a very realistic drawing without any instruction"</p>
<p>If you're talking about innate artistic ability that doesn't require practice, I don't see why it would be very difficult to balance art with academics.</p>
<p>do most people who draw well don't practice? I see all these bueatiful artworks by high school students, and I seriously wonder how they have the time to do them... I wish I was more artistic... or is it hardwork that I need?</p>
<p>I love art, and have taken many art classes over the years.
I feel that art allows me to express myself and display my creativity. (I'm also very into writing for these same reasons.)</p>
<p>I don't think being artistic always has to conflict with academics. Although I have some friends who are a lot better than me at art and devote much more time to it than I, they choose to focus primarily on their art rather than academics. I'm very much the opposite, and place a great emphasis on school (straight A's, 2300+ SAT, etc).</p>
<p>i said that it's hard to balance because they're opposite.</p>
<p>when i do math, i feel like i'm pulling away from my artistic side, and that i'm losing my artistic talent each moment that i focus on academics.. i feel like the right and left side of my brain are in war.</p>
<p>i love photography and i feel that it's a great form of art, but i think it's farrrr too "teach-able". if you follow the instructions of a book, your photos can look like any other pro photographer. the same things have been shot so many times that they've lost substance. you can do that with painting or drawing (house, flower, dog), but there's more room for creativity there. it just gets too technical. it's sad that you don't even need an artistic eye to really succeed in photography. i know that's a heavy statement, but really... i think it's just because photography surrounds us in the modern world. we're overexposed.</p>
<p>so, painters/drawers/etc.... anyone?</p>
<p>how is this thread pretentious?</p>
<p>and what are you talking about, "arts-ists"? it says "artists". stop being such a snob.</p>
<p>piano89-i thin you confused ostentatious with pretentious</p>
<p>cameliasinensis: office space is a good picture. lots of geometric shapes, etc. do you use a digital or scan enlargments (i want to post my pics)</p>
<p>to op: I have always been able to balance art, academics, sports, and other ECs pretty well. I have play V-baseball since freshman year. I have taken 2 terms of photography, 2 terms of yearbook, 2 terms of painting (1 outside of school), a term of sculpture, as well as guitar and drum lessons outside of school. I still maintain around a 3.88 at a top private. The bad part about this is that my days are jammed-packed and I have had to give up drums. I also had to transfer into normal math (which still has me taking AP BC Calc senior year).</p>
<p>The hardest part is knowing when to drop something. I recently dropped varsity swimming. I always value my academics over baseball and actually missed a game yesterday to study for two tests. I consider art to be a possible career, so i will continue it over baseball if the need should arise to discontinue one. I have always had to juggle multiple activities throughout my life. The hardest part is maintaining a social life. I have the highest GPA out of my photography class as well as my baseball team. Its hard to maintain friends when you have to commit so much time to so many activities. I guess it helped when I became close friends with some other photography nuts. Its a constant tug a war, but i don't know what i would do if i didnt have art.</p>
<p>Also, the only reason why photography is "overexposed" (one of the better puns i have ever heard) is because of all the people picking up point and shoots and taking pictures of what they think is new, buts really just something everyone sees and doesnt care about. I use photography to try and record the past. My most recent project is all about taking pictures of this house in atlanta that is about to be torn down b/c asbestos. Its so amazing, but it wont be there for long. I hope to use the pictures to keep it open</p>
<p>Blairt, I agree with you that the more you focus on academics the "less artistic" you become. For many years, I have always been pretty proud of my art works. But since junior year, something seemed to change. Lines I used to trace straight with one stroke became curved, the shadings that used to look realistic became superficial. I was sad everytime I draw because I seemed to lose something I've valued since I was little, something very special to me.</p>
<p>I think part of the reason is because everything I focused on became numbers and grades. Even in my art class, I kept on worrying that my work wouldn't please my teacher. All I cared was the A. When I draw at home, I worried about studying for my SAT and my tests. It just didn't seem right. I was just drawing, machenically, not creating art.</p>
<p>But now I'm done with my apps, I hope I can somehow go back. I want to draw what I see again, not what I think I see. I want to take the time to draw every little detail and use my imagination without worrying what my teacher thinks. If you want to do art, you really have to put your heart in it. I think art isn't like math, where you can just cram and memorize the formulas for tomorrow's test. You really have to devote yourself to it. Don't think about time limit. Have no worries. It's a hard thing to do in a busy world.</p>
<p>MattEisn: Thanks! :) It's funny that you should say that, because everyone I show my photos to seems to like that one, but I actually don't care for it... I prefer portraits and less geometric shapes.</p>
<p>I use a Canon Elan 7 35 mm SLR, print and develop at a local darkroom, and then scan the pictures, which is why the quality is so bad (my scanner = crap). No one really does photography at my school, so when I started freshman year I thought I was all unique, but now I find out it's actually cliche. :confused: Ah, well.</p>