<p>I was told by taxguy sometime ago that Art Center College of Design is a good place to go for animation, but after searching through the programs they offer, i don't see the "animation" word anywhere.............However, I've found many electives such as "3D modelling for film", enough to be associated with a full-animation program........am I missing out on something here? (personally i find the course section of the website abit confusing)</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>Could it be that the Art Center (in Pasadena) is being confused with CalArts (in Valencia)? The latter has animation.</p>
<p>I just suggested Art Center because they have an overall good reputation. I don't know anything about their animation program. What does have a good animation program reputation are:</p>
<ol>
<li>SVA in NY</li>
<li>SCAD in Savannah Ga</li>
<li>Pratt in NY</li>
</ol>
<p>I would also try Calarts ; however, I don't know much about them too.</p>
<p>Taxguy, you really recommend SCAD over schools like RISD for animation? The fact that SCAD doesn't have a protfolio entry requirement really scares me...</p>
<p>"The fact that SCAD doesn't have a protfolio entry requirement really scares me..."</p>
<p>Why?</p>
<p>I have pasted a link to SVA's digital animation department site. They call that major computer art. There is also a traditional animation program. Check out some of the work their BFA students are producing. It is excellent.</p>
<p>Well, it shows that entry is not competitive, and every other american art school I have checked out requires a portfolio admission. I think that's saying something.....</p>
<p>"Well, it shows that entry is not competitive, and every other american art school I have checked out requires a portfolio admission. I think that's saying something....."</p>
<p>Other than that "entry is not competitive", which is probably true, what do you think it is saying?</p>
<p>To me, it says "we acknowledge the fact that students in the United States most likely experienced a miserable art curriculum in their high schools, but may in fact have some sort of talent or ability that can be culled over the next four years".</p>
<p>jkolko, what admissions criteria do you use at SCAD if you don't look at portfolios? And what percentage of students get culled out because they don't have any talent in art?</p>
<p>Based on data on the PrRev website, 19% drop out before 2nd year, 42% graduate in 4 years, and 61% in 6 years. Those are all pretty high attrition rates. Isn't it likely that if you asked for portfolios as part of the admissions package you could avoid so much wastage?</p>
<p>I don't know the percentages, and I don't control the admissions requirements, but a portfolio is highly recommended for acceptance - it simply isn't required. </p>
<p>I personally have no problem with high attrition - I certainly don't think of it as "wastage". I can't speak for the school, but in Industrial Design we have a huge number of students who have seen Choppers or some other terrible design show and figure they want to be an industrial designer. They take our Introduction to ID class and realize that the field actually involves hard work and thought, not just drinking and hammering together a motorcycle. They drop out of ID and end up doing something else. We also get a large number of students who know exactly what they want and intend to do for the rest of their lives, and they complete four years of school and then go on to do just that. And, I see a tremendous number of students who finally figure out what they truly want to do around their Junior year; sometimes "what they truly want to do" involves a different major, and sometimes it has nothing to do with art or design at all. </p>
<p>I strongly, strongly believe that anyone (yes, anyone) can succeed in Industrial Design (or any other design field) with the right amount of perseverance and commitment - and that people aren't "born" with a certain set of skills that indicates their professional direction. The majority of students don't get a chance to truly persevere and commit to design until college; most of the high schools in America send the implicit (or, sometimes explicit) message to their students that art and design aren't worth pursuing at all. These students dont have portfolios may have never heard or understood what a portfolio is until they get into college. Harsh admittance requirements for undergraduates simply remove a large body of intellectual talent that have never had the opportunity to explore artistic endeavors.</p>
<p>Sonic2 asks,"The fact that SCAD doesn't have a protfolio entry requirement really scares me..."
Sonic2 also asks why I didn't recommend RISD animation department.</p>
<p>Response: As to RISD, I don't know enough about their animation department to recommend them since we frankly never investigated that department. Because I don't mention a school, however, doesn't make it bad. It may simply mean I don't know anything about it one way or the other. If I were to bet, however, I can't imagine RISD doing anything poorly.</p>
<p>The schools that I did mention have strong reputation in the animationi, especially SVA. I did visit both SVA and Pratt and liked the work that I saw. I have never visited SCAD and can only comment on their reputation, which admittedly is hearsay.</p>
<p>As for SCAD not requiring a portfolio, I must admit that I always thought that to be a giant mistake, let alone a scarlet letter of poor quality. However, my wife, who was a very successful interior designer, has reminded me that she never had to submit a portfolio for interior design when she was accepted to various schools. Also, some of the top rated schools in the nation don't have portfolio requirements such as University of Cincinnati. Perhaps the programs eliminate the incompetent. For what it is worth, SCAD has garnered a good reputation in animation and sequential art despite not having NASAD accreditation, which does still bother me.</p>
<p>Sonic2, I wanted to add some further thoughts to portfolio requirements.</p>
<p>My daughter spent hundreds of hours preparing her porfolio, while taking two college courses, and a full high school honors programs. This is in addition to preparing a senior research project that requires a well- written 20 pages paper and an oral defense of her thesis. </p>
<p>I am not stating these things to brag. I am pointing out that the stress involved in all this was ENORMOUS! I frankly can't see many kids mentally dealing with these requirements.</p>
<p>I really think that there are a lot of talented kids that don't have access to the advantages my daughter had. Many kids don't have the parental support and school support to be able to prepare a quality portfolio. Although I am certainly not knocking my daughter's talent and tremendous drive, not to mention organization skills, I don't think that she would have succeeded in all this without our substantial support in both understanding, time and money ( money for classes and tutors and for materials). </p>
<p>Also, as noted above, University of Cincinnati has no portfolio requirement, yet has some extremely high rated design programs and very low attrition in their school of design despite some very demanding hard work.</p>
<p>I guess the bottom line is that I am beginning to see why many schools don't require portfolios for the reasons given above.</p>
<p>I see this too, up to a point. But the sometimes overlooked aspect of this, which I think needs highlighting, is that you're likely to get a larger drop out rate from art programs without portfolios. In the case of SCAD, 2 out of 5 students don't graduate (in 6 years). There are costs from this, and I think they would probably be reduced if students were selected more on their artistic potential than their artistic aspirations (though both are important).</p>
<p>I believe that in an art school what you learn from your peers can be a very important. You are challenged and enlightened by your exposure to other artists. I think that real issue is that in a school where there is no portfolio requirement that uses the educational process to weed out the less talented students, you are not as likely early on in the process to be exposed to as many serious art students.</p>
<p>Unsoccer-mom has a good point. For example, SAIC accepts 86% of freshman applicants. Foundation year is largely a weeding out process, losing about half of the freshman class. So what of the students that come in already with a stong arts foundation? They better be extremely self motivated or it will be $36K worth of boredom...</p>
<p>Let me be clear: I do believe that, as a general rule, it is wiser for schools to require a portfolio than not require one for both art and design programs. I also think that requiring portfolios screens out those with lesser talent and helps ensure a better student body and lessons attrition. </p>
<p>However, University of Cincinnati, for example, has a very low attrition yet a very high ranking of its programs. Its graduates are very successful too. However, there is a pre screening based on GPA and SATs Thus, these are academically motivated kids.</p>
<p>My thinking is that I don't mind schools without portfolio requirements IF:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>They don't water down the curriculum in order to reduce attrition AND</p></li>
<li><p>Their foundation program can still challenge even strongly prepared artistic students.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The catch is whether both requirements are met.</p>
<p>This is a very interesting thread. I wish it could be retitled "Portfolio Requirement" or something, as that is how it has evolved.</p>
<p>On this point I am in total agreement with Taxguy. Another school that has an alternative to the traditional 12-20 slide portfolio requirement is Carnegie-Mellon. It's possible that one can be admitted to that school on the basis of their Design Project alone, which has 4 components: 1) a series of 3 inter-related drawings; 2) a stack of photographs on selected themes, with an explanation of which succeed and why; 3) a design of a clock face; and 4) a critique of the designs of 3 modern chairs. So it appears that they are looking for students who have strong critical abilities, good project completion skills, and an ability to work in at least a few media successfully, rather than necessarily a well established background in portfolio quality finished work. Many promising designers (my son included) have limited background in traditional art programs, so the portfolios are less sophisticated than those who have been immersed in drawing and painting continuously. I wonder if schools like RISD and MICA take that into account.</p>
<p>RISD and MICA are very portfolio oriented. I don't know what would happen, however, if you do fantastic work on the RISD home assignment but don't have a portfolio.</p>
<p>DGB, I think like what you describe at CMU is probably a good alternative for many who don't have a lot of drawing background. What you describe, however, is pretty demanding and would likely reveal whether applicants have native talent. This is rather different from having no portfolio, however -- it's an "alternative" portfolio. When my daughter interviewed at CMU (school of art, not design) she was told that they sometimes take chances on really smart applicants (high SAT -- the typical non-art CMU student) with no art background who they think might nonetheless do well out of force of will and ambition. I imagine that on the "design" side (school of design) this might be even more true.</p>
<p>I have never visited SCAD and can only comment on their reputation, which admittedly is hearsay.//</p>
<p>On some other thread I posted the job descriptions of three SCAD alums that have 3 very high profile jobs in Hollywood special effects companies; here they are again.</p>
<p>Mark Therrell, technical director of Pixar Studios; Dimitri Ellingson, art director with LucasArts, the entertainment software company; Steve LaVietes, senior technical director visual effects for Sony Pictures Imageworks</p>
<p>How is this heresay? Please explain.</p>
<p>//As for SCAD not requiring a portfolio, I must admit that I always thought that to be a giant mistake, let alone a scarlet letter of poor quality.//</p>
<p>Hey TG, when I went to RIT for photo they didn't require a portfolio; I don't know about their policies now. But I got in w/o a portfolio submission. Somehow they still maintained the rep. as the finest photo school in the country.</p>
<p>Also, I think jkolk pointed this out, but many high schools have poor art programs, or very very limited art programs because of cut backs; the arts can be the first to go in budget cuts. You simply cannot penalize a student for a lack of opportunity. </p>
<p>You seem to jump to the conclusion that because a college doesn't require a portfolio, that students don't submit one. Not true at all based upon my opbservations at the time.</p>
<p>I would guess, that 90% of applicants at SCAD do submit a portfolio - that was my observation. Students were highly encouraged by the admissions staff to submit one. The college also schedules many portfolio review days across the country. Go to their web site I believe you will find a schedule.</p>
<p>Also, grade point average might actually be a better means to predict success. I had a few very talented friends that flunked out because they lacked discipline. The student with excellent grades may be more likely to apply themselves. Talent can get you so far, but at some point maturity and discipline need to kick in. Talent may be important in some majors, but for applied art programs, GPA may actually be a more appropriate means to predict their success.</p>