Is this art good enough to submit as supplementary material at selective colleges?

Applying to College
1

<p>Hi, I'm a senior currently working through my Common App & essays; I plan on applying to Yale SCEA (dream big) and later to Wake Forest, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Rhodes, and Furman.</p>

<p>I took 2 years of art in high school; would have taken more but for scheduling impossibilities (I chose newspaper over art and am editor in chief this year); I'm in the Art Club but it isn't very active. </p>

<p>However, I do both digital and traditional art on my own, and while I don't spit out masterpieces every other day like some other insanely talented people I know, there are a few works of mine I am rather proud of.</p>

<p>I also do graphic design for my school newspaper and for local businesses and non-profit organizations</p>

<p>Yale strongly advises only submitting supplementary materials that reveal an exceptional amount of talent, so I was hoping you guys could give me a heads up about what exactly they mean by "exceptional." My art means a lot to me and it's a significant part of who I am, but I don't know how it compares with the sort of stuff Yale sees on a daily basis.</p>

<p>I have an online portfolio through deviantART which contains most of my better work, which I now submit for your perusal. :)
<a href="http://toward.daportfolio.com/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://toward.daportfolio.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Incidentally, I highly doubt I'll be using this actual portfolio website to submit these--for one thing, I don't think that's allowed unless I actually designed the website (I just picked the colors), and for another I think only a few images would be sufficient</p>

<p>To that end, I would also appreciate knowing if you have any favorites or if there are any you think would particularly stand out :)</p>

<p>Don't worry about hurting my feelings if there's anything on there that sucks... on the contrary, please let me know so I can consider removing it</p>

<p>I will be very grateful for any and all input!</p>

<p>(P.S. -- I am choosing to ignore the fact that my surname is on the site in the assumption that there are no stalkers here who have a preference for 18-year-old semi-nerds; I do hope I am correct in that assumption... Please also disregard any other personal information you might stumble across)</p>

2

<p>Um… Could we have a link?</p>

3

<p>I’ve been doing art for a longggggggg time, started getting serious about art about 6/7ish years ago. I’m in AP now and I’m also planning on sending an art portfolio to some selective colleges as well. Please don’t take be offended by anything I say, I don’t mean it. </p>

<p>Well, you don’t have a lot of time for yale scea but if you do have the time, I suggest on working on the below mentioned pieces because you do have potential with improvement.</p>

<p>Traditional: My particular favorites are #4 the watercolor and #6 which also kinda looks like watercolor, I can’t tell from the photo (is it suppose to have those faded out white spots because right now it looks like the photo wasn’t taken very well). Your pencil pieces aren’t that strong. For #5 and #8 the scribbley style really isn’t working. It doesn’t show any technique and it doesn’t look that great. I think #5 and #8’s scribbley style and subjects would look great with soft/oil pastels but it’s not working with the pencil. I do like the style of #3 but I would suggest adding some more darks and add shading to that person’s right arm as well. The prespective on the guitar looks a bit off. Going off of adding more darks, try to define the contour of the person and where else where light meets dark. #2 and #8 have good ideas but it needs something else. For #8, I think you could add some color with watercolor or color pencil to add some visual interest. For #2, I like the concept but there’s too much empty space for my taste but you can’t exactly do anything now. For #1, it has a lot of potential. I would say maybe add a dark texturey background and do some more shading where the hair meets her face and define the cheekbones and stuff. </p>

<p>Digital: The only ones I think are decent are #1 and #2. To be honest, the rest isn’t that great. The perspective in #1, particularly the door, is kinda driving me nuts. And the shading as well. Like you have the light from the door shining on the girl’s dress and there’s like no or not enough change in shading from where the light isn’t shining on the dress. First off, I just adore #2. But it could use some improvement. The weed thing next to the person is really random. I would say add another tree in the background (farther in the distance but before the green in the back). Repetition and variation=good composition. </p>

<p>Graphic: I like the logos you did but I think your traditional and digital work shows your style/voice much better and I don’t think anything in here should go in the portfolio. </p>

<p>Sorry for being so long winded. D: I really like your style. Your technique/execution could use some work but you have the right ideas and you’re going in the right direction. I would say if you want to improve some of your work, submit a portfolio. You’re going to be up against people like me who just makes everything realistic. I’m sure that gets boring after a while. If you submit a portfolio, it can only help you. PM me if you have any questions/want another long winded critique from me.</p>

4

<p>I would not submit your work. It is not exceptional and not original. Your sketches, such as “Massachusetts” are very scratchy & cramped, really no more than doodles. I don’t know how much you used photographs or other sources, but your work is pretty derivative; for example “The Kiss” via Klimt? Pretty insulting to think that you can do a crude copy, submit it as an original piece and art teachers won’t notice? “World’s Apart” is cartoon-like. “Exhultation” is so vastly different from all of your other work, it makes me wonder where it came from? Frankly, your portfolio is all over the place, in terms of technique, subject matter, materials and originality.</p>

5

<p>Okay, so I sugarcoated things but it’s not like you’re bad. You just need more practice. It’s not like you can take 2 years of art and become great at it. Don’t give up on art. If you really really wanted to submit a portfolio, I don’t think it would be that bad with improvements of course. But is your competition better? Yes. </p>

<p>I was also curious about your watercolors. If you really did them, why isn’t the rest of your portfolio up to par? Watercolor is pretty hard to master. Also, you should always work from photos that you have taken, colleges don’t like imitations of other people’s work. So if your work is from other people’s photos, I suggest you don’t submit them.</p>

6

<p>Yes, I really did everything in that portfolio. </p>

<p>The only watercolor is the lighthouse one, which took me about two months. Exultation is acrylic and it took even longer. I apologize for the photograph’s quality; I can take a new picture soon.</p>

<p>I am aware that “The Kiss” is a rather famous painting and would never try to pass it off as my own even if it weren’t. I also prefer the term “study” over “crude copy,” personally… There are a couple of other studies in there as well.
It didn’t occur to me before, but I do suppose submitting studies would defeat the whole originality aspect. I guess I’ll be leaving those out for sure then.</p>

<p>As for being “all over the place,” the oldest pieces in that portfolio are two years old or more, and the rest are everything in between, so I went “all over the place” myself in terms of my emotional, mental, and artistic phases. And I’ve tried a lot of things. I don’t really see how variety is a bad thing, either.</p>

<p>Like I said, I don’t have a problem with hearing things like this. I’d rather know, you know? I’d like to have heard something different but I guess it’s nothing I can’t work around. The comments of jg0339 were a little blunt, but I guess I asked for it. I consider art a significant enough part of my person that I’m willing to work at it a bit to have a few pieces to submit.</p>

<p>Anagenesis, your more detailed critiques were very helpful. Do you think you could select which pieces you deem worth salvaging, and give me a bit of advice on how that could be done? We could move to PM if you like, or we could stay in this thread; it doesn’t make a lot of difference to me. </p>

<p>Any other input is also still entirely welcome. I appreciate honesty, but please try to keep the rudeness to a minimum. Thanks!</p>

7

<p>I liked the cathedral- but sorry,have to agree about most of the rest. The art I see at D’s school from kids who are going into that field makes you say ‘wow, that’s amazing’, not ‘oh, very nice lighthouse’.</p>

8

<p>I guess I have to agree. Thanks for posting!</p>

9

<p>It’s really not bad, and I don’t think submitting a supplement could really hurt…then again, it probably won’t add too much, especially the more illustrator-esque pieces. Some are quite good, but you could use a lot of fillers – maybe you have some really awesome photos to add – if they’re good enough they count. Good Luck!</p>

10

<p>I also want to apply to Yale. I am sending in supplementary art materials.
Are photos allowed? </p>

<p>Anyway, do you think this is good enough? I would submit a few of the best pieces…it’s a little illustrationesque, but I think it’s good quality…</p>

<p>Critique welcome =)</p>

<p>Thanks, you guys =)</p>

<p>Oh, and Toward, yes, the cathedral is good; i’m in the same boat so I can’t help you much…</p>

11

<p>I can PM you the links, they got deleted.</p>