Life changing or career building

     The question for this task asks whether we need to be highly trained graduate artists or more creative individuals from a more artsy background when looking for employment and secondly how the course can meet these two opposing views but still offer a fulfilling education. When looking at courses when applying for university what struck me, and I think I can say this for the majority of my year if not the course as a whole, is how focused on art and design the curriculum was. Yet is that what the industry wants, one half of the argument does but is that really the case? Is the software we learn relevant? The pipelines and workflows, etc.? In the fast paced world of game development, VFX and visualization is anything we learn going to be relevant in ten or even five years time? 

     The cynical answer is no but that's perhaps only a few shades away from the truth. Take 3Ds Max for instance, my software of choice and the primary modelling software on the course yet it's being phased out in favor for its contemporary Maya, which we don't learn. Of course software is changing yearly with new products becoming available to us in a much more competitive and, more important, "cheaper" market for students or hobbyist artists. The Quixel suite immediately comes to mind having said this as well as Marmoset Toolbag coming at a reasonable $49* and $129 respectively. For a student that's almost affordable especially when compared to a license for 3Ds Max coming in at £3,300... Ouch. Again these are two software packages that are not strictly taught as part of the degree but one of the best things about our course is how we're pushed by our tutors to go out and learn them. Personally I've trialled and experimented with not only both but a number of other programs such as Keyshot, 3D-Coat and After Effects as well. It's not so much about exclusively learning Max or Zbrush but learning them to a competent level before branching out on one's own and, as corny as it sounds, learn to learn and get a taste and basic understanding of the other programs out there. From what I've read and heard, over the past year especially, is that by showing that you want to learn and that you're trying new things then most places will teach you their in-house tools because in the end they're just that, tools.  

     Which is where the other half of our education comes in, the fundamentals of art and design. These are skills such as composition or colour that don't change over time and are the cornerstone to everything we do artistically from high end characters to the lowliest trash pile. Alongside this we learn to research and creatively solve problems within the briefs we are given, like we've been told so many times by Chris and Mitch it's not so much about the vehicle or character we may design at the end of a project but the processes we learn and improve upon every time. That's what I think, and hope, that employers want, the creativity and the technical abilities to accompany this but most of all the passion which the course fosters to drive us forward. These are skills that we can transfer across a huge plateau of areas and industries that transcend software packages or workflows and apply to pretty much every aspect of a design or artistic process. They're also skills that are heard to teach. We're getting into much more technical stuff as the year has progressed, information that's hard to find unless you know where to look or are pointed in the right direction. Let's face it anyone can learn 3Ds Max or Photoshop but it's a lot harder to teach artistic judgement and build upon the art fundamentals. 

     Which brings us the long way round back to the original question. I feel the course has struck a good balance teaching in a way that pleases both parties in this argument encouraging us to both go out and experience new programs or techniques and the underpinning art fundamentals as well. This leaves a lot of responsibility on our part to go out and learn and practice this but in a healthy creative atmosphere it works and pushes us all to become much stronger artists because at the end of the day that's why we're all here. It's what we want to do. In answer to the second part of the question I do believe the course is definitely offering a fulfilling experience for the students and after writing this post pondering over what we're taught and the ways this can fit in with the two views of the original question I think I've reached my answer.

     Can't we be both?  

*$49 = Academic license

Sources:

Autodesk

     http://www.autodesk.co.uk/products/autodesk-3ds-max/overview

Gamespot

     http://www.gamespot.com/articles/gdc-rant-heard-round-the-world/1100-6120449/

Marmoset

     http://www.marmoset.co/

Quixel

     http://quixel.se/