|Color and Light||1.1||Do Assignment|
|Color and Light||1.2||Do Assignment||1.3 | 1.4|
|Illusion of Space and Atmosphere||1||Do Assignment|
|Personal Art||1.1||Do Assignment|
Taking two right now since I was too late for CDA. As for how the system works, it's fairly simple and straightforward. Instructor uploads a video tutorial/lecture and assigns homework due a week later. Every week there's a live session Q&A where the instructor reviews assignments and opens the field for you to ask questions. As for the quality of the classes, it really depends on the instructor, I recommend going through their blogs and judging their work for youself before deciding whether or not to take it.
Of the two I'm taking James Paick and Paul Christopher's course. Jame's class is something else, he even has pro illustrators taking it and submitting work. The classroom is a great atmosphere, even if it's only online. Nice critiques from both the instructor and peers, and nearly everyone participates every week. Pauls class on the other hand, although it has like 18 people signed up, but only 3 people doing the work each week. =\
If I had to give it a score I'd give James class a 10, and Pauls a 4-5
Eldritch, thanks for sharing your experiences. I am very interested in both classes you're taking. I was gonna start with Peter's and Paul's classes and if it all went well, I planned to move onto James', Michael Hampton's, and Izzy's classes too. (would've loved to take a class with Carlo too, but looks like he's only doing lectures).
Anyway, I wanted to ask about Paul's class...is it going badly just because people aren't participating? Or is it because the structure, or instruction, or content, or whatever else is handled poorly? If someone follows through and does the work, would it be beneficial in your opinion?
From what I observed Paul is very enthusiastic about teaching and his work, but I often find myself skipping various parts of his videos because it's stuff that I know already or not all that useful. It's not so much bad as there are already MUCH better options if you want to learn how to do vehicles. If you're going to spend 600$ on the masterclass, I would buy scott robertson and feng zhu's gnomon dvds, which are 50 dollar a piece. Each gnomon dvd is 2 hours of tutorial and lecture, while the cgmw is 8 weeks of 1 hour lectures. Which means if you spend $600 on gnomon dvds, you would get 24 hours of lecture/tutorial instead of 8. What makes the CGMW class worth it is the feedback from the instructor. Personally I haven't found Paul's critique to be eye opening, rather he tries to give a forced praise most of the time.Anyway, I wanted to ask about Paul's class...is it going badly just because people aren't participating? Or is it because the structure, or instruction, or content, or whatever else is handled poorly? If someone follows through and does the work, would it be beneficial in your opinion?
@doug I can't say about analytical figure drawing, but I've bought Michael Hampton's figure drawing book and it was pretty good (book has 200-300 pages, should be the exact same thing as the videos). Environment 1 with james paick is great, I don't know about the other guy doing an environment masterclass though
Last edited by Eldritch; August 15th, 2011 at 06:11 PM.
Yup, I've seen Feng and Scott's vids many times of course; essential techniques for anyone in this business.
So I'm familiar with the technique but was hoping for guidance with actual designing. How to build a language of plausible mechanical parts, develop an eye for aesthetics/proportions for vehicles and mechs, quick ideation and refining of a concept... things of that nature. How much of this is offered in Pauls class?
I love his work and he seems a great guy, but TBH, if he's just gonna ask me to practice ellipses and cubes, I'm already doing that plenty. I guess I'll look into this a bit more before I drop the 600. Thanks again for the info!
I'm taking Jason's environment design class. Being fairly new to environments I find it quite informative. Lectures, techniques showed, critiques are all good. In Q&A sessions he usually overpaints submitted work as well as answering any questions students have, sometimes does a demo. If only there could be more of everything...but can't complain really. Overall, cool stuff!
I've taken Paul's vehicles class in real life and I think he's just someone who teaches better in person.. his teaching style is very fluid and he responds much better when you have problems right in front of him. Imho, he's a good teacher for getting to understand principles of design (shape language, scale, big medium small etc) -- basically everything you wanted Greg, but not so good at arriving at a working process since he works very fluidly and organically. I personally got a lot out of his class, but that was the real life one at Concept Design Academy. I just think he shines a lot more when confronted with student problems rather than lecturing straight out of the box, I was honestly surprised to hear people online not liking his class as much, since I thought I got the most 'design sense' out of his class than any other I took at CDA. Most of our class time was spent critiquing as opposed to him lecturing. Seeing him take your piece and adjust the scale and shapes to create 3 new different designs is extremely eye-opening, but it does require the class time for him to do that.
I'm taking James Paick's environment class online now and I can second Eldritch, he's awesome
Last edited by Cadaure; August 19th, 2011 at 03:57 AM.
Thanks for sharing Medelo. tbh this thread doesn't diminish my interest much. I have a lot of respect for all those guys' work and well, online classes are my only option for the time being. I will study in person as soon as I'm able. Also sounds like I'll have to give James class a shot too
I'm not sure how much help I can be, 3 years later, but I guess I'd give a review of the courses from a more recent perspective. Currently a student in Peter Han's Dynamic Sketching 1, I have to say that the course is incredibly informative and very helpful. The lecture videos are great and the instructor's feedback are amazing; but it's not all good and dandy.
There is a Live Q & A midweek but if you're in Australia then you get no help at all; you can't attend the Live Q & A as the timing just isn't practical and if you email any of the instructors, you'll never get an answer. I've had to actually write my questions on the same pages as my submissions so that the instructor actually reads it out while he's giving me feedback on my work.
So, overall, I think the course is great but I get the sense that the instructors can't care less whether you're learning or not; as long as they're getting paid then they're happy. I had an incredibly different experience doing two CGSociety Workshops where the lecturers actually cared about each of their students and continued to help them long after the course was over (3 years later and Robert Chang from Becoming a Better Artist still helps us with whatever questions we have).
I recommend CGMA if you just want to take information and figure it out on your own. Except, aren't you paying $600 expecting a professional to actually help you out? Good course but the instructors could care a little bit more, I think.
Website - Kredentis: the journey