View Full Version : MJAS Michael John Angel Studio, good or bad?
August 12th, 2003, 08:58 PM
Hey guys, great site!
My question is in regards to a school I've come across in Toronto, and it seems to be fairly unique in it's approach and instruction called "MJAS" www.angelartacademy.com Since I discovered it's existence, it's been weighing on my mind as a better option prior to entering college.
Why? My portfolio lacks and has been collecting dust due to personal reasons and total separation from the artistic community at large, mostly because I needed money.
Ultimately, I would like to head towards Digital/Analog Illustration, Graphic Design.
Any and all opinions would be appreciated! And if anyone has any experience with this studio please, tell me your thoughts too!
August 13th, 2003, 01:44 PM
The main concern is being able to draw properly and to proportion, and use colour properly to convey a message in my work (And of course produce a portfolio).
Another option which I've looked towards was at Sheridan..
Anyone else have an opinion?
Thanks for the advice iffy:)
August 15th, 2003, 08:32 PM
for the most part Sheridan is the best as far as Ontario goes, i took a tour for Classical Animation awhile back. Right now their site lacks as far as student work (some is on the main page in an applet)
I agree with you on the duration of possible time wasted at MJAS, its more geared towards people with other jobs to deal with and/or families.
One thing that struck me is they don't explain how long completion of the course is depending on the number of days signed/paid for. Just a rough 3-5 years, and yet you could go minimally for one day a week vs. five a week.
Dunno, lots to think about i'll be moving by years end so it plays alot to all of this, thanks!:D
August 16th, 2003, 03:54 PM
whatever you do, don't listen to iffy, he is giving you terrible advice.
If you wan't to get into illustration, than the Angel Studios are a good option. You'll learn how to paint and draw like the old masters. And when you've mastered Classical Realism, almost anything is possible.
I really have to go now, but i'll come back, just don't take what iffy said to serious. By the looks of it, he has no idea what he's saying. (No offense dude)
Iffy - Are you doing drugs?
I'll explain myself later.. but until then classical realism is da shiznits :)
August 16th, 2003, 06:53 PM
np, i'll be looking forward to hearing what your thoughts are on this...nothing has been decided so far :)
August 17th, 2003, 05:00 PM
Ok, now that I have the time to make a decent reply, here goes.
The student gallery at MJAS is not "put on there to impress people who don't really know that much about art". It's simply there because this is what you'll be able to do when you've completed your stay. Saying what Iffy said is basically just saying that ateliers suck.
This is maybe designed for people who want to work as professional painters and portrait artists. But believe me, these people have the trained skill and talent to work as illustrators.
Just to get it straight, the MJAS program is GOOD, it's not illustration but, I mean J.P. Targete studied Painting not illustration (please, somebody correct me if I'm wrong) and he is just an amazing, amazing illustrator.
Ron Lemen (fredflickstone) studied painting at Watt's Atelier and his illustrative works and conceptual art are nothing short of mindblowing!
J.C. Leyendecker was taught the "Classical Academic" way. And he is probably the greatest commercial illustrator of all times.
This all serves to the point, that if you've mastered classical realism, all doors are open. You can always go with an illustration program at some college. But I just wanted to say, that it's not the only way.
Saying that it is bad cause it's Student Gallery only has finished work instead of quick studies is just not right.
I would absolutely love to study there, and would choose it over Sheridan in a heartbeat.
So, now you have my point of view. I hope you take it into consideration when you make your decision. (I hope I'm making sense ;) )
August 17th, 2003, 05:32 PM
Kortez, thanks again for your advice, what you're saying makes complete sense.
So i guess the real question is do i want a more robust foundation to art prior to a career (and be willing to pay for it) OR do i feel that I can move on with the skills i can get from a 1 year update course such as the fundamental program.
Sheridan= 1yr fundamentals + 4yr Bachelor of Applied Arts -Illustration
MJAS & Sheridan= 3-5yr full progam (+optional additional graduate program 1-2 yr on the jobsite) + 4yr Bachelor of Applied Arts - Illustration
MJAS & Seneca College= 3-5yr full progam (+optional additional graduate program 1-2 yr on the jobsite) + Graphic Design 2 yr Seneca College
guess i'll be working the wee hours of the night to pay for all of this :bash:
August 17th, 2003, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by Kortez
J.P. Targete studied Painting not illustration (please, somebody correct me if I'm wrong) and he is just an amazing, amazing illustrator.
Wrong. Illustration, SVA, 1989.
Sheridan's Illustration program has a really good reputation in the field. Contact them and see if they can give you a faculty and alumni list (its too bad they don't have them on their site). Check out the work of the teachers and recent graduates and see if it's the kind of stuff you want to do. That's the only real way to evaluate any program.
August 17th, 2003, 05:36 PM
i sure hope jason manley doesn't see this thread!!! the worst thing you could do is NOT go to that school!!!! damn impressive work and that's the stuff that'll land you the best jobs. i'm sure mr. manley can answer any questions and squash any doubts you may have. as well as set iffy straight. thanks and good luck on your journy! :D
edit: cool link READ THIS ARTICLE (http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/2003/Kirk_Richards/richards1.asp)
August 17th, 2003, 06:04 PM
Ok, thanks for setting that straight Elwell :)
And also, I just read through what I've written in this thread, and I just wanted to apologize to Iffy. I come off really harsh. That was not the intention. Sorry :rolleyes:
August 17th, 2003, 10:41 PM
Good point Capt. My very first impression of MJAS was of surprise and intrigue. It seems every bit worthwhile, hope i can setup a tour soon. The nice thing with it is they are more willing to accept anyone willing to learn as long as you make the comitment.
Good article btw, hadn't read that specific one off the ARC site but it makes alot of sense.
August 18th, 2003, 01:15 PM
Your average student in a typical 19th Century French academy was expected to be able to draw from memory and fill a big canvas with many figures and they all had to look like they were occupying the same space at the same time of day and could interact with each other if they wanted to. Show me one example of a student from MJAS that can do this and I'd have a terrible shock.
Alright how about this...
I grant you there isn't alot of "group" composition, but i don't think that just because it's not a even 50/50 split on the content of his site to judge him on that basis. I would hope that to start off with, students be required to do portraiture first... before large works.
As to the conflict of styles you point out, i agree that it is important to show all attributes to the human condition whenever possible. But that's up to the artist themselves, granted MJAS seems to lean more to an ideal figure in proportion and stance, but that's not to say someone could lean more to a style of their choosing, after studying at MJAS and create a work of art that "suggests flesh and bone under stress" for example.
Thanks Iffy for your thoughts on this, anyone care to respond?
August 22nd, 2003, 01:56 AM
Um, I think you should feel lucky that those guys (Angel academy alumni) typically don't go into illustration because with the draftsmanship skills they develop, they would absolutely dominate. Luckily for many of use, illustration requires quite a few skills that classical painting does not and the fact that illustration painting is going digital helps as well.
I study at the California Art Institute and studied at Watts Atelier before that. Both schools would love to incorporate more of the classical training methods that Angel employs, but they can't due to logistics, real estate, and locale issues. Angel's program is a damn fine program. Ron, and I imagine Manley would be among the first to attest to that.
August 22nd, 2003, 11:43 AM
Um, I think you should feel lucky that those guys (Angel academy alumni) typically don't go into illustration because with the draftsmanship skills they develop, they would absolutely dominate.
I have to disagree with this. Look up Gary Baseman and Brad Holland, they are two of the top illustrators around today. Their draftmanship isn't anywhere near that of Angel grads yet they are at the top of the market. Why? because their work has concept and it isn't boring.
Artist from ateliers have great drawing skills but most of their work has no feeling to it. They draw exactly what they see. They should just take a picture. I've always felt that drawing is about deciding what information to leave in and what to leave out, and to communicate something more to the viewer.
I have drawn from casts a little and I think it is useful to teach accuracy but I wouldn't spend years on it.
Just my opinion.
August 23rd, 2003, 10:15 PM
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.