I love ya Andrew, but you’re innocently naive. Higher education is more bureaucratic and political than most corporations. Politics is a blood sport. It certainly requires an experienced professional, but often times these positions are filled by ‘professional educators.’ The interesting phenomenon with the design/art schools is they are usually led by non designers/artists. It’s more about raising money for the school than anything. Sad but true.
QUOTE="jm2, post: 147817660, member: 899"]I know I've been critical of all the Photoshop renderings i see every day, but this rendition of the old Chrysler Turbine car in bare metal grabbed my attention. View attachment 3114879 [/QUOTE] I see you were impressed by the Burning Man photo from a couple of days back...
LOL! Way back when, I was courted for the position..... I was so flattered!! Thought I was some hot ****! Late in day 2 we got onto the subject of endowments and corporate support.....only then did I fully realize they weren’t looking at my book, they thought maybe I had a hook into Steve’s checkbook. I politely declined our farewell dinner and got sushi instead. Blissful ignorance!
A little something from Jack Baruth; fairly well written with just enough designy stuff to let me sneak it in here.... https://www.hagerty.com/media/opinion/avoidable-contact/avoidable-contact-98-suddenly-its-1976/?utm_source=SFMC&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Tuesday_DailyDriver
Was Guiseppe Delano was one of your alumni? He was part of the 6 person summer group I did at Chrysler in 1977 (Art Center, Long Beach State, Wayne State, Cleveland, Rhode Island, San Jose State). Did he come back to talk with your class while you were there? I think he went to Ford.
No, I'm afraid not. While I was there we were taught by Ed Jucay (spell?) of Ford, Joe Dehner and Joel Bacchus (spell?) from Chrysler. GM sent down Kirk Bennion and Dave Ross. Kirk and Dave put in the most time with us out of all of them. Lol, are you posting his stuff just to aggravate me?
Unfortunately what Andrew point to is how the old Art Center was. Created by an ad man, Tink Adams, and then succeeded by his hand picked choice, Don Kubly, another ad man that had graduated from Art Center. After Kubly came a string of "professional education" leaders that have missed the point of what Art Center has meant. I agree with John that one of the goals of the school leader is the need to find money sources. Yet at the same time what they miss is that their real constituency are the firms that could hire their graduates. It they are not happy with the school and the quality of the graduates then most everything else is irrelevant. There was a time when Chuck Jordan was quite public with his disappointment with Art Center's Trans program and it is quite notable that upon his death he donated to CCS and not ACCD, even though his son is an Art Center alum. Yet, when I read the alumni stuff that comes from Art Center the Trans program seems to be low down on the list of school interest. I suspect that they have forsaken much of the focus on the 2 programs that built the place (advertising and car design) for the sizzle of Hollywood and video gaming. They have even raised the profile of the Fine Arts section of the school which was the red headed step child of my time - where was the paying career path for them? But there was a recognition that art patrons could be a revenue source for the place. Oh well, I am a dinosaur. I remain eternally optimistic for changes that are not likely to occur - GM will realize that they need another VP of Design with the power to lead like Earl and Mitchell, Design will get a seat at the big boy table, and other "not gonna happen" ideas.
Which is a cleaner design Riviera vs the new Genesis X Concept Image Unavailable, Please Login high res https://i.imgur.com/tkhqvw7.jpg
not sure i can tell what I'm looking at. Wheels don't look right on the Buick I'm guessing you are referring to this Genesis? Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login And if that is the case, to my eye it looks more BMW than Buick.
I am encouraged to see a return to a thinner A pillar and roof cross section. For the overall effect it seems to have promise - generally cohesive but I don't think they figured out how to resolve the light bands aft of the front wheels.
elevation says MB with droopy pants than Blocky Beaver... for me, fairly incoherent; not much to like. a bit tape model by Bauhaus
The concept gets nice and curvy at the rear and the back reminds me a tad of the Buick... but I think grill and sides are awful. Just wanted to point out that a design from 1995 with updated lights looks like a cleaner design to me. Video of the concept. youtu.be/hKzBpj8A-nY
I posted a rather harsh review of this car earlier this morning but felt I was being too negative (and I wouldn't want to read something so negative about something I design) so I deleted it. But I agree, it is awful, and looks old.
It is also a big step backwards from what Genesis has been showing recently. I'm kind of surprised they are even showing it, and even more surprised at the positive response it seems to be getting.
Watching Autoline with Jim Hall & Karl Ludvigsen. Both are interesting but I wish Jim Hall would leave some space for Karl...
You You mean the Jim Hall that claims to have gone to Art Center but dropped out before completing a single semester? Or his illustrious career writing for car magazines that wished they got up to third rate?