The IT stuff I learned in college 30 years ago would only be good for some kind of computer museum. I think many young people today are working well outside of what they thought their degree would bring. One friend's son has a degree in political science, but drives a tow truck for a living. He is married, they just bought a house, and they have a kid on the way. He makes okay money, and has more job security than everybody I know in the IT industry. My two nephews have degrees that don't seem to be worth much. One has a "Film Studies" and the other a "Public Relations" degree. One is working as a city clerk, the other is basically just doing the Facebook page for a IT startup company here in Detroit. They both seem pretty disappointed in what they are doing. I keep telling them that many people go thru that. Heck, my dream was to be a professional hockey player. The closes I got to that was getting to drive the Zamboni at a local rink for a second job.

I've known several people who were film majors and almost all of them had a very unrealistic rosy-colored view of what that really entailed. Most of them thought they were going to be the next Spielberg or Tarantino without realizing that for every film student who makes it big in Hollywood, there are probably a few thousand students who never make it and starve and end up waiting tables at restaurants.

Anyway, it's my firm belief that if someone truly has the artistic and inherent talents to be a film maker, they don't need to go to a formal school to teach them.

There is a city close by here called Allen Park. About 10 years ago a bunch of Hollywood people conned the Mayor into a grand scheme of making an old Ford complex into a giant movie production studio. They had everybody duped into thinking it was going to be great for the city and that there were going to be many, many good jobs in the film industry right here in little old Downriver Michigan. Well, that all fell to pieces. The city lost millions, and the area is one giant abandoned industrial site. The citizens got screwed. Most people were against it, but the mayor and the city council took the bait.

So, my nephew's plan was to be a part of this great artistic en devour. His one friend actually went into huge debt by going to a film school in New York (I think NYU). He now works at a Credit Union call center making $11.00 an hour. He is poor as a church mouse.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-08-23/the-movie-flop-that-sank-a-michigan-town

Actually, i think there is a lot about the process that film school teaches, having known a few people who've gone to the UCLA film school. Editing, camera techniques, how to use cuts and wipes, etc. I think a lot of that can be picked up over time, but I also think it saves time and makes it more complete when taught in a structured, focused way.

But probably more important than all of that are the potential connections you make when in one of those major film schools. Look at Spielberg, Lucas, Coppola, etc. - they all met in film school and were able to help each other once one got a break.

Oh please don't think that. I have simply been extremely fortunate. I was pointing out that I wasn't an aero engineer. I loved college after I changed my major from Business Admin to Political Science. Another posted he went to Columbus State, I went to Valdosta State (back when it was still merely a College not yet a University).

You bring up some great points. Either way though, someone shouldn't go to film school unless they are fully prepared to eat only Ramen noodles for a couple of years.

Must an artist suffer to truly be brilliant ? Or are manic people really more creative ?

Exactly. And have a backup plan. Going to film school can help gain skills and contacts, but it's still really unlikely that someone will make movies once they graduate.

First degree was in aerospace engineering.
Eventually ended up doing road vehicle aerodynamics and thermal analysis.

My career started February 9th, 1978. I haven't *worked* a day since. Love what you do, do what you love, or, don't do it.

True artistic endeavors require extreme sacrifice due to the time, failure, learning and trying again that is required to eventually succeed. The moniker "starving artist" is a true one.

No.

Most of what we consider to be the greatest artists of all time were quite wealthy during most of their careers, if they didn't actively squander it.

A good artist can make a decent living.

It's the mediocre guys that wind up drawing caricatures of tourists off the French Quarter or Central Park.

Aye good artists can do well, Dart, but it quite often takes them years of trying and failing, if not decades, to finally turn a profit.

I can just imagine how strange and fickle the modern art (paint and canvas) market is these days. I wonder if you have to hang out in the village, drink Absinthe, and cut your ear off to create "a buzz" about your work. I know nothing of that world. Picaso's work just gives me a headache.

Picasso is easier to understand when looking at the development of his art (sort it by timeline).
Figurative art, particularly with central perspective, was in a crisis at the end of the 19th century - because photography took over, as far as naturalistic, accurate reproduction of a certain image was concerned. No painter could hope to draw a better portrait than a simple photo did, so what was the point of the profession of a painter? Shouldn't they just give up?

Over time different answers were found, one of them cubism, the other abstract art.
Understanding this context goes a long way to help appreciate the work of artists at the time.

Cubism in particular was the concept to get rid of the idea that pictures had to conform to perspective (as developed during the renaissance period). It was an attempt to show multiple sides of the same object in a single picture, to unwrap the object's enveloping cube; also, a certain abstraction of objects/faces took place. Later, Picasso was more and more influenced by African tribal art, and drifted more and more towards abstraction. But if you look at his early pictures, it's pretty clear that the man could paint and draw; he just chose to move away from figurative art.

Mozart and Wagner come to mind. Both were super irresponsible with money.

Started out with an eye on Aerospace Engineering with hopes to work for Grumman and the F-14. The industry killed that idea so I switched to Mechanical Engineering with an emphasis on fluid mechanics. Finished with my BSME. Been in the industry designing mahcinery and components, and for nearly a quarter of a century have been designing machinery for briquetting and compacting. So think of me when you have your BBQ or fill your water softeners with salt pellets--I may have designed the machine that made that briquet, heh.

v6,
boNes

You sound like one of those smart "math people" bones. In other words, the complete opposite of me.

Finished High School (Technical focus) as a "Chemical Engineer", never got an academic degree. 17 years IT Jobs since, completely self-thought, and now going to work as a part time Counselor (again a non-academic education of 2.5 years).

Interesting how we have a lot of quite successful people here who never pursued a degree. OTOH pretty cool to hear that for example OG can't just shoot you from a mile away, he can explain to you the historical military reason for doing so too.

95% of what I know about IT I also learned on the job.


IMHO, with very few exceptions, most certifications and degrees in the IT field are just bullcrap and unnecessary.