can self teaching be as good as a proper teacher?

>>2773256
answer is yes, you just have to be talented

Fuck no.

It depends on how you use resources and what you consider "self teaching". Using forums, reading, and watching videos is still ultimately the same as a "proper teacher"... and cheaper than teachers.

>>2773256
yes.

>>2773256
No

>>2773256
yes. you can teach yourself anything if you got the drive.

>>2773258
>>2773263
>>2773283
Conflict

>>2773256
Depends...
If your motivated enough you're going to get there anyway but having a good teacher could speed that process up.
There's enough stuff online that can teach you anything you'd want to know In my experience the majority of teachers are people who achieved little outside the world of academics.

>>2773256
Absolutely not.

>>2773256
Not at all. A proper teacher will keep you from getting stuck in your own mistakes and will help you learn faster than you ever would on your own. But you can make up for it with good work ethic and a lot of studying and practice.

yes you can. if you're not a dumbass.

>>2773256

>Thats what makes art so hard.

>If you're a dabbler or a novice the only thing >you can determine is if you like the piece or >not.

>You cannot tell which decisions made it good >and which made it bad, until youve had a >master point out the possibility space to you >or you have reflected enough upon it on your >own - and this takes a lot of time.

>Producing countless mindless pieces (and >they will be mindless, because you have no >idea what makes art good) will lead you to >stagnating and either quitting altogether (I >dont have what it takes!) or perfecting some >things you're already good at and convincing >yourself you're good while living in a safe >bubble surrounded by people who couldnt >even do that.

Oh and you cant tell if your teacher is actually good if youre just starting out.

Good luck.

>>2773256

Boiling it down to the essence, it is a question of active versus passive.

Studying on your own means that most, if not all input you get is passive and a one way street. You have to go and seek it and what you get depends on what you find. You might find good info, but along the way you may pass a lot of knowledge (especially practical) because you do not know what you're looking for, or you just miss it accidentally. You will stumble around and there's a high chance you make mistakes as you can't identify them.

Studying with a teacher, or at least in a group, is active and dynamic. New info is actively brought to you that is pertinent to your current situation, and has a high possibility to contain knowledge that you would not have found on your own. It is also dynamic as you and your teacher/group can interact, leading to new findings. There is a much smaller change of making mistakes, because there is someone who can point out potential pitfalls so you can avoid them.

I'm reminded of a comic drawn by Francois Schuiten, I believe, about a man who wants to build a flying machine.
He is ridiculed by his scientific peers, and leaves angrily, vowing to return only when he has build an actual flying machine. For 40 years he toils on his contraptions, until finally he succeeds. Old and grey, he returns triumphantly to the science academy in his airplane. But he does not realize that science has progressed faster than he could, and as he approaches the city, the sky is filled with dozens of various advanced airplanes.

>needing a middle man to teach you something
>not just learning yourself

>>2773256
It depends how much psycho-babble-bullshit you have to cut through with any given teacher. Finding a giving teacher in any area of the Arts can be challenging.

>>2773402
>needing a car to get somewhere
>not just walking there with your own legs
The question wasn't if it's possible to learn without an instructor, the question was whether it was as effective as having a proper instructor.

It isn't.
Having an actual, good teacher will improve the rate at which you learn.

good luck finding a teacher though