Talent

>>2798360
>we alk know

uh oh, someone wasn't blessed with talent.

there are already other threads on talent & stuff, please post there

>>2798360
talent is just a head start

If only OP had a talent for trolling.

>>2798360
There's is a difference between "doesn't exist" and "doesn't matter".
It exists, but it shouldn't concern anyone. It never made anyone famous nor did it ever discourage anyone from becoming great.

Everyone knows talent has nothing to do with your art. Its all about the amount of ligaments in your arm.

>Any retard can become a Michelangelo or a Mozart, you just have to work hard :^)

/ic/'s trouble is generally taking a valid premise and exaggerating it to the point of parody.

"Lack of talent isn't an excuse", valid, becomes "Talent doesn't exist", which is really just silly because natural affinities to skills are evident in basically every field.

The point is that lacking that natural affinity isn't why you fail, it's your lack of discipline to cultivate a skill. Because some guy just 'gets' forms, or perspective, or colour theory, or all of the above while you don't doesn't mean you can't learn them. Likewise, this affinity doesn't mean they didn't still need to train it.

"Raw talent" still needs to be cultivated and polished. Everyone but someone with literal disabilities is still capable of cultivating and polishing skill, though.

>>2798377
Because Mozart is the only composer anyone knows right? I don't need to be Mozart I just need to be good enough.

>>2798360
Good thing I have talent then. Must be the reason I'm able to git gud while my friends still suck.

>>2798360
What you call talent is subjective, some artists don't create for the same reasons, and don't have the same influences. If you go in a atelier you'll find different artists with different style, but talent doesn't exist. Stop searching excuses for being bad

>>2798407
and work is not the only thing, you also have to be in a good situation to create : Some people work better together, some people like to work alone, your country/town will influence you and your art, ect...

>>2798409
So talent is the word that ignorant/naïve artist use to name the things that affect their art discreetly

File: nigger.jpg (33KB, 1196x129px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1196x129px

>>2798377
Same thing with Michelangelo, he was sent to train under one of the best sculpters of his time when he was 13

>>2798413
Sure their education must have played a big part in their success, but they weren't the only artists to receive such a training and yet they are the ones who are still remembered today.
Don't get me wrong, I never said talent is what made the difference between decent artists and good artists. However, it's clearly what differentiates the good from the very best and you would have to be deluded to think anyone could make it that far under the same conditions.

People who believe in talent are just people who want to give themselves a poor excuse not to work toward their goals. Its one thing to be a loaf, but its another thing to give yourself reasons to be a loaf.

Actual truth coming through, make way faggots.

In everything that can amount to any success of a person's activities, be it art, bodybuilding, comedy, or whatever, there are factors that can each vary within the individual:

>Base ability
Genetic baseline: mental capabilities, dexterity, eyesight, etc.

-Trainability
Not everyone who starts out at the same level and ability acquires the same amount of proficiency/results from the same amount of training/practice.
Some are quick learners, some gain muscle easily, others less so.

-Potential
The level where the person's limits are.
Very hard to reach for everyone, arguably one's abilities can ony converge, come very close to the actual limit but never quite reach it.
Still, just like not everyone can get to olympic levels; no matter how much one given person tries, there will probably be someone else who can do things faster, with more creative thought, etc., even if both are at a level of extremely long-practiced mastery.


Feel free to copypaste into shitty "muh talent" threads.

>>2798433
Also couldn't bother with proper meme arrowing, I'm sure you d/ic/ks can figure it out.

>>2798360
A talent for intelligent studying is far more beneficial than a talent for artwork itself. No matter how talented you are, you still have to learn the skills you need, no one starts with them.

>>2798360
time to stop crying and do some work, anon.

>>2798360
>Don't fool yourself guys, we alk know there is such thing as "talent" or however you wanna call it.

Do you think Kron and Sakimichan have talent? If yes, then your standards of what counts as a talented individual is ridiculously low and pretty much everyone has some form of talent. If no, then that kinda proves you don't need talent at all in order to be successful.

File: 1476811579579.jpg (97KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 900x600px

>>2798360
>I believe in magic

File: world-first-dog-art-exhibition-dominic-wilcox-london-12.jpg (77KB, 700x461px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 700x461px

>>2798360
Talent is like beauty, it only exists in the eye of the beholder.

>>2798462
Everyone probably does have some kind of talent or knack or whatever you want to call it for SOME thing. That doesn't mean they are objectively the very best person in existence at that particular thing because there will always be someone better than the next person but it's still a useful term.

>>2798377
>any retard with a composer dad will become composer at age 8

FTFY

Since when 4chan became a board full of normies that believe in talent?

>>2798512

>predispositions to certain skills are magic

Haha recreational arguing

>git gud
>"wow that's god's gift anon"
talentfags need to fuck off

File: 1446245562023.png (237KB, 444x522px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 444x522px

Talent is real
Existing of talent was confirmed by thousand art teachers
Repin had talent and everyone in his art school knew about it
Existing of talent is FACT
Happy New Year and reminder that you never gonna make it

>>2798576
dude. i'm good with being just a decent artitst, i'm not looking to become second repin.

File: image.jpg (53KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x333px

>>2798360
>Talent exists
>No, YOU feel insecure!

Hahaha.

Faggot.

>>2798576
>art teachers can't be wrong

>>2798360
Talent only matters for the last 5%.
Proof? All those people who worked hard and made it.

>>2798576
>"Art teachers have talent"
>"But art school is a waste of money lol"

Get your shit together /ic/

File: 543654765756765653643.jpg (192KB, 1224x946px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1224x946px

>>2798580
Yeah, dude. Top tier teachers are wrong, sure.
>>2798589
>But art school is a waste of money lol
Most people in /ic/ are US. And basically most of the unironically retarded as I can see. They can't even find good art school in their own towns. Or trying to blame art education in US because they choose shit art school

>>2798609
pretty sure you never talked to a top tier teacher then
Read this : >>2798407
>>2798409
>>2798412

>>2798562
I'm not sure I get your point anon. You're saying you don't believe in talent, so you DO believe any retard with a composer dad will become composer at age 8?

File: 09358908345.png (487KB, 1350x566px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 1350x566px

Okay, now back to drawing.

>>2798622
this

>>2798622
yeah reading that very passage settled the whole talent issue for me.

still, there's survival bias into play on who gets to say what on talent

>>2798622
Is that Robert Henry or something?

>>2798612
>pretty sure you never talked to a top tier teacher then
Watts
Vilppu
Steve Huston

File: 4326543765487657657575.jpg (87KB, 1720x221px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1720x221px

>>2798622

>>2798637
Boring American artists, no wonder why they think (if that's what you're sayin) that talent exist kek

>>2798642
And you're a foreign idiot that just learned about the word talent and decided to argue about it for three hours? Go draw you faggot.

>>2798653
That's not true, so that's not a good argument. But I know that you would be offended :
The fact is that we are talking about art, not only drawing. I don't want to do a lot of researches since nobody needs to to explain why talent isn't real. But here is what I see :
When I look for those three artists on google I find god level drawing, cool, today I discover something new
But I don't know why I have to explain this to someone, but there is not only drawing in art
So get some art history lessons, you'll learn what is fine art (not telling that those 3 artists are not good drawer/teacher, but that if you want to talk about art you're totally missing the point here)

>>2798653
>>2798637
+ what they do and why we like them is mostly beautiful and the fruit of hard work and study, not really deep and inspired, so stop naming them when you want to talk about talent

File: 1478340292331.png (517KB, 600x958px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 600x958px

>talent exists
>I wasn't blessed with it
>I know this because I've been drawing 30 minutes a day for one year and I still haven't gotten good
>woe is me

Ok, so stop drawing and fuck off. What do you hope to accomplish by convincing a bunch of anons that they may or may not have been gifted by Gosh with the innate ability to make marks on surfaces?

>>2798642
Top bait.

File: 1459847392599.jpg (11KB, 178x200px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 178x200px

>>2798664
But that's also because all I see about them is drawing, I'm not telling they're not good

>>2798462
They do have tremendous luck though. They do it at the right place, the right time and to the right kind of people. That's how they made it.

>>2798663
You missed point. Modern generation denies existence of talent. Like kids ITT. All people are SAME! And other social justice bullshit. It's just rediculous how some anons are delusional, especially from US.

>>2798670
Either way, you cannot prove that someone is talented or not when they're just starting out (first 5-10 years). Therefore it's not worth thinking about.

>>2798670
>Modern generation denies existence of talent.

What the fuck does this even mean? idk what the "modern generation" is supposed to be but whenever normies talk about artists it's all about how talented they are, not about how hard they work

Anyway some people have an easier time grasping concepts, there's talent in art in the same way there's talent in fields such as theoretical mathematics. Some people simply have an easier time making sense of a subject, either due to a natural affinity, interest which pushes them to put in more effort, or simply the way they learn being more tailored to the subject.

File: workhard.jpg (200KB, 1344x756px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1344x756px

>>2798437

>>2798656
>art history lessons
>fine art

but both of these things are bullshit, anon.

>>2798615
In this site, the word "retard" can be changed for "dude, lad, undesirable cunt, nigger, boi, boy, fag, faggot..." and so on.

Obviously mentally handicapped people can't become anything on their own.

As a side note: All the "talented" people you know has grown on an environment that makes their skills develop faster than an average person.

It's not called "talent". It's called "I have training since I could afford it".

It takes 7 years of consistent practice to master any skill. A kid that starts at age 3 (the age at which intellectual development starts) will become a master at age 10 and considering he will not stop, he will keep practicing until he dies at age 30.

Tl:dr If you haven't started at 3 years old, you will never make it.

This thread has encouraged me to lie about everything. The next time someone asks how long I've been doing art, I'm going to say I just started and it must just be a natural talent I was born with.

>>2798848
Beginning of your downfall. Lie enough and you'll eventually begin to believe it and then once you reach your limit, you'll cry out in tears about how terrible your talent is.

>>2798622
>>2798626
>>2798632
>>2798636

This needs to be sticky'd.

As I mentioned in another thread the art world has a huge issue with talent when Richard Schmid has to start a book on painting by addressing insecurities and talents.

Fucking cunts.

PS. It's Alla Prima by Richard Schmid

>>2798862
I think it's forgivable that artists have to deal with this because art has so much to do with one's subjective perception and it's so difficult to make. It's part of the curriculum to be confident enough in your own learning method.

>>2798862
Richard Schmid did't write this book you know?

>>2798963
Shut up and get back to drawing you new year's stoner.

Prove that talent exists. Or at least define it in the context of art before you start trying to convince everyone it exists or doesn't.

There was a previous thread with this exact same topic where this same question was brought up and no one bothered to answer.

What is talent? Is it being able to understand concept quickly and easily? having a good sense of form and how to put it to paper? Being very observant by nature? I doubt I'll get a real answer here since you've said nothing about what talent is or produced any concrete evidence it exists.

The problem with that survivors bias argument is that you can't apply it to art in terms of having skill and then call it a day like you've won the argument. Why did some people fail? What went wrong along the way? How can this be avoided?

I probably won't get an answer beyond yet another meme (like in the previous thread) but I'm hoping to learn something.

>>2798702
Well art history teach you were you got all this inspiration, because everything got a start somewhere somehow, and makes you understand why we create
And some art are objectively good

Talent exists, but isn't something that comes when you're born, but something you gather when you study

>>2799122
Good luck trying to persuade people with that.
They'll be all like
>W-well that's just your opinion and not the talent I was talking about

>>2799005
People fail because of their perception. Sometimes you can't just remove your weaknesses, you have to work along them so they dont have that bad influence on you. And thinking too much about what you can do without doing it.

It's all fault of one's perception. If we remove our ego while we are learning, we can achieve anything.

>>2798360
As Bob Ross once said, "Talent is pursued interest." I'd say the "talent" most of us are familiar with is just passion that we use to develop skills early on in our lives or phycological development. I'd say that natural passion IS talent.

File: 14032098114.gif (283KB, 500x274px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 500x274px

>>2798360
I used to not believe in talent, but then I realized that I'm better than most people that practice twice as much as me.

What people think of as talent is just intelligence.
Smart people can learn skills faster than stupid people. ("Work smarter, not harder")
The simpleton could still become a great artist, it will just take a hell of a lot more effort than someone who's not a dumbass.
And then there are some people who are just borderline retarded and have no ability for analysis and self-reflection. (eg. >>2768545)

In short, if you're not intellectually deficient, you can become a great artist given enough work.

>>2799125
Yes but whatever, people...

File: laughingwitches.jpg (114KB, 512x383px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 512x383px

>>2798512
>he doesn't believe in magic

>>2798670
That's just your very own strawman though. Most people don't make the point that talent doesn't exist, but that it does not matter because you do not need to be the greatest artist who ever lived in order to be successful. And you do not need talent to become decently competent at the fundamentals. so for what reason do you have to worry about talent? Yeah, you'll never be Sargent or Repin or Michelangelo, but thousands upon thousands of highly successful and influential artists won't be either.

>>2798676
>Theoretical mathematics
Thanks for showing you have no idea about what you are talking.

>>2799485
>Most people don't make the point that talent doesn't exist
Except for most of the posters ITT.

There are some people in this thread who don't get butthurt whenever they read the word "talent" and actually knows what that word means.

>>2799235
This guy is one of that example.
When you compare the word "talent" with "passion" and "interest" and not some superpower, it means that you actually understand the essence of this word.

I never understood why people can't deal with that fact that being talented for something actually exists.

>>2798360
ok, quit then.

due to life circumstances, maybe some people need to have more talent before art is worth it to them, eg. someone with chronic fatigue might need to be able to get good with less practice for art to be worth the investment to them.

if youve genuinely tried putting the time you're willing to put in in, and genuinely tried to debug your improvement process, and you're still not getting better over a time period of, say, a year, AND you don't like to do art unless you're good at it... you can just quit.

yeah it's not fair that some people learn faster. and it's not fair that people blame people who don't achieve their dreams as if achieving dreams just comes down to choice. people will push that narrative because being a hardass with themselves makes them work hard. but for others it will just make them miserable....

dunno where im going with this. whatever. accept that people are generally clueless, and also that being good at something is fun but if youre unhappy enough that youre mad abt lack of art talent, like, maybe theres other things to tackle to make yourself happier

>>2798360
>talent exists
What conceivable fucking reason do you believe that some were blessed with something that others weren't?
>or you feel insecure because you lack of it
Oh the irony. I love when retards suddenly use 'insecure' like they know what they're talking about.

>>2798568
I'd say its for the best. It's not the liveliest board, after all.

What a sad state of the arts that talent is even a concern.
Luckily for all of us, Scientists at UCLA Berkely have just discovered a talent -linked organelle dubbed the Midichlorian. It's function previously unknown, the only useful predictor of midichlorian activation appears to be the number of ellipses drawn in perspective by the subject.

Talent exists.

It's obvious, no matter for how long and what studying techniques you use, most artists will never reach a master level.

Talent isn't something that makes you automatically good, but it boosts your learning curve.

>>2799934
>What conceivable fucking reason do you believe that some were blessed with something that others weren't?
Yes, why would you even ask that? The same way some people are tall while others short, some can be smart while others not. Every person has a different capacity.

Do you really think everyone can actually do anything with enough and proper training?

It's possible for everyone to be a decent artist, but the difference to a talented person will be obvious from start.

>>2799998
> a master level

According to which standards can someone be considered a "master?

>>2798566

Aptitude certainly exists among other environmental factors, but there is no easy way through to being a consummate artist.

>>2800007
Doesn't matter, because with enough practice, every single person in the world can equally get as good as the supposed masters we study today.

File: 60344934_p0.jpg (2MB, 2140x2851px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2140x2851px

"Each Buddha kills the Buddha"
逢佛殺佛
Thinking about the Buddha as an entity or deity is delusion, not awakening. One must destroy the preconception of the Buddha as separate and external before one can become internally as their own Buddha.

replace buddha with talent

>talent doesnt exist, everyone can be like Mozart, Michelangelo, Da Vinci

Yet nobody is even close to those

People in this thread are insecure because deep inside them they actually realize talent exist but they dont have it. At least not for drawing.

>>2798360
Ok.

>>2798425
that's all ok and stuff but yknow, most people here want to work commercially. you will hardly be able to be remembered as Mozart or michellangelo on a job where you produce work for general consumption. your artistic freedome is limited and your own vision doesn't matter

>10+ years of guitar.
>Hardwork, blood, sweat and pain.
>Someone calls me "talented".
>Sudden urge to kill.
>[spoiler]Leave music behind and replace it with visual arts.[/spoiler]

Best decision of my laif; music is overrated as fuck.

>>2801739
You do know that talented is synonymous with "skilled" or "adept", yeah? Seems rather silly to get upset over a compliment.

>>2798377
Beethoven was 100x better than Mozart and he achieved it with hardwork while being deaf because his father beat him up for not being Mozart.

>>2798562
Not believing in talent = social science = reddit = normies

fuck off

>>2798704
This is some flat earth, young earth creationist-level opinion right here. And like the above, you are immune to argument.

File: Bob+Ross+on+Talent[1].png (381KB, 954x740px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 954x740px

>>2801772
I didn't actually get upset, I'm not Sir Autismo. Talent is not synonymous with "skilled" or "adept", there are other ideas involved; remember that language is a product of customs, and most people don't use "talent" to simply mean "skilled".

File: 14650221_574495592734381_6833525274356213273_n.jpg (80KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 720x960px

The way people argue about talent and denying it's exsistence clearly tell you how insecure they are.

They know VERY GOOD that even if they put 10.000, 50.000 or 100.000 hours in drawing, you still need that 1% which makes difference between skilled artist and talented artist with strong skill.

Is JungGi Kim just skilled?
Cmon guys... Don't pretend just to feel secure

>talent doesn't exist
Not true
>talent do exist
Also not true

All the knowledge you have about his world is gained from certain sources. And talent, which is an unique attribute of a person, is a mixture of various knowledge he/she gained from those sources. You'll never 'become someone' because you don't have their 'talent'.

Your talent is developed by yourself and only yourself can truely understand what does 'talent' means.

tl;dr --
'talent' is a mixture of knowledges you learnt from your past.

>talent doesn't exist
>Check all threads on /ic and can't find a SINGLE anon with amazing work but notsobedatall at best

Good luck on quiting art /ic when you realize that it's not just about hard work and hours you put in

>>2801790

You'll never make it, untalented waste of sperm :^)

>>2801894
I guess that 1% isn't exactly talent, but not being an asshat and knowing how to use your 10.000 hours of drawing.
You won't get better by drawing pokemon fanart.

Left: 2008
Right: 2015

File: lasahido.png (3MB, 1957x1389px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1957x1389px

Lasahido

Left: 2008
Right: 2015

>>2798433
>Comparing highly complex mental activities like art and comedy to basic do-it-everyday activities like bodybuilding

>>2798862
>Alla Prima

Fuck I wish I had that book

>>2798566

It's called "not being a retard/lazy faggot".

But yes, some people simply don't have predisposition to discipline. That's why they never accomplish anything despite trying.

>>2798360
It's not that talent doesn't exist or is just another word for hard work... Obviously, talent does real. But the catch is: talent without hard work is just as useless as hard work without talent, even more so to be honest.


And that applies everywhere. As a graduate student I have seen first hand how far retards with dedication and a rock solid work ethic can get (they can get PhDs, that's for damn sure). But the talented, crazy intelligent guy with no work ethic that's lazy as fuck? Not gonna make it. (I know, cause that's me).

>>2803597
what is this suppose to show? 8 years is substantial time to get from A to B with some work

>>2803710

>Talent exists
>I am talented

Dunno mate.. talented people mostly don't even know they are talented if they suck. Their talent shows when they hit some level of sucecess

File: Language is hard.png (28KB, 696x462px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 696x462px

>>2801809
>Talent is not synonymous with "skilled" or "adept", there are other ideas involved
Oh?
>remember that language is a product of customs,
I am well aware of linguistic drift, though you may want to remember that talent can be inate, or something trained, depending on the context it is used in.
>and most people don't use "talent" to simply mean "skilled".
Unless they specifically say something along the lines of "naturally talented" it cannot be assumed to be either meaning.

>>2798360
The only talent I have is hyperflexibility
you're born with talent like said hyperflexibility, or other things that I can't think of. nobody is born knowing how to write or draw right out of the womb therefore art can not be a talent. I was able to dislocate my leg as young as can be, therefore it is a talent.

>>2798360
There is such a thing as talent. Wanna know what it is? it is that thing that keeps artists out of the cringe/autistic improvement threads. people in those threads don't have talent and thus spend years with the same shitty style and never learn how to draw because they lack the common sense to see better and improve over time towards an objective good taste.

everything else is perfecting the craft.

>>2798360
Do you think Kobe Bryant got good at playing basketball because he had some sort of magical talent?
No he practiced like a mad cunt everyday.

I don't know why retards like you come here just to post dumb useless shit like this.

Consider offing yourself OP.

>>2804466

Talent is NATURAL APTITUDE OR SKILL. You are mad because you don't have it.

Do you think you would be as good as Kobe at basket iclf you would put THE SAME amount of hours in training?

>>2804735
>Do you think if you spend 20 years training would you be as good as Kobe Bryant?

If you're not a handicap, lazy cunt, then yes.

>>2804765

Do you even have an a glimpse of idea how many hundreds of people on this planet trains basketball for more than 20 years and don't come even close to his level?

File: 5597534+_611fe6195969299ecff2a5b947c9810c.jpg (10KB, 275x183px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 275x183px

>>2804776

Yeah.

Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'neal, Will Chamberlain, LeBron James, Dirk Nowitzki....

You're a fucking retard if you ever think real life works like.

>Oh, I'm bored. I'm gonna play fucking basketball.
>Hey, this is easy.
>Hey I'm GOAT and I'm just started out! I must be talented!

>Inb4 natural traits, /pol/ science, genetics, birth traits...
pic related.

>>2798670
Japan way of achieving things is basically deny existence of talent and work as hard as you can, and this mindset is stronger than in any other nation, especially US. And you hardly can call them adherents of SJW movement, kek.

>>2798360
Couldn't agree more OP.

Cancelled my schoolism membership, sold my tablet, and threw away all of my sketchbooks.

Such a waste of time. And for what? It's completely unnecessary and serves no purpose.
Art is not needed, especially in today's society where the intellect, personality, and face reigns supreme.

To be honest, the "artistic lifestyle" seems almost like a childish endeavour at this point, and I don't mean any disrespect, but it seems like the most serious artists (asides from guys who are legit conceptartists/illustrators/porn artists but they represent a very low % of dedicated lifters) are also the people with nothing else going on in their lives.
I know this was true with me, I was biggest and most serious about drawing when I was still in uni, working only 15 hours a week, and pretty much just plucking around all the time, going out, with no real life.
To all you kids out there who are getting sucked into the comerical art , try to stop yourself.
So long as you have and maintain decent facial aesthetics, you'll be fine.
Art just not worth it.

Cheers.

>talent exists
>Countless contradictory definitions of what talent actually is
>Everyone who doesn't believe in this concept that hasn't even been properly defined is insecure

For the sake of argument, lets assume talent is real in some way. You'll never know until you try.

Then there's the fact that people learn differently and drawing 10 000 bad drawings mindlessly for several years won't make you a master, talent or no.

In some environments, someone will completely fail and appear retarded while in another, they will advance at an alarming rate.

There are so many factors one must take into account when learning how to draw well especially when you're self taught.

Just because someone has a good sense of form doesn't mean they can see value properly, or that they have a good sense of composition.

What does talent actually mean? I'd like a specific definition instead of just "drawing well" Especially when there are different skills involved depending on what you're drawing (accurate copying and then drawing from imagination or deciding on a subject's colour scheme are not the same though they are related)

File: 1481137689766.gif (295KB, 700x704px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 700x704px

>>2804846

I love forced memes!