>tfw he does not understand you cannot learn a general skill

>>3062731
true

File: 20106378_1506860342669989_6725428826763858282_n.jpg (133KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 960x720px

>>3062731
last two are retarded.

talent does exist, unfortunatly. Einstein was talented. leonardo davinci was too.
ramanujan was too.

>>3062733
>talent does exist
proof?

>>3062733
The last one is true though. Robert Beverly Hale says the same thing in the book Drawing Lessons from Great Masters.

There's no proof talent exists.

Children are maybe predisposed to an interest, or gravitate towards something they like. Reinforced from an early age, it's really easy to mistake this for talent.

So, really, 'talent' is just an early inclination towards something, which is then given extra attention and practiced more.

You would've called me mfing talented at PlayStation because I was clocking games before the age of 6. I'm not amazing at games by any stretch today, but I was insanely good for a child because I started young and loved it.

>>3062733
They weren't talented. They were smart.
That's all talent is and all it ever has been.

How would you define "talent"? Why doesn't it exist?

>>3062911
The most talented artists are not necessarily the most intelligent. A certain level of intelligence is important but the primary component of talent is superior intuition; a trait that is impossible to quantify but has very real effects on everything from one's rate of improvement to how nuanced one's use of detail is. Taste and intuition do not stem directly from intelligence or hard work, but the artist who possesses all of these will excel above his peers.

File: 1498342224059.jpg (302KB, 1588x820px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 1588x820px

>>3062731
>tfw he does not understand you cannot learn a general skill like "drawing" or "painting" just like you dont become a doctor but you become a surgeon, cardiologist or dermatologist and you have to specialize whether its in concept art, fine art, animation or illustration
Nobody thinks this, besides terms like painter and surgeon are just broad categories, a surgeon that specialises in heart surgery is a heart surgeon but he's still a surgeon
>tfw he does not understand you can literally use any proportions you like.
Only extreme beginners think this, any anatomy book will tell you in the introduction that these are just ideal/average proportions and real people have variation
>tfw he is trying to learn skeletal anatomy from pictures and not from real bones
An anatomy book can teach you much more about anatomy with annotated pictures than buying yourself a skeleton. Pictures and drawings can provide better examples of important artists elements in the structure of them
>tfw he thinks talent is a real thing
Nobody thinks this, it's in the first chapter of the sticky
>tfw he doesn't understand you cannot draw well from life until you can draw from imagination
They go hand in hand, you have to draw from both in your life if you want to be good, you can't master one entirely and then move onto the next


UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

I have a lot to say about this, but I don't want to say it the wrong way.

It seems like people think of the word "talent" as a euphemistic/agnostic term for "magic" or "touched by God," -- it stands for a special greatness that not any generic person with high enough intelligence can achieve. Naturally, people who do not have a fondness for flowery ideals reject the notion of something that lies beyond the limits of intelligence, supernatural or not.

I could be wrong.

I'm legitimately interested in why people would say there's no such thing as talent. I'm confident in the hunch a wrote out above, and yet I get the feeling I'd be surprised what people really think.

>>3063025
>I'm legitimately interested in why people would say there's no such thing as talent
I think that some people feel like acknowledging that there are factors outside of an individual's control that influence success devalues personal effort.

>>3062731
What happens when you start believing your own words, OP?

>>3063025
/ic/ is just being socially inept

When people say 'talent' they just mean 'good'

"Wow you're so talented!"
= "wow you're so good"
=/= "wow you didn't work hard at that at all you were born with it"

They don't even actually care about how you got your skills they just want you to draw their family portrait for $5

>>3062737
>>3062894
Intelligence. logic,understanding,self-awareness,learning,emotional knowledge,planning,creativity, and problem solving. Intelligence is hereditary, but it wont develope if it wont be exercised. Same with visualization. Spatial intelligence is a thing. It is hereditary. For instance some people mostly think in pictures, some in words. Those who think in words have harder time fully visualizing three dimentional objects than those who think in pictures.
Spatial intelligence can be trained, but some people have a head start. And if those people with a head start wont train, tgey wont make any progress.

If you are so fucking stupid that you have talk about talent in 2017, when it was already proved wrong many, many times in various threads, books or whatever, then no wonder you are such fucking losers. Seriously, why do you keep bringing those irrelevant topics? Either newfags or literal retards.

How can you not believe in talent when it's so obviously around you? I've met artists and musicians so far ahead of the rest of their peers it was a joke, and every art class of any kind has the two or three top students who are actually artists and then all the average students behind them. This whole 'THERES NO SUCH THING AS TALENT' sounds like pc shit to make people feel better about their mediocrity.

>>3063240
[citation needed]

>>3063247
>another brainlet thinks that skilled people are good just because they are talented, not because they actually put more hours into their craft

How can you be so stupid?

File: a_genius_of_hard_work.gif (117KB, 390x518px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 390x518px

>>3063247
>This whole 'THERES NO SUCH THING AS TALENT' sounds like pc shit to make people feel better about their mediocrity.

No. The people who believe that talent exists, usually use it as an excuse for mediocrity. Not the other way around. They believe that "talented" people were just born with it, and that they had it easy.
>i'm not talented that's why i'm shit.

It is true that different people have a different levels of aptitude at learning different things. But that only gives people a headstart, and that distance can be shortened or even closed with hard work and determination.

>We first asked the professors at the music academy to identify students who had the potential to have careers as international soloists—the very upper tier of professional violinists. These were thesuperstars-in-waiting, the students who intimidated all their classmates. The professors came up with fourteen names. Of those, three were not fluent in German—and thus would be difficult to interview —and one was pregnant and wouldn’t be able to practice in her normal manner. That left us with ten “best” students—seven women and three men. The professors also identified a number of violin students who were very good but not superstar-good. We chose ten of them and matched them with the first ten by age and sex. These were the “better” students. Finally, we selected another ten age- and sex-matched violinists from the music-education department at the school. These students would most likely end up as music teachers, and while they were certainly skilled musicians when compared to the rest of us, they were clearly less skilled than the violinists in either of the other two groups. Many of the music teachers had unsuccessfully applied to be admitted to the soloist program and then had been accepted into the music-teacher program. This was our “good” group, which gave us three groups that had achieved very different levels of performance: good, better, and best. We also recruited ten middle-aged violinists from the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra (now the Berlin Philharmonic) and the Radio-Symphonie-Orchester Berlin, two orchestras with international reputations. The music teachers at the academy had told us that their best students were likely to end up performing in one of these orchestras or in ensembles of similar quality elsewhere in Germany; thus the violinists from these orchestras served as a look to the future. Our goal was to understand what separated the truly outstanding student violinists from those who were merely good.

>>3062733
>>3062911
>>3063022
>>3063266
so many unacknowledged dubs

>>3063272
>To look for these differences, we interviewed each of the thirty student violinists in our study in great detail. We asked them about their musical histories,when they started studying music, who their teachers were, how many hours a week they spent in solitary practice at each age, what competitions they’d won, and so on. We asked them for their opinions on how important various activities were in improving their performance—practicing alone, practicing in a group, playing alone for fun, playing in a group for fun, performing solo, performing in a group, taking lessons, giving lessons, listening to music, studying music theory, and so on. We asked them how much effort these various activities required and how much immediate pleasure they got while they were doing them. We asked them to estimate how much time they’d spent on each of these activities during the previous week. Finally, because we were interested in how much time they’d spent on practice over the years, we asked them to estimate, for each year since they’d started to practice music, how many hours per week on average they had spent in solitary practice. The thirty music students were also asked to keep daily diaries for each of the next seven days in which they would detail exactly how they’d spent their time. In the diaries, they recorded their activities in fifteen-minute increments: sleeping, eating, going to class, studying, practicing alone, practicing with others, performing, etc. When they were done we had a detailed picture of how they’d spent their days as well as a very good idea of their practice histories. The students from all three groups gave similar answers to most of our questions. The students pretty much all agreed, for instance, that solitary practice was the most important factor in improving their performance, followed by such things as practicing with others, taking lessons, performing (particularly in solo performance), listening to music, and studying music theory.

>>3063280
>We found that the best violin students had, on average, spent significantly more time than the better violin students had spent, and that the top two groups—better and best—had spent much more time on solitary practice than the music-education students. Specifically, the music-education students hadpracticed an average of 3,420 hours on the violin by the time they were eighteen, the better violin students had practiced an average of 5,301 hours, and the best violin students had practiced an average of 7,410 hours. Nobody had been slacking—even the least accomplished of the students had put in thousands of hours of practice, far more than anyone would have who played the violin just for fun, but these were clearly major differences in practice time. Looking more closely, we found that the largest differences in practice time among the three groups of students had come in the preteen and teenage years. Our results indicated that those preteens and teens who could maintain and even increase their heavy practice schedule during these years ended up in the top group of violinists at the academy. We also calculated estimated practice times for the middle-aged violinists working at the Berlin Philharmonic and the Radio-Symphonie-Orchester Berlin, and we found that the time they had spent practicing before the age of eighteen—an average of 7,336 hours—was almost identical to what the best violin students in the music academy had reported. There were a number of factors we did not include in our study that could have influenced—and indeed probably did influence—the skill levels of the violinists in the different groups. For instance, students who were lucky enough to have worked with exceptional teachers would likely have progressed more quickly than those with teachers who were just okay. But two things were strikingly clear from the study.

>>3063286
>First, to become an excellent violinist requires several thousand hours of practice. We found no shortcuts and no “prodigies” who reached an expert level with relatively little practice. And, second, even among these gifted musicians—all of whom had been admitted to the best music academy in Germany—the violinists who had spent significantly more hours practicing their craft were on average more accomplished than those who had spent less time practicing.


I know this won't shut your mouth about talent but it should help those that don't find self pity comfortable.

>>3063288
tl;dr me

>>3063277
check yourself

>>3063288
So practice makes perfect, who fucking knew.

File: 1499305373181.gif (2MB, 228x170px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 228x170px

>>3063288
So the most successful had stage-mom parents who made them practice 7000+ hours before age 18 and/or had access to exceptional teachers?

How reassuring.

>>3063310
It's based on music, so yeah, you have to start early. When it comes to art, the general rule still applies - who makes more hours with deliberate practice, wins.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-innate-talent-a-myth/
Reminder that hard work does make a HUGE difference but that doesn't mean it's necessarily correct to deny any other factor in reaching excellence at a skill because it might discourage you.
Maybe you won't ever become the very best at something because there'll always be someone who's more talented AND works hard but it still makes sense to put in the effort to become the best possible version of yourself.

perhaps people with talent have earned it in past lives?

>>3063196

HMM. THAT SOUNDS VERY GOOD.

>>3063202
You unironically make it because if you can't even believe in your own words, you'll be stuck and lost.

>>3063310
>when sucking up to your parents and being forced to do things is what makes you successful
So what are the other options?

>>3062731
>just like you dont become a doctor but you become a surgeon, cardiologist or dermatologist and you have to specialize

Only there are tons of generalist doctors who just refer to specialists in specific circumstances. In the same way you can become a generalist artist with broadly applicable skills, and if a specialist is required a specialist is consulted.

>>3063196
You don't need to talent to realize that though. Just being born in a country/family where you could get an education or access to resources is completely out of your control, at least when you're young.

>>3063641
Sure. Of course that doesn't stop /ic/ from being in denial about life not being fair because they're paranoid that fact could be used as an excuse to be lazy.

>>3062731
">tfw he doesn't understand you cannot draw well from life until you can draw from imagination"

Lol no

>>3063778
It's the other way around

>>3062731
>>tfw he thinks talent is a real thing
stopped taking you serious after this

>>3063804
It actually goes both ways.
Humans do not learn draftsmanship on a linear scale.

>>3062731
>>tfw he thinks talent is a real thing
stop right there friend.

>>3062731
>>tfw he thinks we're all supermen in waiting and the right combination of disciplined study and pure time invested=earth shattering genius

if we can be born innately handicapped at a particular something, then it's just possible...maybe that we can innately excel at a given area. Holy fuck call it genetics...call it privilege, luck, or talent...whatever, we've obviously moved past the grandma definition of "talent", time to get our heads out our asses.

>>3062737
what kind of retard asks for proof of such a thing? Everybody is different. That's where talent - i.e varying levels of aptitude - comes from.

>>3062731
>>3062731
>tfw he does not understand you cannot learn a general skill like "drawing" or "painting" just like you dont become a doctor but you become a surgeon, cardiologist or dermatologist and you have to specialize whether its in concept art, fine art, animation or illustration

Jeff Watts has said to become a "jack of all trades master of one" so you're half right. You CAN learn a general skill but there's always something (fine art, animation, concept, illustration) you will probably stand out in.

>>3063933
So no proof?

>>3064834
anon was right, you're just a retard.