/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4921599
Practice is about 25% of success. The rest is genetics, environment, etc.
T. the guys who made the 10,000 hour study rule.

>>4921599
if an elephant can draw, a monkey can too

Talent is literally vector intelligence. Don't listen to these retards pooping out semantics arguments.

>>4921599
Talent is real. An untalented person can, theoretically, get as good as someone with talent, but the enormous amount of effort it requires means that they won't unless they are extremely dedicated.

>>4921599
Everyone can draw. Not everyone can draw well.

>>4921599
You can make it, anon. Not every artist happens to be talented. Been drawing for about 10 years and finally peaked this year. Pic related isn't the best, but it's something I'm proud of. As sappy as it sounds, you have to stay passionate about what you like in order to get better

Say for a moment that some people CANNOT be as good as others, for the sake of argument.
So what?
Even if you "have talent" you're not going to be among the best, statistically speaking. No matter how good you are there's always going to be someone better. So what the hell does it matter? Most people really aren't ambitious enough in the first place to really be aiming to be the best so why should it matter if there are talented people out there who improve faster with less effort? All that matters is what YOU do, and what YOU want to do. If your goal is to make money with your art, then yeah the likelihood is high that you can totally do that even if your art isn't particularly good compared to whoever else.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that even if talent did play a large factor in how skilled of an artist one can become in any amount of time, it really shouldn't affect you unless your aim is to compete with those people as the very best in your field. I would argue it's more important to have a distinct "thing", like a niche, that you do to the best of your ability. It doesn't matter if other people are super good at drawing portraits if you're not even trying to get hired or recognized for your portraits.

>>4921599
Talent is a pursued interest. In other words, anything you are willing to practice, you can do.

>>4921599
without talent you'll never make it no matter how smart or hard you work
take the talent pill, kiddo

>>4921890
>you like kicking balls, surely you can be the next ronaldo
>you like math, surely you can be the next einstein
>you like singing and playing guitar, surely you can be the next beatles
massive cope

having talent is just a successful form of autism. also i’m the most based person on this board

>>4921599
Talent does exist, in my opinion, but it isn't what ic niggers will make it out to be
A talented person will stagnate if they take it for granted, while a dedicated person will learn whatever the fuck they need and become a master in the subject
The thing is: Talent or not, you still need to have a fuckton of dedication, having talent will help you? Of course, but not by much, and if you don't give a shit, not at all
Study a fuckton, be hungry for learning new shit, treat studies like masturbation and finishing pieces like an orgasm from good sex. Rest, exercise, and then do it all again. We're all gonna make it anon

>>4921904
You are a brainlet

>>4921599
talent is real
and yes you can be good as a talented person, it just takes extraordinary effort
you already knew this though and you wanted people to affirm that you can quit because youll never reach a talentchads skill level

>>4921919
>uses a meaningless, feel-good platitude by Bob Ross
>thinks anyone is a bigger brainlet than him

>>4921957
reaching a bit there eh mate?

talent can only be realized by actually trying
its an active pursuit and genuinely thinking about your subject of mastery in your free time.

>>4921904
you are talking about notoriety, not skill
these are not mutually inclusive
ps. Einstein was a hack anyway

>>4921599
>or can anyone become a master with enough dedication?
No. If that were possible, we'd have millions of masters running around.

Talent axistes. Or whatever you want to call it - affinity, the right combinations of brains and dexterity, whatever. Many, many, many things require talent to reach the top - writing, sports, engineering, art, music - and like all of that, art is the same pyramid of a wide, vast base of beginners and people who just won't get further up, and at the top a small number of "masters".

Where you fall on the pyramid...nobody knows, and can't know until you try.

Can anyone learn enough art skills for it to be personally satisfying and gratifying? Sure. A master? Not so much.

>>4921622
This. "Talent" just = IQ. Smart people are better at learning to do anything, including art.

>>4921904
Look at all those cope replies to you

>>4921915
Undeniably inexplicably BASED.

>>4922035
>2 replies
is highschool getting boring anon?

>>4921599
I think that success at anything is probably 80% enjoying doing that thing. I'm good at math (not to toot my own horn) because I like doing math a lot. Conversely, I'm terrible at art because drawing is usually like pulling teeth.

>>4921852
I like it, anon :3

>>4921599
>>4919557