I think talent gives you a boost at the beginning of the process, but it doesn't mean that a talentless person can't be as good as the one who has it. It all comes down to time that we have on this planet. If we lived ten thousand years, we could all be da Vincis and Mozarts, IF and only IF, we are lucky to be born in the right time and the right place, even though it may seem like the opposite of that, and genuinely have passion for what we do. Hard work simply comes with it and sucess itself is just a by-product of all the above.
I really very strongly disagree with the creative thing. I know what we do is commercial and a lot of the times you are working from concepts, but that doesn't mean you are mindlessly recreating this stuff, you need a hell of a lot of creativity to bring that to life, areas need resolving that concepts don't cover or even completely redesigning elements that just don't work. I've worked from intricate concepts to scribbles to smudges to nothing at all.
If you think of yourself as a worker monkey and an asset that can be easily dropped in and out of projects then that is what you will become. I don't think I would do this if I couldn't be creative with it. I don't know if this is just because I do a lot of 2d concepting or design resolving and others don't get the chance to but in my eyes it's another string to my bow that makes me valuable to a production and a good team mate. This doesn't mean I'm redesigning everyone's work haha, just if I have a suggestion I'm allowed to roll with it and as a team we resolve it and see what the devs think, if it doesn't work it doesn't work but atleast we tried and you can see the passion to make a good product. Yes you aren't allowed free reign but that's what personal projects are for commercial art doesn't mean you are mindlessly recreating others work, art without creativity is a dark place I don't want to live haha
As for the OP, [HP] summed it up beautifully for me. I come from an artistic family, so it came easy but I drew all the time and got better without even realising what I was doing, just like the kids outside playing football didn't realise they were getting better the more and more they played. Now I'm an adult and doing the same thing, being an artist doesn't stop at 5pm and it's weird when you realise you are staring at people because you are figuring out their features or like a particular fold on their person haha. Being an artist seems more like a way of life than a profession sometimes.
So yea for me it's a bit of talent and a bucket load of hard work. I used to think I had a bit of luck but now I think we make our own luck. I am quite introvert and shy so I've always let my work speak for me. I network a bit but it's not on purpose, joking on Facebook or just showing some work here and there. In the end I put in a lot of hard work behind the scenes and I hope that's what people see when they look at my work
I really very strongly disagree with the creative thing. I know what we do is commercial and a lot of the times you are working from concepts, but that doesn't mean you are mindlessly recreating this stuff, you need a hell of a lot of creativity to bring that to life, areas need resolving that concepts don't cover or even completely redesigning elements that just don't work.
I think everyone is making a pretty big assumption that the ability to work hard and be persistent is completely by choice and not also a genetic product of your brain chemistry. People cannot choose what makes up their own personalities anymore than they can choose their own height. So it seems somewhat disingenuous to completely separate hard work from inherent aptitude when it's all part of the same equation. Talent is a poor word to use though because it's colloquial definition makes this separation arbitrarily when there shouldn't be one.
To put it in black and white, a unmedicated person with ADHD is going to have a harder time trying to practice than someone without ADHD. Then you have all the shades of grey in between representing the entire spectrum of human brains that determine how much you are capable of focusing and pushing yourself to a goal, none of which were obtained by choice. Ultimately this is an issue with free will and depending how you think on that issue will influence how you break down the ingredients to your own success.
I think everyone is making a pretty big assumption that the ability to work hard and be persistent is completely by choice and not also a genetic product of your brain chemistry. People cannot choose what makes up their own personalities anymore than they can choose their own height. So it seems somewhat disingenuous to completely separate hard work from inherent aptitude when it's all part of the same equation. Talent is a poor word to use though because it's colloquial definition makes this separation arbitrarily when there shouldn't be one.
To put it in black and white, a unmedicated person with ADHD is going to have a harder time trying to practice than someone without ADHD. Then you have all the shades of grey in between representing the entire spectrum of human brains that determine how much you are capable of focusing and pushing yourself to a goal, none of which were obtained by choice. Ultimately this is an issue with free will and depending how you think on that issue will influence how you break down the ingredients to your own success.
bla bla bla.
there is no such thing as genetic product or brain chemistry.
admitting such things exist mean you are discouraging hard work.
"Natural Talent" is most often used to validate ones own inability to focus and improve. It probably does exist to a certain extent, but your environment/upbringing probably has much more of an impact on your ability to work hard then your genes.
Probably.
With that said, me working my ass off got me where I am, not the genes I was born with.
I'm certainly not denying modern research in neuroscience and psychology. Just sharing a personal philosophy that there are certain things within my control and certain things that are not.Genetics is among the things outside my control, so why worry about them? When it comes to my work, the only things directly under my control are my own actions, so I choose to focus on those.
But while we're on the topic of brain chemistry, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that there are many factors outside of genetic heredity that influence brain chemistry. Environment and training are among those factors.
"Natural Talent" is most often used to validate ones own inability to focus and improve. It probably does exist to a certain extent, but your environment/upbringing probably has much more of an impact on your ability to work hard then your genes.
Probably.
With that said, me working my ass off got me where I am, not the genes I was born with.
So talent is sort of a wishy-washy concept that isn't exactly easy to define.
On the other hand, the ability to learn new skills and retain knowledge certainly does vary from person to person, and even through the course of a single person's life, as a teenager your brain is a sponge and operating at maximum efficiency, and it gets worse from that point onward.
I think if you took two different people, and gave them the exact same amount of practice (lets say 1 year) doing a particularly activity, and assume they both have the same focus/drive/determination/etc, you're still going to see variance in the skills of either person at the end. Whether this is due to "talent", genes, upbringing, general education level, or any other number of factors I don't really know, but it is the reality of the situation. Not everyone is created equally, or rather, not everyone is equal(because I do believe upbringing likely has a major effect).
Now, having said all of that, all the things that I suck at happen to be things that I haven't put much effort into improving at, and the things I feel I am good at are because I have put a huge amount of effort into learning and improving. At the end of the day hard work is the biggest ingredient in success, though I find it hard to believe, at least from a scientific level, that its the only thing that matters.
If we define talent as the relative ability of our brains to learn skills and process information, I think it likely has a significant amount to do with not only how successful we are in life, but the paths we take and the things we enjoy doing.
I'm certainly not denying modern research in neuroscience and psychology. Just sharing a personal philosophy that there are certain things within my control and certain things that are not.Genetics is among the things outside my control, so why worry about them? When it comes to my work, the only things directly under my control are my own actions, so I choose to focus on those.
But while we're on the topic of brain chemistry, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that there are many factors outside of genetic heredity that influence brain chemistry. Environment and training are among those factors.
Unfortunately modern research science demonstrates that the idea of anything being directly under your control is an impossibility.
Here's a good video on the subject by neuroscientist Sam Harris:
I'm certainly not denying modern research in neuroscience and psychology. Just sharing a personal philosophy that there are certain things within my control and certain things that are not.Genetics is among the things outside my control, so why worry about them? When it comes to my work, the only things directly under my control are my own actions, so I choose to focus on those.
i believe in mind over matter to certain extent so i agree with you that we should not worry about talent or genetics, work hard no matter what.
what bothers me is when people out right deny the existence of natural talent(or its role in their success) like many are doing here. that seems absurd to say the least. i mean give a little credit to something other than your all powerful and awesome "hard work".
when we control for time spent / practice and access to learning resources. what do we call that thing where some folks end up being ' better ' than others ?
when we control for time spent / practice and access to learning resources. what do we call that thing where some folks end up being ' better ' than others ?
talent
I can just as well cal it luck.
That's the problem with spoken languague. It's very vague.
That's the problem with spoken languague. It's very vague.
Luck is an occurrence. When it's systematic it's talent. One random fluke piece that's better than everyone else's is luck, but a whole portfolio that sticks out of the pack is talent.
Lots of research has been done on the topic of "talent" and what has been a pretty good constant when it comes to great masters in ANY field is practice and tutoring. Mozart's father was an acclaimed musical instructor, tiger woods father was a highly respected golf teacher and both were taught constantly from a very early age.
Yes there is such thing as talent, but it doesn't always lead to broad professional success on its own. It just helps early on. Our natural (maybe genetic) inclinations towards various skills make up who we are but those natural inclinations often only get you so far until you practice them. Some people may seem like they are naturally confident or talkative but keep in mind that those people often talk, and may simply have unintentionally practised confidence. I personally intentionally practised pretending to be more confident and as a result many of my students think I simply am. I certainly am more than I was before and I'm much more talkative then I was when I was young but that was due to practice, where others may have slipped into it easier, they still would have needed to do it often to improve.
Every skill someone can be talented in, but standout, mature artwork is not "talent". That's practice and dedication. I've seen many many groups of students. Some I initially considered talented who produced weak work in the end. Some who I thought weren't who produced much stronger work.
Was there a through line?
Yup.
Previous education/practice + current practice = great portfolio
I've found it VERY rare to find someone who had a strong portfolio coming into school, who then busted their ass and DIDN'T produce a great portfolio in the time I had them as a student. This however assumes they have a natural talent or previous inclination to dealing with computers and technology. That can often slow down someone's velocity. But like anything, once that barrier falls lower, the person's skill increases dramatically due to being able to make better use of their previous education/ practice.
Talent is real, but it really only accounts for initial work which CAN often cause a person to get into the skilled work that they have an initial talent for. So are many of the great artists here talented artists? There would be a statistical probability, but did it lead to their greater successes? That's very unlikely.
I attribute a significant amount of my success to my talent. But then, it's not my artistic talent that I'm referring to.
I have a real gift for problem solving and ingenuity. I have worked hard at using this talent, and I've gotten lots of practice. But ultimately this gift for figuring things out was something I was born with. And it comes in really, really handy. While I do occasionally lament the fact that I have only ever been mildly talented in other areas, I have never been ungrateful for my biggest talent. Being a fantastic problem solver doesn't often get you as much attention, but it is insanely useful.
So I do attribute a significant amount of my personal success to talent. At the same time, talent without the will or wisdom to employ it properly is wasted. You have to have the personal impetus and discipline to apply and develop talent, no matter how much of it you are born with.
Replies
well said I agree
This and the rest is spot on, nice one Tom!
To put it in black and white, a unmedicated person with ADHD is going to have a harder time trying to practice than someone without ADHD. Then you have all the shades of grey in between representing the entire spectrum of human brains that determine how much you are capable of focusing and pushing yourself to a goal, none of which were obtained by choice. Ultimately this is an issue with free will and depending how you think on that issue will influence how you break down the ingredients to your own success.
bla bla bla.
there is no such thing as genetic product or brain chemistry.
admitting such things exist mean you are discouraging hard work.
Yeah, only you're plain scientifically wrong.
there is no such thing as science, only hard work!
Pfff, like you know anything about medical science.
I've watched every episode of Scrubs. Have some respect.
[ame="
Probably.
With that said, me working my ass off got me where I am, not the genes I was born with.
Work hard, don't worry about the definitions.
But while we're on the topic of brain chemistry, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that there are many factors outside of genetic heredity that influence brain chemistry. Environment and training are among those factors.
Boom. Well said.
just kidding.
On the other hand, the ability to learn new skills and retain knowledge certainly does vary from person to person, and even through the course of a single person's life, as a teenager your brain is a sponge and operating at maximum efficiency, and it gets worse from that point onward.
I think if you took two different people, and gave them the exact same amount of practice (lets say 1 year) doing a particularly activity, and assume they both have the same focus/drive/determination/etc, you're still going to see variance in the skills of either person at the end. Whether this is due to "talent", genes, upbringing, general education level, or any other number of factors I don't really know, but it is the reality of the situation. Not everyone is created equally, or rather, not everyone is equal(because I do believe upbringing likely has a major effect).
Now, having said all of that, all the things that I suck at happen to be things that I haven't put much effort into improving at, and the things I feel I am good at are because I have put a huge amount of effort into learning and improving. At the end of the day hard work is the biggest ingredient in success, though I find it hard to believe, at least from a scientific level, that its the only thing that matters.
If we define talent as the relative ability of our brains to learn skills and process information, I think it likely has a significant amount to do with not only how successful we are in life, but the paths we take and the things we enjoy doing.
Unfortunately modern research science demonstrates that the idea of anything being directly under your control is an impossibility.
Here's a good video on the subject by neuroscientist Sam Harris:
[ame="
i believe in mind over matter to certain extent so i agree with you that we should not worry about talent or genetics, work hard no matter what.
what bothers me is when people out right deny the existence of natural talent(or its role in their success) like many are doing here. that seems absurd to say the least. i mean give a little credit to something other than your all powerful and awesome "hard work".
talent
+1
I can just as well cal it luck.
That's the problem with spoken languague. It's very vague.
Luck is an occurrence. When it's systematic it's talent. One random fluke piece that's better than everyone else's is luck, but a whole portfolio that sticks out of the pack is talent.
Yes there is such thing as talent, but it doesn't always lead to broad professional success on its own. It just helps early on. Our natural (maybe genetic) inclinations towards various skills make up who we are but those natural inclinations often only get you so far until you practice them. Some people may seem like they are naturally confident or talkative but keep in mind that those people often talk, and may simply have unintentionally practised confidence. I personally intentionally practised pretending to be more confident and as a result many of my students think I simply am. I certainly am more than I was before and I'm much more talkative then I was when I was young but that was due to practice, where others may have slipped into it easier, they still would have needed to do it often to improve.
Every skill someone can be talented in, but standout, mature artwork is not "talent". That's practice and dedication. I've seen many many groups of students. Some I initially considered talented who produced weak work in the end. Some who I thought weren't who produced much stronger work.
Was there a through line?
Yup.
Previous education/practice + current practice = great portfolio
I've found it VERY rare to find someone who had a strong portfolio coming into school, who then busted their ass and DIDN'T produce a great portfolio in the time I had them as a student. This however assumes they have a natural talent or previous inclination to dealing with computers and technology. That can often slow down someone's velocity. But like anything, once that barrier falls lower, the person's skill increases dramatically due to being able to make better use of their previous education/ practice.
Talent is real, but it really only accounts for initial work which CAN often cause a person to get into the skilled work that they have an initial talent for. So are many of the great artists here talented artists? There would be a statistical probability, but did it lead to their greater successes? That's very unlikely.
I have a real gift for problem solving and ingenuity. I have worked hard at using this talent, and I've gotten lots of practice. But ultimately this gift for figuring things out was something I was born with. And it comes in really, really handy. While I do occasionally lament the fact that I have only ever been mildly talented in other areas, I have never been ungrateful for my biggest talent. Being a fantastic problem solver doesn't often get you as much attention, but it is insanely useful.
So I do attribute a significant amount of my personal success to talent. At the same time, talent without the will or wisdom to employ it properly is wasted. You have to have the personal impetus and discipline to apply and develop talent, no matter how much of it you are born with.