A Limit to the Growth of Ability?

[gnarl]

Do you think some people have the potential to only go so far in the skill level of their art? Like they just hit a wall, and even through continuous studies, their ability just falls idle and cannot progress further.

This is my worst fear. That or the possibility that, yeah, I may get good - but I'll never produce anything other than generic, uninteresting static.:(

[riceface]

as a veteran around here id like to chime in, i think theres a limit to ones growth.. im never gonna be as good as jason chan or some of the other ppl i look up to..

i think its like with everything... someones always gonna be better then u, all u can do is dream

[ShroudStar]

Or work your ass off and make yourself like Jason Chan, etc. but with your own brand. Self-defeat right at the get-go is poisonous. Someone's always going to be better than you but you're going to be better than someone else. As long as you don't let fear paralyze you, you always have a chance.

[gnarl]

I don't care about someone being better than me, that's just fine. However I have a notion that I might hit a limit with how far I can take my art, and that I wouldn't be able to reach a level to make a living off art. I'm not worried, I never worry - It's just a rarley occurring thought, none obstructive to my motivation. (I'm not whining:))

But the original question was "Do you think people can have a limit on their ability to progress artistically?"

[Craig D]

as a veteran around here id like to chime in

when does 10 months equal veteran,
and when does how long you've been a member of a forum equal how much you know (or don't as the case may be)

I say there probably are limits to growth, but you'll never know where they are until you hit them. And they might be temporary so even then you are doing yourself a disservice by paying them any attention.

[•Lindsay•]

We all have limits and most of us aren't going to be the next Sargent or anything, but unless you develop some kind of memento disease you aren't going to lose the ability to learn. In psychology class I was told that long term memory has infinite storage. The hard part is transferring things from your short term to your long term memory.

Everyone I can think of who stopped growing is someone who gave up. One of the nice thing about art is that artists typically get better as they age, not worse, even at very old ages.

[Black Spot]

No one knows what they're capable of and some people give up too easily or soon. If you're not progressing with one method of study, try another. Keep pushing and you might amaze yourself.

[FranciscoShreds]

im never gonna be as good as jason chan or some of the other ppl i look up to..

Really? That sucks for you huh...

I'm gonna be every bit as good as chan, and whit and jaime jones and james paick and james jean and pretty much everyone else I look up to.

Man, I love opening these threads up where effectively every thread starter is so content with pigeonholing themselves into mediocrity and finding complacency in that mediocrity. And there's just so many of them lately it's so reassuring to me that with this many people willing to strive for less and look for their limits and be bound to them that people like me who will be better will have no issues in finding a job in the future. Honestly, it helps cheer me up every time... :|

I've seen what determination can do. Hell, I've lived it. Coming from an impoverished part of mexico where my family, my cousins family and my grandparents were all living in what was essentially a wooden box sharing a kitchen and a bathroom with our neighbors. Where I had never even heard the word draw and the closest thing I had come to art was the caricature on the chocolate milk bottles that I would beg my parents to buy but they never would. And having my parents work their asses off, come to america, my mother getting two full time jobs and my father getting 2 and a part time at any given time, start their own business and being able to afford to own a home and being able to buy my grandparents a better home down in mexico. And lastly giving me the freedom that they never had, the freedom to be able to do whatever the hell I want to do with my life and my future. So am I gonna let something weak like a supposed limit stop me? LOL.

Anyways, to address the question, do I think people can have a limit on their abilitys growth? Who knows. But I'll tell you one thing, I won't waste time looking for them. I'll keep drawing and trekking along and if one decides to rear it's head I'll address and surpass it then.

A great guitarist friend of mine (good guitarist, jake willson, was at berklee school of music then with a half ride, is currently working on a side project with the drummer of dragonforce and teaching at dover UK.) once told me, 'if you shoot for the moon you'll land on a mountain' and even though it was said in passing it still stuck with me.

Another inspring one for you, said by the late, great, ralph to his wife alice, "One of these days alice, and then Bang, zoom, straight to the moon!"

And if any of this sounded like an attack on you, or anyone with similar thoughts or intentions of starting like minded threads... then it was. It's an attack, a slant at your character, an insult. It's everything that will hopefully make these words stick with you, that will burn them into your heart, mind or soul and make them boil over till one day you've had enough and you say to yourself, till you say to me 'You know what, fuck you franciscoshreds. Mediocrity? Complacency? I'll show your ass, I'm gonna be better, I'll be right there at every job battling you for the same or a better position!'

And if that day comes, hopefully some time soon, where you say those words and they're more than just words... Well then, sir, I'll see you on the mountain top.

Franc~

[Eugie]

Art is subjective there is no better or worse, it's all in the opinion of the viewer. That doesn't mean you should spend time pouting about useless thoughts like this.

[Sidharth Chaturvedi]

Everything

Franc~

I was gonna respond to rice, but you've put it quite nicely.

Gnarl, don't worry about it. Just draw ;).

[gnarl]

Franciscoshreds:
"Man, I love opening these threads up where effectively every thread starter is so content with pigeonholing themselves into mediocrity and finding complacency in that mediocrity."
--
My previous post clearly states the notion I have does not effect my motivation or attitude towards drawing. And a "personal attack"? Naaahh, I enjoyed your enthusiasm lol. I'll see yah on that moon mountain sir! Except I'll probably be just floating by because I wont be able to stop my momentum. (double meaning? i think so:))

Eugie:
"That doesn't mean you should spend time pouting about useless thoughts like this."
--
Pouting? Maybe I shouldn't have said the "my worst fear ect.." part. Didn't think others would interpret that as pouting, over the interweb. Like saying, "my worst fear are spiders" isn't really a pouty statement, imo. Maybe it was the ":(".

Sidharth Chaturvedi:
"Gnarl, don't worry about it. Just draw"
--
I'm not worried.:)

I just had a curious question, NOT pertaining particularly to me, that I wanted to hear other peoples thoughts on.

Sometimes people seem very pretentious on these forums, have to watch how yah type I guess. Sorry if my post just seemed like another "I can't do it/Need Motication/Why is it so hard?!" thread. And sorry if this read as deffensive. But I gots a web-ego to protects. lol

[Nickillus]

As a veteran with rounded parts I've been at it for 25 years plus, and it's a rollercoaster ride, but on a slight incline - up, I hope.

It's like the saying about the boxer - it doesn't matter how many times you get knocked down, it's how many times you get back up that counts. Get up one more time than you're knocked down and you're still in the fight.

Because it's a constant fight to overcome/go round/work though your own limitations, whatever they may be. Everybody is better at some things than others. Even the Chans and Whits of this world.

A huge part is about keeping yourself inspired enough to keep battling, by feeding on the glorious imagery that others have put out there. Use it to spur you on. If they can do it (and they are human with their own limitations), you should be able to do it or something similar too - but your route to get will most likely take a different path, because you are a different person. Look for that path. Find the way. It's there somewhere.

I still find that the journey of discovery about what I can and can't do (at the stage I am in my own journey) throws up little surprises, lessons and rewards all the time. It's a never ending learning process. A journey, not a destination - and we all have a different ticket. And there are dead end diversions from time to time, that you back-track from and set off again at a differnt angle.

That doesn't mean you should'nt use the jet airline of proven drawing and painting methodolgy available in vast abundance to give you a flying start - and go back to it whenever you need it. Unless you want to reinvent the wheel and impede your progress.

The only real limitation on how much you can improve (although the timeframe for each will vary also) is your will to keep trying - but it is about finding out who you are as an artist, not about becoming the same as someone else already out there. They are filling that spot for themselves.

[Derek the Usurper]

Art is subjective there is no better or worse, it's all in the opinion of the viewer. That doesn't mean you should spend time pouting about useless thoughts like this.

If there is no better or worse, what is the point in improving? How could you even see improvement?

[SoufMeng]

Art is subjective there is no better or worse, it's all in the opinion of the viewer.
I agree, you are right: the problem, indeed, is there are viewers better or worse than others...

[gnarl]

Well, what about technical ability? Wouldn't call that subjective.

[Ninjerk]

If there is no better or worse, what is the point in improving? How could you even see improvement?

There is no point, see? So you don't even HAVE to work hard!

[J Wilson]

Even when I see artists that are doing work faaaaaaaaaaaaar beyond what I'm currently doing, I never really think "I'll never be as good as them," or feel like I'll reach some limit on my ability before I get to that level. Mostly it just inspires me to push a little harder, to move past my current comfort zones and try something more challenging. If you manage to keep pushing a little further you'll never reach any brick wall of ability. Even if you never reach the level of the guys you admire most, you can keep pushing closer, and maybe end up just as good in different ways.

[DanialGlover]

as a veteran around here id like to chime in, i think theres a limit to ones growth.. im never gonna be as good as jason chan or some of the other ppl i look up to..

You enjoy your low self-esteem, huh?

I won't limit my growth, I'll always try new techniques, new studies, whatever I can do to grow a little more. As long as I work hard, I'll get better. And unless I'm dead, I don't plan on limiting myself.

[Eugie]

"Pouting? Maybe I shouldn't have said the "my worst fear ect.." part. Didn't think others would interpret that as pouting, over the interweb. Like saying, "my worst fear are spiders" isn't really a pouty statement, imo. Maybe it was the ":(".

- Yes, very used to seeing a lot of those threads you mentioned which is probably why I jumped the gun, I apologize for the assumption.

"There is no point, see? So you don't even HAVE to work hard!" and "If there is no better or worse, what is the point in improving? How could you even see improvement?"

- My statement had nothing to do with how much effort you should be putting in, that all depends on you. But you can't tell me that his/her art is better than another person's art, and then state it as a fact. That is why it is called critique, that meaning to judge.

[Dile_]

fucking respect fransisco!! i love you buddy

and gargh riceface.. why the f*** are you still here ? I don't get it.. you have never helped or participated in this community ever. All you do is go against everything of what could have possibly be helpful or establish and roll with it till someone lock the thread....

i'd really like to see you banned, at least from the general forums.

[Ilaekae]

What limits? I BELIEVE that I'm already better than Marko, Chan and Elwell...and Picasso, Cezanne, Rubens, and everybody else, too. I just haven't proven it yet. Laugh all you fuckin' want, but this fantasy belief in my own abilities is what keeps me going.

And as for limits, there's just one, and the good thing is I won't know when I hit it because I just died. You invent or imagine, or even worry about any other supposed restrictions on your growth as an artist and your wasting your time.

[Derek the Usurper]

"Pouting? Maybe I shouldn't have said the "my worst fear ect.." part. Didn't think others would interpret that as pouting, over the interweb. Like saying, "my worst fear are spiders" isn't really a pouty statement, imo. Maybe it was the ":(".

- Yes, very used to seeing a lot of those threads you mentioned which is probably why I jumped the gun, I apologize for the assumption.

"There is no point, see? So you don't even HAVE to work hard!" and "If there is no better or worse, what is the point in improving? How could you even see improvement?"

- My statement had nothing to do with how much effort you should be putting in, that all depends on you. But you can't tell me that his/her art is better than another person's art, and then state it as a fact. That is why it is called critique, that meaning to judge.

What you said has everything to do with personal effort and improvement.

You said that there is no better or worse art. Why would I put forth any effort if I will never produce artwork that is better than what I am producing now?

I can objectively see and state as fact that my artwork has improved since I was a child. You are asserting that my art has always been, and always will be the same. I disagree because I can objectively judge my own artwork and improvement based on objective criteria such as perspective, anatomy, lighting, etc.

[KarylGilbertson]

Fuckin' rights Dile. I'm with you on this one.

Fransisco, that was amazing :)

[soverynight]

Wow.

So. I'm going to humour this question and just say: If you were an athlete then there may be a limit to your abilities because your body at some point would not allow you to do certain things. (there are exceptions but let's just set a standard)

But I think as visual artist you need: ability to hold pen/pencil/brush/stick and your vision. Ummmmm... oh and a brain.. As far as I know (not considering any diseases or illnesses) the mind doesn't really change as you get older (as long as you exercise it). And eyesight could get worse but meh, you can get glasses. I don't think you need to worry about hand movement or anything like that - you could draw with your feet if you had to.

Sooooo I have no idea why there would be a limit. I guess you'll reach your limit when you die. But even then... maybe you'll be way more appreciated after you're dead. Well anyways, I guess it depends on what your goal is.

[CCThrom]

Since making art is a pretty wide-open endeavor, I always figured that when you run into a roadblock you can ALWAYS choose another direction. To me this question is a bit like standing in the middle of a desert and saying 'dang, I can't go north any more because there's a big rock in my way'.

[Eugie]

derek - you are totally missing the point of my statement towards him/her. The main reason I told him this is because there is no point in trying to become someone else or putting down your work. He quotes, "That or the possibility that, yeah, I may get good - but I'll never produce anything other than generic, uninteresting static." Correct me if I am wrong but there are many artists in this world whose skills are on a godly level but do not get recognized, then there are those that leave you dumbfounded as to why their art is popular. I heard this from Bobby Chiu's podcast, a lot of art is based on luck, but that does not mean you can not do something about it. His advice was to expose yourself as much as possible, it's like buying lottery tickets; the more you buy the higher the chance you have of winning.

[Nickillus]

re-His advice was to expose yourself as much as possible.

Hey, you get arrested for that in the UK

[Eugie]

that goes for the US too I guess the naked cowboy is an exception.

[Derek the Usurper]

derek - you are totally missing the point of my statement towards him/her. The main reason I told him this is because there is no point in trying to become someone else or putting down your work. He quotes, "That or the possibility that, yeah, I may get good - but I'll never produce anything other than generic, uninteresting static." Correct me if I am wrong but there are many artists in this world whose skills are on a godly level but do not get recognized, then there are those that leave you dumbfounded as to why their art is popular. I heard this from Bobby Chiu's podcast, a lot of art is based on luck, but that does not mean you can not do something about it. His advice was to expose yourself as much as possible, it's like buying lottery tickets; the more you buy the higher the chance you have of winning.

I just disliked your statement. It reeked of post-modern BS that perpetuates people not trying hard and being rewarded for it.

Perhaps that is reality, but I don't have to like it or accept it. I try hard to be better than I am, and as good or better than those whose art I respect. Despite that I may not become popular, I don't think this is a foolish endeavor for anyone.

Popularity is not the goal of self improvement.

[Eugie]

derek - yeap, no one does but that is just how life works in general, I hate to accept it also but luck is just a factor. The genius that lives secluded from the world and has no clue on escaping will never be recognized unless by chance someone stumbles upon him and reveals him to the world. Artists are artists because they love what they do and that will never stop, well at least most artists anyways. Oh, and I always believe hard work will always pay off in millions of ways.

[Droid]

someones always gonna be better then u, all u can do is dream

Completely disagree with that.

So you can't draw like Jason Chan.

So what?

Draw like you, keep your own style and techniques, and with practice you can become a pro.

Hit the wall?

Then smash through it with your face! Nothing should stop you if you really want it.

[Jovian M]

The only thing that causes people to plateau is a lack of effort. People start idling, often, after they see a certain amount of progress. They stop pushing themselves (or they never did in the first place and were just coasting to where they are).

It depends on how much you want it, and whether or not you're willing to bust your ass, day in and day out, to achieve greatness. Derp durr

[hala]

perhaps there is a point where you have nailed your technique to a "T", but your personal touch in your art, imo, always evolves, whether it's out of your competitive blood, or boredom with your own work, or just a natural process of experimenting.

and I agree with meissner.


i'm a big believer of creating your own future--I don't believe that certain people get things handed to them. (I do believe certain people have the luck of better circumstances...but that doesn't mean they will get anywhere unless they have the motivation to utilize their good fortune).

this is an interesting concept tho to discuss.
just keep confidence that you can continually progress, and you probably will :)

[Pezz]

I kind of have a Michelangelo approach, "Every block of stone has a statue inside it and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it. "

I know that I too, like a piece of marble, can be chiseled and refined again and again until I find the perfection I seek. I'm bad at this metaphor stuff though.

[Eric Young]

"The greatest danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark." - Michelangelo

Take a lesson for the greatest artist who ever lived. Don't limit yourself with the idea that you will never be as great as someone else, try and be better then everyone and you may fail but you'll be better then you would have been if you had never tired.

[Pezz]

;2323116']"The greatest danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark." - Michelangelo

Take a lesson for the greatest artist who ever lived. Don't limit yourself with the idea that you will never be as great as someone else, try and be better then everyone and you may fail but you'll be better then you would have been if you had never tired.

Thank you for that quote, too; I was trying to think of it properly but couldn't conjure it at the time. It's very true.

[The Pariano]

Your improvement is only limited by your life span.

[ferretula]

DO NOT listen to any of this bullshit about being limited. the ONLY reason these people arent as good as they want to be, is because they THINK they cant be as good as they want to be. everyone gets better at whatever they do until theyre dead, as long as they work at it and actually beleive they can do it.

[kev ferrara]

Your vision is your only limitation.

If you need to express your vision, you will pursue the means to accomplish it. You will become as good as you need to be. This is a question of will power. Intelligence and talent are, in some ways, equivalent to will power. Sensitivity is the will to concentrate on the subtle and to perceive it. Similarly, boring is equivalent to difficult. If you have the will power and are willing to be bored to accomplish your vision, you will achieve it. Which would mean that you have become as good as you needed to be.

kev

[alesoun]

Limits are man-made, and all men are fallible.......

[pat@hpnc.com]

I do not think there are limits ever. BUT there is a difference in how fast people learn. So some artists my shoot ahead of me just because they learn faster. I also find if I cant do something it normally means there is something I do not understand. Figuring out what that is and learning it then leads to progress in that area.

[pat@hpnc.com]

Oh and here is a good quote

"If people knew how hard I worked to get my mastery, it wouldn't seem so wonderful at all."
Michelangelo

[AChipps]

If you are still reading this, There are walls that we hit at times when we peek at our best, or the best that we know of. If you can draw like a photo so nobody could tell the difference, you will hit a wall, but learning is not over for you. When you make imaginary images, that has the same high quality, you hit a wall, but you don't stop learning. By then how you see things has changed, what was amazing at once looses it wonder, but it is not the end of learning, because no matter how much you learn, and no matter how far you have gone with your art, there are things to learn, and new way to look at things. You might hit a wall many times and think I can't learn anymore, because I can do anything, but by them you have forgotten a lot, and not willing to try new points of view, because you feel there are things you can't do, and it will seem never ending to doing you best, and you might not ever get there. When you start to face the fact that you can't do better, because your art leaves no room for improving, it is like a turn off switch that clicks, and you consider giving up, because you have no future goals. Then months later your try to start again, and you already forgot simple things that makes it hard to get back to the way you were, or realize you have no imagination, no dreams, because every thing was full filled, and finished. It will be a time to add more into your art, what you drew could have been too simple, but very detailed. It could be to complicated, and lack of focus. Some times it is good to work with other artist to change your way of thinking, and learn about new ways of doing things, but if you refuse to give up, just remember this. Draw, and never stop, and you will never regret wasting a day of your life without having some achevement to look back and see.

[Zirngibism]

It's an interesting question, and despite all of the inspirational answers, I'm pretty sure everyone else has asked it of themselves at some point in time.

I guess what I'm not sure of is how someone would actually know when they've hit such a wall. Would they paint something that looks sub-par and not recognize its flaws unless it's compared to the work of their heroes? In that case, it's a problem of perception, not artistic ability, and can be helped along through good critique.

Perhaps you're thinking of it being asymptotic. (Makes me think of Achilles and the turtle.)


Anyway, what I personally fear is of "hitting a well" due to age. I'm afraid of growing old and losing my vision, or my color perception, or getting terrible arthritis, and always knowing my best days in those particular areas of observation, perception, and technical skill are behind me.

If we can define that situation as a "wall" of sorts, one can always turn in a different direction once they reach it. If I'm no longer able to produce art that satisfies me, perhaps I'll turn to producing literature, or a different kind of visual art so that I can once again have the feeling that my best days are in the future.

[Flake]

You won't lose your colour perception.
I'm kinda colourblind, you're not. It won't get worse.

If your vision fades, you can get specs or surgery. We can take nearly blind people and give them workable vision now.

If you get terrible arthritis, tape a brush to your hand.

You are full of fear. This is your big obstacle.

[Zirngibism]

I never said I was "full of fear", nor that such a fear was any obstacle to me. I'm just saying it's there, and the notion does bother me from time to time.

And there's a history of macular degeneration in my family. Two of my relatives are currently almost blind, with nothing modern medicine could do about it. So I guess that's sort of what I'm thinking of.

And I do know that people have a harder time differentiating similar colors as they age.

Hopefully in the 50-60 years it'll take for me to get to that point, they'll have come up with some treatments.

But I guess this whole "effects of aging on art" is a whole topic in itself and probably doesn't belong on this thread anyway, so whatever...

[AChipps]

When I was 8 and just started doing art, I had a little reality hit me when the bike hit a boulder in a mudpuddle. I was thrown and landed on my knees, and that folded me into. I found my legs beside my head on both sides. Nobody was around to help me. I did my best to sit up on my hip with my legs behind me, and put my legs back in place. After I did I was back to normal, in a way. But, I started to think, what if I loose my vision. I thought then I will make clay scuptures. What if I loose my arms, and I put the pencil in my toes, and drew. What if turned out to be any situation, and I found with no legs, and arms I would paint with the brush in my teeth. None of that ever happened, but I learned that the way an artist works, and fixes mistakes, you can gain control over any part of your body, because when you draw you can get so far into what you are doing that you don't think about what is holding the pencil or brush, you just think of you want on the canvas or paper, and do everything to get it, no matter what you have to do to do that. I have played around and finished a painting with my toes, and I would not know which one that was, only the fact it was sold in advance. Your mind controls your body, and your concentration creates your art. You will be able to work with your hands better, but the quality of your art will not change if you work at it with any part of your body.
It is possible I may be different, because I was given a hand and mind capabilty test, and finshed in half the time. I was told that the time limit was set by the 7 geniuses best time, and I hands respond to thoughts while I am still thinking, and if my mind and hands are one, but that could be normal as far as I know.

[Leonor]

Man, I love opening these threads up where effectively every thread starter is so content with pigeonholing themselves into mediocrity and finding complacency in that mediocrity.

I love to see people drawing and getting rewarded for it with interested comments.

[Zirngibism]

It is possible I may be different, because I was given a hand and mind capabilty test, and finshed in half the time. I was told that the time limit was set by the 7 geniuses best time, and I hands respond to thoughts while I am still thinking, and if my mind and hands are one, but that could be normal as far as I know.

Woah! Wait a minute, what is a hand and mind capability test? I googled that term and didn't really get anything.
Is it art-based?
And what kind of geniuses were the 7 that set the record? Cognitive, kinetic, both? Were they child prodigies in art or did they just think quickly? Because what you're saying sounds more like a nerve anomaly, not a brain thing, which seems like the term "genius" wouldn't even apply...

And finally, how does your performance on that test translate into real-world skills, specifically, your art? Does it somehow help you use a mouse when you paint digitally? Are you perhaps more spontaneous and quick? By how carefully rendered the work in your gallery looks, it seems odd. As to thinking while your hand moves, doesn't everyone do that? At least, it feels like it. I don't think "I'm going to draw a curved line here" and then draw it, it feels like I'm thinking I'm drawing that line while I'm doing it.

Sorry for all the questions-- I don't mean to sound critical, I'm just really curious about this.

[Crass]

What would be the reason for such a limitation? What is it that Jason Chan, or Anders Zorn or Michelangelo for that matter, have that me and you don't?

No, I don't believe it, anyone can become a great artist but you will always be your own worst enemy in getting there. Most people won't make it but it's not because they don't have enough 'talent' or 'ability', but a matter of distraction and lack of insight, set your mind to it and understand what it is that you want, and you will succeed.

[AChipps]

I was given the test by a doctor. Basically it looked like a bunch of blocks made out of dark walnut, and oak, glued diagnally. The test showed patterns, and each one was about a minute to copy the picture pattern, with all of the blocks. I did all of them in lest than 20 seconds, and one pattern took 35 seconds, but the doctor told me not to worry about finishing that one in a minute and 15 seconds, because he has never seen any one solve that one. I told him I was finished with it anyway when he looked up to see, and started watching my time.
After the test was done, he called a construction company and told them he found a craine operator. I wasn't looking for work, but he said with the way my mind works with my hands, I could do anything that require hand skills, and a craine operator make $27 to $40 an hour.
I don't think it is unusual for the way my hands work with art, but my mind goes beyond controling my hand. Any thing I am holding I can control easy. I have used a coat hanger to open a lot of cars, like it was a snake going right for the lock while it is twisting and moving without one wrong move. The only problem I have it when I am typing and someone says 20, and I am typing hundreds of quality reading numers. I alway type what people say before I can stop it, and have to fix the numbers. It seems normal to me, but I guess my hands work faster than my brain sometimes. It did come in handy when companies called me on the phone and discribe a picture they wanted, and at the end of the call I told them to check the email, and tell me if that is what they wanted. It was the basic picture without a lot of shadows, and not texture, but they thought it was finished. I'm slow at typing, because I never bothered to use more than two fingers, but I wrote a 4 chapter story, at 1000 words a chapter each day. So, I don't think it is like a special gift or anything. I can pick up hand skills quick, but art is more that hand skills, I do mostly imaginary art, but I have very little imagination to keep me going. If I look at some thing my mind goes blank while my hand draws it like a photo. That is why I like to draw from imagination, because what I see is no challenge, and mindless.

[Chris Saksida]

The only limit is HOW HARD DO YOU WANT IT AND HOW MUCH DO YOU LOVE TO DO IT.

Nothing else man; the rest are only excuses, maybe you don`t like to make art enough to be truly good, maybe this is not for you, for example, I like to play guitar but I`ll never be satriani... hell I will never even play like my best friend that plays guitar extremely well, just because I don`t like to play guitar THAT much

this guy... can spend the entire weekend inside his house playing the same fucking Steve Vai solo more than a hundred times and he`s HAPPY doing it, it`s not a struggle for him, he doesn`t whine that "he wasn`t born with enough talent"... he just loves to strum the cords and get that perfect sound out of that thing man... when you see him playing you don`t see struggle, you don`t see frustration, just love, flow and happyness.

I don`t love playing guitar like him, I just like it a little, so I`ll never play like him, I LOVE ART, it`s my thing, I feel the same when I`m painting than when this guiy plays the guitar, no frustration, no whining, just love, See my website, do you see a Jason Chan there? hell no! so what? I`m fine with that, I love to do what I do and that`s all that matters to me, the rest comes with time.

All you need is love. HAH!

[riceface]

there is a limit! or else there would be a billion michaelango's right now.. at least i know my limit.. doesn't mean i wont keep trying...

everyones brain is different.. and u aint gonna be as good as someone who is considered a genius

but there is a way to work around it.. is create ur own unique style thats fresh.. and u wont have to paint like a photo

[Crass]

there is a limit! or else there would be a billion michaelango's right now.. at least i know my limit.. doesn't mean i wont keep trying...

everyones brain is different.. and u aint gonna be as good as someone who is considered a genius

but there is a way to work around it.. is create ur own unique style thats fresh.. and u wont have to paint like a photo

Is there any evidence what so ever that justifies a position like this?

Michelangelo didn't have a mystical power that allowed him to sculpt and paint at a super-human level, he acquired his skills through dedication, hard work and a profound understanding of what he was doing. His work is absolutely awe-inspiring, no doubt, but it was created with two human hands just like yours. He himself said it best - "If you knew how much work went into it, you wouldn't call it genius." (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Michelangelo)
The reason that there aren't a billion Michelangelo´s is that there are not a billion people who are willing or able to sacrifice the time and energy to reach that tremendous level, and you probably have to be a bit mad to do so.

There might be circumstances that make it easier or more difficult, but if you really think you won't become a great artist because it's not "in" you, then that is either a terrible misunderstanding, something you have been told by someone who doesn't know what they are talking about and that has stuck even though it is a completely irrational standpoint - or you are a lazy bum, making excuses because it's too much of an effort. Settling for a style that you don't really want to pursue because it's easier, I mean come on?

[Mikko K]

Didn't Michelangelo dissect bodies of hanged thieves back in the day? Talk about dedication in studies :)

[Dile_]

there is a limit! or else there would be a billion michaelango's right now.. at least i know my limit.. doesn't mean i wont keep trying...

everyones brain is different.. and u aint gonna be as good as someone who is considered a genius

but there is a way to work around it.. is create ur own unique style thats fresh.. and u wont have to paint like a photo

You try ? How many studies have you done within the last two years ? =) The first time I saw your art was 1 day after my last post in this thread. I pity you for being so misguided and uninformed and unwilling to pursue your own supposed interest and for not working to get where you actually want to be. Setting up some sort of invisible 'limit' is so stupid I don't even know where to begin.

[Farvus]

What limits? I BELIEVE that I'm already better than Marko, Chan and Elwell...and Picasso, Cezanne, Rubens, and everybody else, too. I just haven't proven it yet. Laugh all you fuckin' want, but this fantasy belief in my own abilities is what keeps me going.

Haha. I got that too.
I prefer to think that my real potential is just waiting to be revealed some day. I just need to keep my eyes peeled for every single discovery beacause it might be the right path to that completness.

[Jason Ross]

The short answer to this question is...yes. Not everyone is going to be a Lance Armstrong or a Michael Jordan. Although we are "limited", you won't know what that limit is until you give it your all. Jason Chan could've said the same thing..."these other guys are just too good and I'm not so...I'll just be content with whatever level I think I'll reach." Everyone on these forums started out the same...not very good and in needing of learning. Be smart, practice, and surround yourself with other people better than you are and not family/friend fans.

I used to be a very good billiards player. And one thing that I noticed about my game was that whenever I played against someone who I felt was better than me or my equal I played much much better for the same reason. Better people bring out the best in us.

[Crass]

The short answer to this question is...yes. Not everyone is going to be a Lance Armstrong or a Michael Jordan. Although we are "limited", you won't know what that limit is until you give it your all. Jason Chan could've said the same thing..."these other guys are just too good and I'm not so...I'll just be content with whatever level I think I'll reach." Everyone on these forums started out the same...not very good and in needing of learning. Be smart, practice, and surround yourself with other people better than you are and not family/friend fans.

I used to be a very good billiards player. And one thing that I noticed about my game was that whenever I played against someone who I felt was better than me or my equal I played much much better for the same reason. Better people bring out the best in us.

There is a huge difference when we are talking about sports because they may require a set of physical characteristics that you don't possess, it will be very difficult to become a successful basketball player if you are five feet tall. Sure, becoming a good artist generally requires a few physical traits of its own, that you have eye-sight and that you are able to control your own body, specifically, but that could hardly be thought of as anything extraordinary.

Art is not a physical skill, the amount of physical effort that goes in to a brush stroke is minimal, there is a certain element of technique to a master´s brush work, sure, but it's definitely not a skill that is unattainable by anyone´s standard. Representational art is about analyzing and understanding what you see and what you do, this is a mental process and cannot be compared to riding a bike or executing a slam dunk. Any limit you could conceivably reach has to be in your brain. I don't believe there is such a limit, but even if there were our understanding of the human mind is still so very basic that we could never find or describe this limitation - so why would you just assume that it's there? Come back when someone has found the art gene that allows a select few people to become great artists, and I will change my theory to fit the evidence.

[Mikko K]

[QUOTE]there is a limit! or else there would be a billion michaelango's right now.. at least i know my limit.. doesn't mean i wont keep trying... /QUOTE]

I don't think there's a measurable limit one can reach considering artistic growth.

However, these threads are proof that a different kind of limit exists. And that is a mental limit. Your attitude and personal limitations are inside your own head, and those are hard to shake.

[Jason Ross]

There is a huge difference when we are talking about sports because they may require a set of physical characteristics that you don't possess, it will be very difficult to become a successful basketball player if you are five feet tall. Sure, becoming a good artist generally requires a few physical traits of its own, that you have eye-sight and that you are able to control your own body, specifically, but that could hardly be thought of as anything extraordinary.

Art is not a physical skill, the amount of physical effort that goes in to a brush stroke is minimal, there is a certain element of technique to a master´s brush work, sure, but it's definitely not a skill that is unattainable by anyone´s standard.

Not really only because we gravitate towards tasks that we believe we do well (tho spudd webb and muggsy bogues were well under 6 feet). Everyone therefore has the potential to be an artist because we all have an opposable thumb by the physical standards you are representing here. I can use non-sport related activities as well like Chess, Poker, Singing, or even Billiards to explain potential limitations in achievement.

Representational art is about analyzing and understanding what you see and what you do, this is a mental process and cannot be compared to riding a bike or executing a slam dunk.
Sure it can be compared in some sense...both take time, practice, and dedication to your goals. Exercising your mind to paint isn't much different that exercising your mind/body to play basketball well. If what you are saying is totally correct then there would be an amount of certainty pertaining to artistic limits. If you practice for "x"...then you will reach "x" level or proficiency...there is no guarantee in this claim.

I do understand your point and you are correct as far as saying that the playing field is not level when talking about the physical attributes for sports versus activities of the mind for most people. Then again do we all have equal amount of chance to obtain the level of genius? Are there limits in intelligence? I believe there is but that limit isn't reached until we die.

[Crass]

Not really only because we gravitate towards tasks that we believe we do well (tho spudd webb and muggsy bogues were well under 6 feet). Everyone therefore has the potential to be an artist because we all have an opposable thumb by the physical standards you are representing here. I can use non-sport related activities as well like Chess, Poker, Singing, or even Billiards to explain potential limitations in achievement.

Representational art is about analyzing and understanding what you see and what you do, this is a mental process and cannot be compared to riding a bike or executing a slam dunk.
Sure it can be compared in some sense...both take time, practice, and dedication to your goals. Exercising your mind to paint isn't much different that exercising your mind/body to play basketball well. If what you are saying is totally correct then there would be an amount of certainty pertaining to artistic limits. If you practice for "x"...then you will reach "x" level or proficiency...there is no guarantee in this claim.

I do understand your point and you are correct as far as saying that the playing field is not level when talking about the physical attributes for sports versus activities of the mind for most people. Then again do we all have equal amount of chance to obtain the level of genius? Are there limits in intelligence? I believe there is.

The thing is that there really is no 'x' proficiency, art can't be measured in terms of absolutes. A painting can be more or less realistic, but the fact that it is more or less realistic doesn't make it a better or worse painting in and of itself, it's so much more complicated than that, and to make matters worse, it's all subjective. I think it's wise to draw a line here between the arts and something like chess that has a rigid set of rules, even though I don't think some people have a natural ability to become skilled chess players either. (As for singing I don't know how it works but this may very well be a physical thing, some people have beautiful faces, others have beautiful voices? I don't know, I have neither.)

As for intelligence playing a part it may or may or may not be, there isn't even a consensus on how intelligence can be measured so it's difficult to address this at all. There are savants that have a very low IQ but are capable of creating life drawings with machine-like accuracy for example, which might seem counter-intuitive. These are incredibly complex matters and we are nowhere near any form of definite answer. Until there actually is some kind of evidence that some people have a 'natural ability' to paint or write music or climb mountains or solve equations you are only selling yourself short by assuming that's the way it works and that you may not have been born with this particular ability. I think the fact that some people become successful painters and others become great writers and that some people don't excel at anything at all depends on other factors than inherent 'talent', things of which you are i control, at least to such an extent that you can do it if that is what you really want.

This doesn't mean that I think that everyone starts out with the exact same prerequisite, that depends on who and where you are when you decide what you want to do, and what you have experienced and learned before, you generally don't decide that you want to become an artist at birth.

[riceface]

art is a talent... to all the people claiming theres no limit.. in one of ur winded the skys the limit bs.

listen.. everyones brains are different, everyones talents are different.. stop saying everyones the same in this freakin politically correct world..

lets give everyone an A for on the basket ball court when clearly some of them suck.. lets give everyone a cookie cuz were all completely equal in everything..

eskimos are just as talented as african americans at basket ball.. samoans are better then asians at math... because despite clear statistic.. we have to be politcially correct and where all EXACTLY THE SAME...

theres no difference between any of our 6billion.. a doctor is just as smart as an 8 time convinct for rape...

[Ilaekae]

Hate to be the piss-off here, but THERE IS such a thing as a "genius" in art. It occurs in all other fields, so how can it not appear in art?

You can call it "talent," "genius," a "miracle of coincidence" where everything that could happen to the high-end extreme happens to one person, or an "accident of birth/life/tangency" where the exact level of perception, skills, overwhelming interest, access to knowledge and circumstances all come together to produce a person who has a slight edge. This person(s) exists. It can't be denied. And this person(s) has a limit(s), just as every one of us does.

Their limits may be different than with most, or so far in front of them that they die before they come to it, but the limits are there, AND they MUST work their fuckin' asses off to reach and overcome THAT limit so they can SEE THE NEXT LIMIT, just as everyone else does. The problem comes when "every one else" starts to spend their time and effort comparing themselves to the guy way in front, or tries to find shortcuts to get where (s)he is without the effort required, assuming the target is a singular "place" or limit to reach, let alone surpass.

Let's get this to practical levels here...

Do I know more than Jason Chan, Android and Marko (named simply as examples)? You bet your sweet fuckin' ass I do. I'm not stupid, and I've got a 30 to 40 year jump on these punks. Is there an advantage my way due to this? All things being equal, YES!

But...are we comparing equal dedication to the same skills, specialized learning connected to a specific vertical field, and even remotely similar facility with the same media/processes/methodologies? HELL NO!

Which proves what? Absolutely fuckin' nothin'...

The three people I mentioned above have done, are doing, and will do things that I couldn't attempt without embarrassing myself, but the opposite is EQUALLY TRUE for my side of the equation. They and I all still have much to learn, just in different areas that we didn't have to venture into before, and this is more of a problem for me than it is for them because I have less time and a much more complex learning/unlearning experience going on than they do.

Before we bite the big one, will EVERYONE on this forum ever achieve the incredible levels that any given "artistic god" we worship did? Get real! You believe that and you probably still believe in Santa Klause and the Tooth Faerie. There are so many things against the perfect combination of opportunities, education, level of skills, access, eat-my-own-leg-off dedication, and just plain luck coming together for every single person on this forum to achieve the level of "the gods" that the odds alone would have to violate the laws of math/physics.

So...

Can we all become professional artists (whatever the hell THAT means)? Technically YES, except for the percentage of assholes who'd rather whine, stay permanently drunk, get laid twice a day, and slack off to the last minute on every single thing they ever do for the rest of their pitiful lives.

Can we all get rich and famous? We all wish. We can be successful in direct proportion to the amount of effort that we put in to it, and often that will get us money and recognition of some kind.

Can we all be "gods" of the art world? Fuck no! (...see para above word "So...")

Can we all be "geniuses" that will be remembered through history as inspiration to those who come after us? Again, not very fuckin' likely. If it were POSSIBLE, you could prove it to me by listing every single artist on the face of the earth who successfully earned their living through art between the years of...so...ohhh...1700 and 1800. The list should be at least a couple of yards long (at least!) unless you missed someone, or JUST didn't KNOW about them... Too hard? Do the same for the years 1900 to 2000 instead then. THAT list (due to advances in communications and literacy) should be a couple miles long probably... How easy is this?

[PUH-leeeeeze... Don't be stupid enough to try this. It's not--NOT--possible to do, because we can't possibly know about all those people. Go draw instead.]

Basically, we ALL can achieve the life in art we want to whatever degree we deem worth our efforts, all things being equal (excluding the idiots I mentioned above), MANY of us WILL make a mark outside our immediate circle of acquaintances, and some of us will become "gods" of our professional fields, but "geniuses"? You might be able to count them on both your hands with fingers left for future names. The odds against the perfectly balanced intelligence, perception and skill levels occurring necessary for that to happen are just mind-boggling.

Are you depressed now? Tooooooo bad. Are you wiser now? Hopefully. Will you decide to work your fuckin' asses off now just to prove how great you are and what a mis-informed moron I am? ...hopefully.




...oh...and it would help if you got out of the lounge first.

[Crass]

art is a talent... to all the people claiming theres no limit.. in one of ur winded the skys the limit bs.

listen.. everyones brains are different, everyones talents are different.. stop saying everyones the same in this freakin politically correct world..

lets give everyone an A for on the basket ball court when clearly some of them suck.. lets give everyone a cookie cuz were all completely equal in everything..

eskimos are just as talented as african americans at basket ball.. samoans are better then asians at math... because despite clear statistic.. we have to be politcially correct and where all EXACTLY THE SAME...

theres no difference between any of our 6billion.. a doctor is just as smart as an 8 time convinct for rape...

That is not what this is about at all, but there doesn't seem to be much of a point taking this any further with you, so, best of luck to you.

[Crass]

Hate to be the piss-off here, but THERE IS such a thing as a "genius" in art. It occurs in all other fields, so how can it not appear in art?

You can call it "talent," "genius," a "miracle of coincidence" where everything that could happen to the high-end extreme happens to one person, or an "accident of birth/life/tangency" where the exact level of perception, skills, overwhelming interest, access to knowledge and circumstances all come together to produce a person who has a slight edge. This person(s) exists. It can't be denied. And this person(s) has a limit(s), just as every one of us does.

Their limits may be different than with most, or so far in front of them that they die before they come to it, but the limits are there, AND they MUST work their fuckin' asses off to reach and overcome THAT limit so they can SEE THE NEXT LIMIT, just as everyone else does. The problem comes when "every one else" starts to spend their time and effort comparing themselves to the guy way in front, or tries to find shortcuts to get where (s)he is without the effort required, assuming the target is a singular "place" or limit to reach, let alone surpass.

Let's get this to practical levels here...

Do I know more than Jason Chan, Android and Marko (named simply as examples)? You bet your sweet fuckin' ass I do. I'm not stupid, and I've got a 30 to 40 year jump on these punks. Is there an advantage my way due to this? All things being equal, YES!

But...are we comparing equal dedication to the same skills, specialized learning connected to a specific vertical field, and even remotely similar facility with the same media/processes/methodologies? HELL NO!

Which proves what? Absolutely fuckin' nothin'...

The three people I mentioned above have done, are doing, and will do things that I couldn't attempt without embarrassing myself, but the opposite is EQUALLY TRUE for my side of the equation. They and I all still have much to learn, just in different areas that we didn't have to venture into before, and this is more of a problem for me than it is for them because I have less time and a much more complex learning/unlearning experience going on than they do.

Before we bite the big one, will EVERYONE on this forum ever achieve the incredible levels that any given "artistic god" we worship did? Get real! You believe that and you probably still believe in Santa Klause and the Tooth Faerie. There are so many things against the perfect combination of opportunities, education, level of skills, access, eat-my-own-leg-off dedication, and just plain luck coming together for every single person on this forum to achieve the level of "the gods" that the odds alone would have to violate the laws of math/physics.

So...

Can we all become professional artists (whatever the hell THAT means)? Technically YES, except for the percentage of assholes who'd rather whine, stay permanently drunk, get laid twice a day, and slack off to the last minute on every single thing they ever do for the rest of their pitiful lives.

Can we all get rich and famous? We all wish. We can be successful in direct proportion to the amount of effort that we put in to it, and often that will get us money and recognition of some kind.

Can we all be "gods" of the art world? Fuck no! (...see para above word "So...")

Can we all be "geniuses" that will be remembered through history as inspiration to those who come after us? Again, not very fuckin' likely. If it were POSSIBLE, you could prove it to me by listing every single artist on the face of the earth who successfully earned their living through art between the years of...so...ohhh...1700 and 1800. The list should be at least a couple of yards long (at least!) unless you missed someone, or JUST didn't KNOW about them... Too hard? Do the same for the years 1900 to 2000 instead then. THAT list (due to advances in communications and literacy) should be a couple miles long probably... How easy is this?

[PUH-leeeeeze... Don't be stupid enough to try this. It's not--NOT--possible to do, because we can't possibly know about all those people. Go draw instead.]

Basically, we ALL can achieve the life in art we want to what ever degree we deem worth reaching (excluding the idiots I mentioned above), MANY of us WILL make a mark outside our immediate circle of acquaintances, and some of us will become "gods" of our professional fields, but "geniuses"? You might be able to count them on both your hands with fingers left for future names. The odds against the intelligence, perception and skill levels occurring necessary for that to happen are just mind-boggling.

Are you depressed now? Tooooooo bad. Are you wiser now? Hopefully. Will you decide to work your fuckin' asses off now just to prove how great you are and what a mis-informed moron I am? ...hopefully.




...oh...and it would help if you got out of the lounge first.

To me, this discussion isn't about making money, being remembered or being labeled a genius by others at all. It's about making great art, that doesn't guarantee you any of those things, and not making great art doesn't necessarily mean that you won't get them either...

Even if there were a pre-defined limit for each and every person, dictating just exactly how good of an artist they can become regardless of how hard they work, I'm sure the limits people put on themselves by reinforcing those kinds of ideas hold them back even more. It's not about idealism or any sort of 'believe what you want to be true' sentiment on my part, it's a way of approaching art and learning, and it's not taken out of thin air either, the notion that there even is such a thing as talent is, on the other hand.

I dare anyone to even define talent.

Of course not everyone on this forum is going to become one of the greatest artists, on the contrary close to none will, and yes, it does depend on what different circumstances different people find themselves in, and yes it will probably be dependent on a bit of luck and it will be much much harder for some of us than for others but there is nothing mystical, nothing magical about it. No X factor. This is what I believe, if someone else want's to blame their failures on the 'fact' that they weren't born with Michelangelo's syndrome of the mystical art gene then I suppose that's fine, but if I don't make it, it is because I didn't work hard enough.

[Crass]

Flipping the argument on it's end, if you are an accomplished artist and you believe that this is because you have a special gift that lesser artists lack, that's just being an asshole.

[Ilaekae]

"Flipping the argument on it's end, if you are an accomplished artist and you believe that this is because you have a special gift that lesser artists lack, that's just being an asshole."

I would definitely agree with you. But if someone were to get that from what I wrote above, THEY would be a complete asshole.

Do you have a sketchbook, or any art posted that would give me an idea of where you stand at this point in time in your art journey? It would give me an idea as to how to understand where you're coming from possibly...

[Crass]

"Flipping the argument on it's end, if you are an accomplished artist and you believe that this is because you have a special gift that lesser artists lack, that's just being an asshole."

I would definitely agree with you. But if someone were to get that from what I wrote above, THEY would be a complete asshole.

Do you have a sketchbook, or any art posted that would give me an idea of where you stand at this point in time in your art journey? It would give me an idea as to how to understand where you're coming from possibly...

That comment wasn't directed at you at all, it was just a general reflection. In general I think we agree pretty much, it comes down to defining terms like genius. To me, dedicating yourself to such a degree that you achieve mastery is genius, it's also madness, but that the two walk hand in hand isn't really a new notion. Luck is involved to a degree, but most people have the ability to change their situation to favor their own development as artists if they really want to do that, even if some people are less fortunate and will have a harder time doing this.

I don't have a sketchbook yet, there is a thread in the educations board about me studying on my own but I really don't see how my current skill level would have anything to do with the validity of my arguments or my standpoint on this issue.

[ShroudStar]

Talent might not be the end all and be all but I definitely believe some people have the intuitive nature of it down better and faster than others. In my circle of artist friends, one of us I believe is naturally gifted. While I and the others have had to attend art classes from early on to now to grasp the basic fundamentals, this young man in our group was already ahead of us about 10-14 years back. He'd never taken classes before. He just drew for fun and out of imagination but he already got down perspective, anatomy, environments, etc. while the rest of us needed references and plenty of studying just to nail it.

As a result, he's already ahead of us in his career as a professional. While he does have his down days, even his worst stuff looks stellar to us. A college art education simply gave him even more tools and techniques to bolster his natural ability. My brother, who started out way later than me, grasps certain aspects faster than I do. He doesn't even crack open the Bridgman - he just gets it from looking and observing all the time. Me - I need everything.

So yes, there are different rates of learning and absorption of knowledge. Talent isn't everything to determine success but combined with hard work, it sure advances certain people ahead of the game.

[Crass]

Talent might not be the end all and be all but I definitely believe some people have the intuitive nature of it down better and faster than others. In my circle of artist friends, one of us I believe is naturally gifted. While I and the others have had to attend art classes from early on to now to grasp the basic fundamentals, this young man in our group was already ahead of us about 10-14 years back. He'd never taken classes before. He just drew for fun and out of imagination but he already got down perspective, anatomy, environments, etc. while the rest of us needed references and plenty of studying just to nail it.

As a result, he's already ahead of us in his career as a professional. While he does have his down days, even his worst stuff looks stellar to us. A college art education simply gave him even more tools and techniques to bolster his natural ability. My brother, who started out way later than me, grasps certain aspects faster than I do. He doesn't even crack open the Bridgman - he just gets it from looking and observing all the time. Me - I need everything.

So yes, there are different rates of learning and absorption of knowledge. Talent isn't everything to determine success but combined with hard work, it sure advances certain people ahead of the game.

But is his gift that he is a great artist, or a great learner?

[ShroudStar]

Both? He's a natural learner without the academic back-up that most of us needed or already had. No one else in our group can say the same. We still need to pencil in perspective lines, especially if we try making comics. He doesn't and it still looks natural. I can't argue with that.

[Jon Sun]

I find it difficult to talk about limits to artistic ability, because art isn't something that is easily quantifiable. Once you get to a certain level of accomplishment, it isn't lack of ability or skill that "limits" an artist. Rather, it is the very subject/content of the piece of art that the artist is using his/her artistic ability to create.

Once you get to certain point of skill, how can you say that one skillfully painted painting is any better than another of the same quality? Is the one piece of art more beautiful than the other? How can beauty be quantified? How can someone say that Rembrandt is better than Sargent is better than Velazquez? When it comes to that level of skill, I think aesthetic tastes and opinions determine what is a "better" painting more than anything.

So, for new and budding artists (like myself, and others) I guess you can talk about improving speed, limits, and such, but when you get to a certain point, doesn't it become arbitrary? Granted, even pros are still improving and striving to get better, but I think at that level, it's not so much skill or talent that is the "limit" but rather what to paint?

[Crass]

Both? He's a natural learner without the academic back-up that most of us needed or already had. No one else in our group can say the same. We still need to pencil in perspective lines, especially if we try making comics. He doesn't and it still looks natural. I can't argue with that.

Good for him, but it doesn't mean that the rest of you can't become as good, or better artists. The fact that people learn at different paces and by different methods is difficult to argue against, it is quite obviously so.

[Ilaekae]

"But is his gift that he is a great artist, or a great learner?"

Why would it matter? Unless we can prove that one of these just can't possibly exist with positive evidence, aren't they just two sides to the same coin?

Have you ever met someone who never saw or held an artist's brush in their hands before, but when presented with one, simply went through what they thought was the logical process with pigments and an appropriate tool, with surprisingly good results? I know at least three people who actually did this. One of them was quite skilled with a pencil, but basically stuck to line without shading, so the concept of volume, shading, etc., were a totally new concept to them. Before someone tries to explain it away by claiming exposure to magazines, school, or TV, I'd like to point out that all three were Appalachian 12-13-year-olds who had never attended formal school or traveled, and were nearly illiterate (very early 60s--northern Cambria County, Pennsylvania).

[ADD] Please note here that I'm not necessarily agreeing with your use of "great" above. I'd rather say "natural" for want of a better term.

[ShroudStar]

Good for him, but it doesn't mean that the rest of you can't become as good, or better artists. The fact that people learn at different paces and by different methods is difficult to argue against, it is quite obviously so.

Of course I'm not saying that, but we'll hit his level much later than he did. That's a fact and he's already making another headway that shoots him above us again. Some people just have that intuitiveness. If I can compare that to something else not art, my brother loves playing 2D fighting games. He can simply watch a combo vid, see the combo done, and immediately memorize it in his head and apply it to gameplay. It's gotten to the point where his friends, going by Naruto, said that he has the "Sharingen" eye. He gets it that fast. Of course, playing games isn't the same as art, but some people just can immediately understand what's been put in front of them. Others can't or do so at a much slower pace.

[Ilaekae]

Sorry, overlooked this...

"It's about making great art,..."

That statement is why I asked what I did. I was a professional instructor for 17 years, and seeing people's work can often give me a clue to how well they are advancing and sometimes how intuitive they might be in adapting to new information. It lets me see your thought process in a very rudimentary sense. Sorry if I made you feel you had to defend yourself.

[Crass]

"But is his gift that he is a great artist, or a great learner?"

Why would it matter? Unless we can prove that one of these just can't possibly exist with positive evidence, aren't they just two sides to the same coin?

Have you ever met someone who never saw or held an artist's brush in their hands before, but when presented with one, simply went through what they thought was the logical process with pigments and an appropriate tool, with surprisingly good results? I know at least three people who actually did this. One of them was quite skilled with a pencil, but basically stuck to line without shading, so the concept of volume, shading, etc., were a totally new concept to them. Before someone tries to explain it away by claiming exposure to magazines, school, or TV, I'd like to point out that all three were Appalachian 12-13-year-olds who had never attended formal school or traveled, and were nearly illiterate (very early 60s--northern Cambria County, Pennsylvania).

I don't think they are the same thing because if there were such a thing as an artist's gift, someone who has it would be able to make greater art than someone who has not. That some people learn much faster than others is not a secret, but it only means that they get to a higher level more quickly. I'm not denying the fact that there are child prodigies or people who present enormous skill in their respective field very quickly, but the fact that these people exist does not mean that other people cannot create art that is just as good, it will take longer, but in the end it comes down to what bandaidboy12 was talking about, how do you even determine what is better at the level of the masters?

I suppose if we by some alien technology were able to objectively determine what is better art, it could be proven that some people are better artists and that this is linked in some way to their genetic or psychological markup but as you see this is getting very ridiculous. My point remains that the notion that there would be some identifiable point beyond which a normal person can't advance, but 'gifted' people may exceed seems completely unfounded.

[Ilaekae]

All skills being equal, with or without identical methods of education, would you accept that there are some people who have the ability to convey/communicate/depict a level of "life" or "meaning" in a piece of art that others do not, and this may account for why there is an apparent small group of artists/musicians/writers/sculptors who are recognized as "talented" or "geniuses" in their creative field?

[Crass]

All skills being equal, with or without identical methods of education, would you accept that there are some people who have the ability to convey/communicate/depict a level of "life" or "meaning" in a piece of art that others do not, and this may account for why there is an apparent small group of artists/musicians/writers/sculptors who are recognized as "talented" or "geniuses" in their creative field?

Yes, but I think this is because these people have a combination of experiences and attitudes that shine through in their work. This is something completely different because you have influence over who you are and what you choose to experience and learn, it's not something assigned to you at birth like your shoe size or the color of your eyes. There is no gene that will give you an idea for a painting or a great story for a novel, these are things that you find within yourself as you experience life.

[Ilaekae]

Agree. Done.

[Bushido]

"The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them into the impossible."

Arthur C. Clarke

[JeroKane]

This is actually a very interesting topic.

I personally think, before you begin to talk about limits.

What kind of limits are we talking about?

There is something called "Talent" or "Gift".

Everyone has it, but not in drawing/painting. It can be anything.

Someone has the talent/gift to become a great pilot. Another in being a master of many languages. Another in being a great writer. Another in being a great musician. Another being a carpenter, mechanic, engineer and whatnot.

I don't believe that there are 'no limits' and everyone can be anything they want to be. Everyone has a limit. If you like it or not.

Example, I always wanted to be a jetfighter pilot. Unfortunately genetic circumstances interfered with my dream and I ended up being 1.93cm (absolute max. length for pilot), having a long neck (combined with max. length not being able to withstand the high G-forces) and my hearing not being high enough to pass the tests. (Im not deaf, but test req's are very very high demanding).

There is in no way I can make myself shorter, cut away my long neck and look at the sky and ask some supernatural being to magically improve my hearing, so I can pass the tests and become a pilot.

So, you are forced to give up that dream and start looking for another. That is called being realistic, don't waste your life and move on in a different direction.

---------

Morale if this story. I think this applies to everything. Even the ability to draw/paint.

If lack the talent, touch or feel for drawing... no matter how hard you try... you will end up being stuck with the drawing skills of a 6-year old.

And then you will have to ask yourself the realistic question: Is this really what I want? Or am I going to waste my life pursuing a goal I will never reach?

I could have moved to another country, where the tests are less, become a pilot there... then pull some high G's, pass out in mid air and then ultimately crash to my death.

--------

And sure, there is something called will power and determination. But it can only help you just that much along the way. The talent, the touch, the feel for drawing/painting still needs to be there from the start. Even if it's hidden and not directly noticable at the beginning.

--------

I personally think, that the real question in this topic is. What do I want to do? What goal do I have in mind?

Do I just want to just have fun, draw whenever I can and pursue it as a hobby?

Or do I want to become a professional artist and make a living out of it?


For the first, everyone can pursue that and have fun in their own way.

The latter however.... there another very important factor that comes into play and that is something you CANNOT learn! : IMAGINATION and IMPROVISATION.

You might not believe it, but there are plenty of unfortunate people that don't have an imagination.

And without it.... well pretty much forget in becoming a professional artist.

-----------------

In the end. Everyone has a talent. It might just not be drawing/painting.

That's life.

[Crass]

This is actually a very interesting topic.

I personally think, before you begin to talk about limits.

What kind of limits are we talking about?

There is something called "Talent" or "Gift".

Everyone has it, but not in drawing/painting. It can be anything.

Someone has the talent/gift to become a great pilot. Another in being a master of many languages. Another in being a great writer. Another in being a great musician. Another being a carpenter, mechanic, engineer and whatnot.

I don't believe that there are 'no limits' and everyone can be anything they want to be. Everyone has a limit. If you like it or not.

Example, I always wanted to be a jetfighter pilot. Unfortunately genetic circumstances interfered with my dream and I ended up being 1.93cm (absolute max. length for pilot), having a long neck (combined with max. length not being able to withstand the high G-forces) and my hearing not being high enough to pass the tests. (Im not deaf, but test req's are very very high demanding).

There is in no way I can make myself shorter, cut away my long neck and look at the sky and ask some supernatural being to magically improve my hearing, so I can pass the tests and become a pilot.

So, you are forced to give up that dream and start looking for another. That is called being realistic, don't waste your life and move on in a different direction.

---------

Morale if this story. I think this applies to everything. Even the ability to draw/paint.

If lack the talent, touch or feel for drawing... no matter how hard you try... you will end up being stuck with the drawing skills of a 6-year old.

And then you will have to ask yourself the realistic question: Is this really what I want? Or am I going to waste my life pursuing a goal I will never reach?

I could have moved to another country, where the tests are less, become a pilot there... then pull some high G's, pass out in mid air and then ultimately crash to my death.

--------

And sure, there is something called will power and determination. But it can only help you just that much along the way. The talent, the touch, the feel for drawing/painting still needs to be there from the start. Even if it's hidden and not directly noticable at the beginning.

--------

I personally think, that the real question in this topic is. What do I want to do? What goal do I have in mind?

Do I just want to just have fun, draw whenever I can and pursue it as a hobby?

Or do I want to become a professional artist and make a living out of it?


For the first, everyone can pursue that and have fun in their own way.

The latter however.... there another very important factor that comes into play and that is something you CANNOT learn! : IMAGINATION and IMPROVISATION.

You might not believe it, but there are plenty of unfortunate people that don't have an imagination.

And without it.... well pretty much forget in becoming a professional artist.

-----------------

In the end. Everyone has a talent. It might just not be drawing/painting.

That's life.

I don't want to be having a go, but this whole idea of the inherent talent, some people become good at this and that and others at something else, where does it even come from? How have you arrived at this conclusion? Obviously in the end some people will end up as one ting or another since there is no time in life to be good at everything, but from where comes this notion that your final skill level is pre-determined? Is there anything observable in the universe what so ever that even suggests this? Yes there can be physical limitations, someone who is blind and paralyzed won't become as good of a portrait painter as John Singer Sargent but this is very far beside the point, it's taking it into extremes where argument becomes redundant. Is it a religious thing to believe in this mystical talent element to the human mind? If it's not, then it can be researched and defined at some point, so what do you propose that it actually is?

It seems to me this is just a thing people say because it's what they have been taught, it's what I got hammered into my head when I was younger as well but as I've started to think more about it it just seems ridiculous. I understand perfectly well why an idea like this runs rampant, it's convenient both ways because if you want to acquire a skill but ultimately fail you deduct that it's because you didn't have the required talent and so it wasn't your fault, and on the other hand if you do believe you have the talent, then maybe you won't have to work as hard?

I'm sorry you couldn't become a pilot, but it is also beside the point because as I said, I don't think something that requires a very specific physique is really comparable to art in a broad sense.

[Pezz]

There's a lot of debate over whether or not you can excel at something if you really love it and apply yourself... but, all I know is, the closest thing I have to a talent or gift is in the arts. I do not excel at anything else at that same magnitude.

I don't know if it has to do with some sort of mystical talent or some favor over one hemisphere of my brain over another (I excel in the sciences also, but not in the math as much (as in, I don't drool on myself and beat my head into the concrete over doing advanced math, but I'm no genius))

Either way, I'm nowhere near as good as the greats or even some of the people here that are younger than me. I admittedly am making up for some lost time and am just now finding my niche and focus. I look now at an El Coro painting and no longer feel disappointment that I am not like him, but feel secure in knowing that one day, perhaps I could find my own niche in that regard.

However, I am one to believe that one's own self confidence and esteem has to do quite a bit with one's limitations and cap in ability and perhaps enjoyment. I do not set limits for myself, only goals; and I can already see my skills improve with leaps and bounds, my imagination re-awaken from the dead sleep it was in.

Perhaps everyone does have one final plateau. Perhaps...but if I continue on with a focus like that in mind, I might just fulfill my own prophecy and hit it. The day I said "I'll never be good enough" was the day I wasn't.

[DanialGlover]

there is a limit! or else there would be a billion michaelango's right now.. at least i know my limit.. doesn't mean i wont keep trying...

everyones brain is different.. and u aint gonna be as good as someone who is considered a genius

but there is a way to work around it.. is create ur own unique style thats fresh.. and u wont have to paint like a photo

What are you on about? People make their own limits. You know your limits because you're limiting yourself, unless someone's dead there's no way they know their limit unless they just goof off and limit themself from not drawing, painting, etc.

I was born with 0 talent, not even stick figures, I'm still terrible but I'm not gonna go around saying I know my limits. Sure, some people are born more gifted than others, understanding stuff better, but that's definitly not everyone. If anything I was born with a bit of knowledge on how to grasp what I see, and that's not even good.

You really don't know your limits, you're going to keep trying, meaning you're making your OWN limit. If my right hand got cut off, does that mean I'm at my limit? Of course not, I have a perfectly fine left hand that I can learn with. If my left hand fell off? I have two feet, I have a mouth. Limits are made because a person wishes those limits to be made, or they're just incapable of moving their body.

There's always something new to learn. Time moves on, new techniques are developed, new artists are born.

People make excuses.

[JeroKane]

I don't want to be having a go, but this whole idea of the inherent talent, some people become good at this and that and others at something else, where does it even come from? How have you arrived at this conclusion? Obviously in the end some people will end up as one ting or another since there is no time in life to be good at everything, but from where comes this notion that your final skill level is pre-determined? Is there anything observable in the universe what so ever that even suggests this? Yes there can be physical limitations, someone who is blind and paralyzed won't become as good of a portrait painter as John Singer Sargent but this is very far beside the point, it's taking it into extremes where argument becomes redundant. Is it a religious thing to believe in this mystical talent element to the human mind? If it's not, then it can be researched and defined at some point, so what do you propose that it actually is?

It seems to me this is just a thing people say because it's what they have been taught, it's what I got hammered into my head when I was younger as well but as I've started to think more about it it just seems ridiculous. I understand perfectly well why an idea like this runs rampant, it's convenient both ways because if you want to acquire a skill but ultimately fail you deduct that it's because you didn't have the required talent and so it wasn't your fault, and on the other hand if you do believe you have the talent, then maybe you won't have to work as hard?

I'm sorry you couldn't become a pilot, but it is also beside the point because as I said, I don't think something that requires a very specific physique is really comparable to art in a broad sense.

Where (inheritant) talent comes from?

It's there. It's been proven over and over and over.

I am sorry, but under wich rock have you been hiding all your life?

Talent or people with a gift. That's for real and it exists.

I know musical talent runs in my family. And I have the ability to pick up things real quick and being able to become good at something if I go for it.

As example, I picked up DJ'ing. Have a passion for house music. And within 2 years I was playing in the biggest clubs and parties on Holland and beyond. Unfortunately economic recession pretty much killed the whole scene (and I was happy to still have my full time IT job). Nonetheless I enjoyed the few years of fame. Nothing can take that experience away from me and I never regret pursuing it and trying it out.

So you see. I sertainly believe that sertain talents (or gifts for that matter) can be inherited.

Just go back to your school time. At least I can go back.

There were students that could read everything just once and get A grades over and over and pass with a breeze.

While on the other hands there were students that read and read and read and read over and over and over again. Blood, sweat and tears. They worked their asses off.... and yet they keep getting F's or maybe an E if they were lucky.

IQ rating ringing a bell perhaps?

The human brain is a complex thing. Little is still known.

It's the same with art. Plenty of people try and try and try and try.

Should you give up? Ofcourse not!

You might not make it to a professional level and make a living out of it. But it doesn't mean you can enjoy it as a nice hobby.

Next to that, there are plenty of limits and barriers in something called Real Life that interfere with what you can achieve as well.

It all depends on wich point of life you are.

If you are a young kid. You have a whole life ahead of you. Still all the choices to make and the freedom to make those choices.

Me for example, I was really good at art subject back at school. But ultimately I chose a different path. As I thought it was safer and more future proof (IT professional).

Now I am 32, nearly 33, have a wonderful girlfriend, we just bought a house and I have a good solid job.

It means I have a mortage and bills to pay. So I can't just decide to quit my job to pursue the idea of a (want to be) professional artist all the sudden. Ruining my girlfriend's life in the process.

Those a realistic limits you deal with in life. Not something you can just wave away.

Do I give up? No ofcourse not. I draw and paint whenever I have time. I haven't done it for over 10 years. I missed it and decided to pick it up again.
Being an IT professional, I am a total NOOB when it comes to digital painting.

I enjoy it in my spare time. As a hobby. That is all there is for me. At least for now.

Jer

[Crass]

Where (inheretant) talent comes from?

It's there. It's been proven over and over and over.

I am sorry, but under wich rock have you been hiding all your life?

Talent or people with a gift. That's for real and it exists.

Just go back to your school time. At least I can go back.

There were students that could read everything just once and get A grades over and over and pass with a breeze.

While on the other hands there were students that read and read and read and read over and over and over again. Blood, sweat and tears. They worked their asses off.... and yet they keep getting F's or maybe an E if they were lucky.

IQ rating ringing a bell perhaps?

The human brain is a complex thing. Little is still known.

It's the same with art. Plenty of people try and try and try and try.

Should you give up? Ofcourse not!

You might not make it to a professional level and make a living out of it. But it doesn't mean you can enjoy it as a nice hobby.

Next to that, there are plenty of limits and barriers in something called Real Life that interfere with what you can achieve as well.

It all depends on wich point of life you are.

If you are a young kid. You have a whole life ahead of you. Still all the choices to make and the freedom to make those choices.

Me for example, I was really good at art subject back at school. But ultimately I chose a different path. As I thought it was safer and more future proof (IT professional).

Now I am 32, nearly 33, have a wonderful girlfriend, we just bought a house and I have a good solid job.

It means I have a mortage and bills to pay. So I can't just decide to quit my job and decide to pursue the idea of an artist all the sudden. Ruining my girlfriend's life in the process.

Those a realistic limits you deal with in life. Not something you can just wave away.

Do I give up? No ofcourse not. I draw and paint whenever I have time. I haven't done it for over 10 years. I missed it and decided to pick it up again.
Being an IT professional, I am a total NOOB when it comes to digital painting.

I enjoy it in my spare time. As a hobby. That is all there is for me. At least for now.

Jer

There are people who are more intelligent than others, people who learn more efficiently than others, I agree, but why wouldn't someone who learns at an average pace be able to achieve the same level of mastery in painting? Where is the evidence that shows that great painters were born to be great painters, and that their skill would be unattainable by normal people regardless of how much they practice? I don't believe you have this evidence, or that this has been proven at all.

Does IQ have something to do with it? Yes and no. I don't think you can draw a conclusion that out of a hundred art students the one with the highest IQ will become the best painter, or the one with the lowest will become the worst. Looking at savants like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aru6c7dzVVE) on may wonder whether it has any bearing at all. Savants typically have very low IQ, about 50% of the average, but may show extraordinary skill like this.

Your social situation has a lot to do with whether you become a good artist or not, if, like you, one finds himself in a situation where it is very difficult to dedicate oneself to an art form it will be difficult to excel at it but this hasn't got anything to do with the issue either, since you are in this position because of choices you have made, not because you were born that way (unless we go into determinist philosophy...)

Edit: Also, I'm bailing out of this discussion now because I'm starting to sound like a broken record. I don't think I can make my point much clearer.

[JeroKane]

There are people who are more intelligent than others, people who learn more efficiently than others, I agree, but why wouldn't someone who learns at an average pace be able to achieve the same level of mastery in painting? Where is the evidence that shows that great painters were born to be great painters, and that their skill would be unattainable by normal people regardless of how much they practice? I don't believe you have this evidence, or that this has been proven at all.

Yes, someone that is lucky to be more intelligent (or just having the gift to pick up things very quickly) will learn a lot quicker and excell in something a lot faster.

And ofcourse someone with an average pace (basically the vast majority of people) can attain a high master level too. It takes longer. Sure.

But there are also plenty of people that are less fortunate and are just not able to pick up and excell in sertain areas (incl. art). No matter how hard they try and how long they try.

And then it's not fair to give those people false hope and let them waste their life trying to achieve something that is clearly out of their reach.
They would be better off trying to find something else in wich they can excell and ultimately enjoy and so make better out of their lives.


Does IQ have something to do with it? Yes and no. I don't think you can draw a conclusion that out of a hundred art students the one with the highest IQ will become the best painter, or the one with the lowest will become the worst. Looking at savants like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aru6c7dzVVE) on may wonder whether it has any bearing at all. Savants typically have very low IQ, about 50% of the average, but may show extraordinary skill like this.

Awesome video. And yes Savants are a very good example of people that might look severely mentallity challenged to the outside world, but are very well able to excell in one single subject.

In this case. This savant has the gift/ability of photographic memory and translating it to a canvas.



Your social situation has a lot to do with whether you become a good artist or not, if, like you, one finds himself in a situation where it is very difficult to dedicate oneself to an art form it will be difficult to excel at it but this hasn't got anything to do with the issue either, since you are in this position because of choices you have made, not because you were born that way (unless we go into determinist philosophy...)

Edit: Also, I'm bailing out of this discussion now because I'm starting to sound like a broken record. I don't think I can make my point much clearer.

Yes ofcourse my social situation are choices I made in life.

Just like everyone else makes his/her choices in life and so face different kind of barriers and limits.

Jer

[vampire cervix]

Of course there's a limit to everyone's ability. There's a limit to pretty much everything.

Just like physical resources, mental resources are not infinite, because they're don't have physical form people tend to believe they're mystical and special, they're not. And everyone has different limits. Think about cars, different cars have different top speeds, a Ford Expedition would NEVER be faster than a Porsche Carrera GT no matter how many times they would race or how hard the guy in the Ford would stomp the gas pedal.

Yeah i know what you're gonna say, "you can upgrade the Ford's engine...bla bla bla". Nothing you can do to it would make that much of a difference except replacing the engine. That's equivalent to a brain transplant, something you just can't have.

The thing is, why the hell is the Ford racing anyway? It wasn't built for that, it was built for carrying people, carrying lots of crap in the back and off-roading, thing it does very well. And that's what it should be doing.

Just because you can't draw it doesn't mean you suck as a human being.

Look for something you CAN do, instead of chasing something you can't.

[Derek the Usurper]

Of course there's a limit to everyone's ability. There's a limit to pretty much everything.

Just like physical resources, mental resources are not infinite, because they're don't have physical form people tend to believe they're mystical and special, they're not. And everyone has different limits. Think about cars, different cars have different top speeds, a Ford Expedition would NEVER be faster than a Porsche Carrera GT no matter how many times they would race or how hard the guy in the Ford would stomp the gas pedal.

Yeah i know what you're gonna say, "you can upgrade the Ford's engine...bla bla bla". Nothing you can do to it would make that much of a difference except replacing the engine. That's equivalent to a brain transplant, something you just can't have.

The thing is, why the hell is the Ford racing anyway? It wasn't built for that, it was built for carrying people, carrying lots of crap in the back and off-roading, thing it does very well. And that's what it should be doing.

Just because you can't draw it doesn't mean you suck as a human being.

Look for something you CAN do, instead of chasing something you can't.

Are you seriously saying that people who can't draw shouldn't attempt learning to draw?

[vampire cervix]

"Are you seriously saying that people who can't draw shouldn't attempt learning to draw?"

It depends, if they've been struggling for a long time and have nothing to show for, they just suck a little less, then yes.

The whole "baby steps" philosophy would work great if you would live forever, but you don't.

[alesoun]

"Are you seriously saying that people who can't draw shouldn't attempt learning to draw?"

It depends, if they've been struggling for a long time and have nothing to show for, they just suck a little less, then yes.

The whole "baby steps" philosophy would work great if you would live forever, but you don't.

Doesn't matter how much my family begs me not to; I'll sing if I damn' well want to. I may never be the best singer in the world, but I might be the one who has most fun.

"The best" is artificial and subjective. Limits do what they say on the tin; they set boundaries. Everybody has a limit they hit and then surpass.

You want to be "the best"? There is no "best". There is only "the best" you can be, and that starts here, and it takes hard work (Fame Academy)

[Derek the Usurper]

"Are you seriously saying that people who can't draw shouldn't attempt learning to draw?"

It depends, if they've been struggling for a long time and have nothing to show for, they just suck a little less, then yes.

The whole "baby steps" philosophy would work great if you would live forever, but you don't.

This situation doesn't even exist. If you are struggling for years and have nothing to show for it, then you simply haven't put in the time, study, and practice needed to become successful. Doodling once a month for 10 years and feeling sorry that your drawings aren't as good as you want them to be doesn't count.

[JParrilla]

Of course there's a limit to everyone's ability. There's a limit to pretty much everything.

Just like physical resources, mental resources are not infinite, because they're don't have physical form people tend to believe they're mystical and special, they're not. And everyone has different limits. Think about cars, different cars have different top speeds, a Ford Expedition would NEVER be faster than a Porsche Carrera GT no matter how many times they would race or how hard the guy in the Ford would stomp the gas pedal.

Yeah i know what you're gonna say, "you can upgrade the Ford's engine...bla bla bla". Nothing you can do to it would make that much of a difference except replacing the engine. That's equivalent to a brain transplant, something you just can't have.

The thing is, why the hell is the Ford racing anyway? It wasn't built for that, it was built for carrying people, carrying lots of crap in the back and off-roading, thing it does very well. And that's what it should be doing.

Just because you can't draw it doesn't mean you suck as a human being.

Look for something you CAN do, instead of chasing something you can't.

It depends, if they've been struggling for a long time and have nothing to show for, they just suck a little less, then yes.

The whole "baby steps" philosophy would work great if you would live forever, but you don't.

Ok these two comments are just terrible. Ability to create art is in no way like a slow car. If you have 2 hands and a fully functional brain.. with hard honest work you can learn to draw. And if you "struggle" for a long time with no results.. trust me you didnt struggle. You cant honestly believe that If you sit down everyday and try to get better at drawing.. honestly try and try.. that you will not see improvement.. And with more time.. will come more improvement. What you two guys said are great examples of giving up and making excuses instead of putting in effort. Its real easy to sit down and say "ya know what.. im just not cut out for art... its probably not in my genes.. no use trying.." thats just sad really

[Flake]

Of course there's a limit to everyone's ability.

Yup, but much like physical potential, very few people will ever work hard enough to hit this glass ceiling.

So it's kinda irrelevant.

I always saw it as a ladder.

Some people are born a few rungs higher than most.

Some people can climb really fast.

Some people climb slowly but they climb all day, every day.

Most people fall off and don't get back on, too much effort. Hey, I always wanted to work in a call centre..

[dirtydiesel]

on a slightly unrelated note, and perhaps i am a little late on this, but i'm applauding whoever banned riceface... lol. :)

[Leonor]

Of course there's a limit to everyone's ability. There's a limit to pretty much everything. Just like physical resources, mental resources are not infinite, because they're don't have physical form people tend to believe they're mystical and special, they're not.

Why not? If it's not physical it's what?

Tell me how do you know for sure the difference between absolute failure, failure that means you reached your limit, and failure that is part of learning and just means that you have to try again a different way or to understand the meta problem that is preventing you from moving you further. I honestly don't know.

[CCThrom]

Of course there's a limit to everyone's ability. There's a limit to pretty much everything.

It depends, if they've been struggling for a long time and have nothing to show for, they just suck a little less, then yes.

Sorry but I think this is total BS. Art is not about crossing some absolute finish line, it's about doing something you enjoy.

And to all the people who draw parallels between art and athletics (or mathematics or whatever) to support the idea of limits... that's all well and good but you are missing the point. "Limits" in this context are relative, and there are no limits to your personal improvement.

Sure I'll never paint like Frazetta just as I'll never be as good at hoops as Jordan... so what? These comparisons are completely relative AND irrelevant. If I keep working at it, I will continue to improve. Period. If I don't improve, I'm either not really trying or I'm not really interested. If I flat out suck at something but continue to practice, I will improve... although it may be reaaaaly slow. And if if I love something enough to pursue it even though I suck and never improve much... who the frack are any of you to tell me I'm wasting my time? Claiming that individual variation is the same as a limit to potential is comparing apples and oranges.

Rant over.

[Stoat]

I've been playing musical instruments since I was five. I'm almost fifty. I have invested...oh, who knows how many hours. I practice daily. I do drills. I have lived around some truly remarkable musicians and hit them up for tips.

The best that can be said of me, after all this time, is that I'm not very good.

Someone I knew in High School took up guitar when he was sixteen and, by the time we graduated two years later, he was a highly sought-after studio musician. I once saw him passed out drunk in a doorway at a party -- someone shook him awake, handed him a guitar and he did things with that instrument that I could only dream of. I'm not sure, at that moment, if he could have pronounced his own name, he was so plastered.

A little humility is in order, folks. Everybody can improve, but not everybody will become a beautiful fairy princess -- even if you really, really want it and work really, really hard.

[CCThrom]

Everybody can improve, but not everybody will become a beautiful fairy princess

Again, this is true... but the point I'm trying to make is, so what? If you really believe this, why did you spend all that time working on your music? Why do you continue to practice daily? Because you get something out of it... something NOT related to becoming the next big star. That's my point - improving at something is NOT the same as becoming the beautiful fairy princess.

I don't know about you, but if I spent all that time working with music and then had someone in my face saying, "learning music is a waste of time unless you can solo at Carnegie Center" well I'd be a wee bit annoyed.

[Stoat]

I gave up once or twice. I do actually find my suckitude pretty heartbreaking. Now, I mostly noodle about on it. My dreams of Carnegie Hall have long receded, though I did have them once.

If I had been a rare fine talent, I'd be a wee bit annoyed at anyone who said, "pff! Hard work, that's all it is."

[dcorc]

If I had been a rare fine talent, I'd be a wee bit annoyed at anyone who said, "pff! Hard work, that's all it is."

Drawing and painting are teachable, learnable skills.

The "riceface" mindset overrates "talent" and underrates the combination of knowledge and practice in making progress as a visual artist.

[Stoat]

Sez you.

Playing a musical instrument is a teachable, learnable skill. So is downhill skiing or racecar driving or doing math in your head or flower arranging. Everyone can improve; not everyone will get good.

[dcorc]

Sez you.

Playing a musical instrument is a teachable, learnable skill. So is downhill skiing or racecar driving or doing math in your head or flower arranging. Everyone can improve; not everyone will get good.

Depends what you mean by "good". Riceface, for example, could get a lot better than he is now, if he stopped throwing back every suggestion anyone makes about learning more anatomy, or reading more in depth on colour by reading David Briggs' site and the Munsell student book, or rejecting the advice that he'd gain a lot from some experience of traditional media.

These things would not take disproportionate effort.

Its still the case that what holds him back is his attitude, overrating "talent" and underrating the combination of knowledge and practice in making progress as a visual artist.

[JParrilla]

Sez you.

Playing a musical instrument is a teachable, learnable skill. So is downhill skiing or racecar driving or doing math in your head or flower arranging. Everyone can improve; not everyone will get good.

I disagree. I dont see what can hold someone back if they are trying their hardest and doing all the right things. I believe people do learn slower than others.. and people start a few levels under other people... but I will not accept that someone cannot learn to be a "good" artist by putting in time and hard work. are you saying their brain is not cut out for it? Im not understanding what factor it is that you claim holds someone back from getting good. If you show me a 5 foot 1 inch guy.. I would say ok ya know what.. I dont think he wil jump high enough to dunk a basketball no matter how hard he tries... or maybe theres a child who was born with a mental issue and could never grasp the visual ideas necessary to create art.. then I would say hey would probably never get good. But take a normal, healthy individual with a drive to improve and the dedication to get better.. I will not sit here and believe they just might not be able to get good at it.

[soverynight]

I've been playing musical instruments since I was five. I'm almost fifty. I have invested...oh, who knows how many hours. I practice daily. I do drills. I have lived around some truly remarkable musicians and hit them up for tips.

The best that can be said of me, after all this time, is that I'm not very good.

Someone I knew in High School took up guitar when he was sixteen and, by the time we graduated two years later, he was a highly sought-after studio musician. I once saw him passed out drunk in a doorway at a party -- someone shook him awake, handed him a guitar and he did things with that instrument that I could only dream of. I'm not sure, at that moment, if he could have pronounced his own name, he was so plastered.

A little humility is in order, folks. Everybody can improve, but not everybody will become a beautiful fairy princess -- even if you really, really want it and work really, really hard.

I think this is still not a limit. It is possible that this dude learned guitar so quicktly because he was more able than you musically. But - this is your assumption. You don't know really... any sure details about him. Maybe he was listening to music since he was 2 repeatedly and would dream about it and assemble pieces in his head during math class while you were paying attention. Point is, you don't know.

You on the other hand - maybe throughout 45 years you did practice a lot but you also had other goals, and distractions. Maybe you had less free time. Whatever.

What I'm trying to say is - this is a pointless arguement unless you surely know all the facts about someone's life.

If there are things that impede a person's progress I think they are more circumstantial. Like health and income. I don't have time because I work too much so I can say right now that is affecting my "rate of improvement" or whatever. But in terms of my actual potential - that is all speculation.

Good attitude would probably help with that limit too btw.

[gnarl]

Well I could start pulling links of Sketchbooks, in comparison, where:

SB1: Shows immense progress in 4 pages, from some one who's decently passionate about it improvement.
and
SB2: Shows hardly any improvement, over 16 pages, yet this person is obviously working harder than SB1.

And keep in mind this is really not in comparison towards eachothers skill level, but rather a comparison from where they were, and are now.

[dcorc]

Its not always about working harder - in the sense of churning out more stuff, more pages - but of working smarter.

Do the comparison - the person making better progress - what is it that they are doing that the other person isn't? Analyse the differences.

What additional information or knowledge might the person making faster progress have? What would be the impact of drawing that extra information to the attention of the other person?

If you do lots of stuff but keep making the same mistakes, it shows that you're not recognising them - the answer to this is not simply (as is so often repeated here) "draw more" - but to find a fast track to gaining the additional insights.

[gnarl]

Its not always about working harder - in the sense of churning out more stuff, more pages - but of working smarter.

Do the comparison - the person making better progress - what is it that they are doing that the other person isn't? Analyse the differences.

What additional information or knowledge might the person making faster progress have? What would be the impact of drawing that extra information to the attention of the other person?

If you do lots of stuff but keep making the same mistakes, it shows that you're not recognising them - the answer to this is not simply (as is so often repeated here) "draw more" - but to find a fast track to gaining the additional insights.

What if the person who is doing less is just predisposed to a better visual understanding of the subject, so he doesn't have to work as hard as the person who is just not capable of observing the certain things that you would call mistakes?

[dcorc]

Observational skills are teachable. Its just that they are generally not taught well, a lot of people don't know what to look for.

[JParrilla]

Well I could start pulling links of Sketchbooks, in comparison, where:

SB1: Shows immense progress in 4 pages, from some one who's decently passionate about it improvement.
and
SB2: Shows hardly any improvement, over 16 pages, yet this person is obviously working harder than SB1.

And keep in mind this is really not in comparison towards eachothers skill level, but rather a comparison from where they were, and are now.

Ok thats just not true.. There were many times where I churned out pages and pages and pages of a subject.. and left not learning a single thing. But sometimes Ill sit down and learn just the right thing at just the right time and boom.. a lightbulb will go off and Ill advance.. sometimes from one simple drawing. So what Dave said about practicing SMART is really whats important. When I first started drawing I drew aimlessly without know what I needed to look for. Once I began to practice and actually consciously try to get better.. and practice with a goal.. thats when I got better. Just pumping out 16 pages in a SB doesnt mean you will get better... it just means you pumped out 16 pages in a SB. Honestly I dont mean to sound stubborn.. but like I said before.. If you are a fully fully functional human being with a normal working brain.. you can be taught to see and taught to draw.. period. I have seen it happen in real life.. and right here on CA.org.

[CCThrom]

There were many times where I churned out pages and pages and pages of a subject.. and left not learning a single thing.

I'm with you and dcorc on this one... as Sensei is fond of saying, "Garbage repeated a thousand times is still garbage."

[dcorc]

Sometimes, cranking out the turkeys is necessary to make the penny drop that one does have a problem that needs addressing.

What then makes the difference, when you realise you've hit a plateau, is your response - choose from the following options:

(i) my art sucks, I'm not as talented as those other guys, I'm going to give up

(ii) my art sucks - but its good enough (in fact, why not go the whole way and self-delude - its great, you're all just philistines that you can't appreciate how good it is :P )

(iii) My art isn't as good as those other guys - let's try to figure out what I'm doing, or not doing, that makes the difference - what do they know that I don't - perhaps I could even ask them, and learn from them?

[Stoat]

Well, all of those reactions are preferable to (iv) I'm pretty pleased with the way this one came out. You can bet any post in the Critique section that starts with those words is going to be bad, and highly resistant to getting better.

As long as you're dissatisfied, you've got a path to improvement.

[Spirit]

I don't think there's a measurable limit one can reach considering artistic growth.

However, these threads are proof that a different kind of limit exists. And that is a mental limit. Your attitude and personal limitations are inside your own head, and those are hard to shake.

I completely agree with what you're saying here. That the limits are different for each person, but for me, I also think that the only limits which exist are the limits artists impose on themselves. Whether it's intentional, or sub-consciously or whatever, or like you said their attidude. The only definite limit is death, in my opinion.

[vampire cervix]

"I disagree. I dont see what can hold someone back if they are trying their hardest and doing all the right things"

"Im not understanding what factor it is that you claim holds someone back from getting good"

It's the simple fact that they weren't built for that. That's like you or me or anything with lungs trying to breathe underwater, it cannot happen.

"the only limits which exist are the limits artists impose on themselves"

I know this is kinda simplifying it, but why would people do that? Why would they be so masochistic? Generally most people are ruthless in seeking victory and gratification so why would so many people go the other way?

[ShroudStar]

"I disagree. I dont see what can hold someone back if they are trying their hardest and doing all the right things"

"Im not understanding what factor it is that you claim holds someone back from getting good"

It's the simple fact that they weren't built for that. That's like you or me or anything with lungs trying to breathe underwater, it cannot happen.

"the only limits which exist are the limits artists impose on themselves"

I know this is kinda simplifying it, but why would people do that? Why would they be so masochistic? Generally most people are ruthless in seeking victory and gratification so why would so many people go the other way?


Masochistic? Victory and gratification? Definitely not the first to me and I get both latter ones from a good series of studies that results in a polished piece of art that I can be proud of. If the process isn't enjoyable to you, art can be a drag. But I find it to be a series of stepping stones that eventually becomes a sturdy bridge.

I mean, if you look at mindcandyman's SB, you would've said the guy was horrible at the first few pages. But he's a working pro now and that's through hard work.

[vampire cervix]

"I mean, if you look at mindcandyman's SB, you would've said the guy was horrible at the first few pages. But he's a working pro now and that's through hard work."

Yeah, he's pretty good. But i never said that NOBODY can improve through hard work. I said SOME people will always suck no matter how hard they work.

[Derek the Usurper]

"I mean, if you look at mindcandyman's SB, you would've said the guy was horrible at the first few pages. But he's a working pro now and that's through hard work."

Yeah, he's pretty good. But i never said that NOBODY can improve through hard work. I said SOME people will always suck no matter how hard they work.

And I defy you to provide evidence of any such person.

[Spirit]

I know this is kinda simplifying it, but why would people do that? Why would they be so masochistic? Generally most people are ruthless in seeking victory and gratification so why would so many people go the other way?

Well, what I meant was that people can impose limits upon themselves, and may not even be aware of it. Nobody would deliberately limit themselves, I agree, as that would be... well stupid I guess. People can hold themselves back, or put up limits for themselves without even knowing they have is what I am trying to say. Also the limits of our own minds can contribute. I hope this has helped you understand what I meant, as I can't think of any other way of explaining it.

[dcorc]

"I disagree. I dont see what can hold someone back if they are trying their hardest and doing all the right things"

"Im not understanding what factor it is that you claim holds someone back from getting good"

It's the simple fact that they weren't built for that. That's like you or me or anything with lungs trying to breathe underwater, it cannot happen.

From the discussion on page 1 which started this off - and in the context of so much of the angst that gets posted on this site - we are not talking about people achieving at olympic-equivalent standard, we're talking more about achieving basic competence, or perhaps a little beyond that.

If you have at least one functional eye, can sign a cheque with a hand (or a foot, or by holding the writing implement in your mouth), and have an IQ at least slightly higher than a turnip, then you have all of the prerequisites required for being able to learn to draw passably well, providing you are prepared to work at it, and have access to a teacher who isn't totally clueless.

"the only limits which exist are the limits artists impose on themselves"

I know this is kinda simplifying it, but why would people do that? Why would they be so masochistic? Generally most people are ruthless in seeking victory and gratification so why would so many people go the other way?

Many people have a streak of self-doubt, self-loathing, and self-destructiveness.

Also, while most people are ruthless when it comes to trying to achieve something quickly, a lot fall by the wayside at anything requiring an extended program of work for its achievement.

I said SOME people will always suck no matter how hard they work.

But that's because they are working at the wrong things. I'll say it again - if you can sign your name, you have enough neuromuscular wherewithal to learn to draw. What you may need is some guidance from someone who's got a clue.

[JParrilla]

"I disagree. I dont see what can hold someone back if they are trying their hardest and doing all the right things"

"Im not understanding what factor it is that you claim holds someone back from getting good"

It's the simple fact that they weren't built for that. That's like you or me or anything with lungs trying to breathe underwater, it cannot happen.

"the only limits which exist are the limits artists impose on themselves"

I know this is kinda simplifying it, but why would people do that? Why would they be so masochistic? Generally most people are ruthless in seeking victory and gratification so why would so many people go the other way?

why would they go the other way??? well maybe because its not easy.. its time consuming.. they dont have the drive, etc, etccc. Not built for it?? hahah comparing being able to draw to being able to breathe underwater is a really awful comparison. Physical qualities that we are born with have nothing to do with mental ability to see and draw.

[Eugie]

This thread is starting to get very old and repetitive.

[the_jos]

A couple of examples from my own life:

I have a minor social disorder. I just have a hard time relating to people and getting used to being around them and dealing with them. Could be a minor form of autism or just how I grew up. I'm to old to get a clear diagnosis of autism. Autism would mean that there is a limit to what I can achieve, the problem being part of how I developed means that that limit is not there.
I didn't know the relation to autism so I struggled for years and improved a lot.
Having a autism diagnosis at early age could have hold me back and prevented me from improving this much.

Then we have me and school. I was put in the wrong school (because of my bad social skills), always had an easy time there. Learning? I was doing other stuff and still getting very decent grades. Same for studies and such. Almost always best in class. This gave me a huge disadvantage I only learned about a couple of years ago. I'm not used to value achievements. It consider many things normal where others have to struggle hard to achieve them. The problematic things in my life were mainly outside my influence so I could not do much about them anyway (parents divorsed and had huge problems for years before that, people bullied me at school bc of my social skills, that kind of stuff).

Then we have me and the things I like and don't like.
I've always been good at certain things and spend countless hours improving them. Not even noticing that I was good at them and the time spend was making me even better.
Then there are the things I don't like. I avoided them as much as possible, didn't spend much time improving those things.
Years ago one of those things was social interaction with other people. I was bad at it and because I didn't 'practice' it it became only worse. Till the moment I decided it was enough and I moved my life so I had to improve them. Took a job with face to face interaction with people. Put a serious amount of effort in improving my social skills and succeeded. People nowadays hardly notice my struggle nowadays and think I'm rather normal.

People can and will grow whenever they put enough effort in something.
Sometimes you do something regular and it will take ages and you will hardly notice any progress except when looking back and noticing how far you got.
Sometimes it will take a huge struggle for a long time and you will hardly see any progress. That is, till you get that one "oh, that's how it works" moment.
And sometimes a short fight is enough to burst to the next level.

One of the best examples I can give of that last one is my (limited) experience in sales.
Try to imagine someone who can hardly face someone without getting shy and wanting to run away as fast as possible trying to sell you something.
I learned to sell stuff in two days time, pretending and acting like I was confident (which I wasn't). It's nothing more than a few tricks and a specific mindset you have create.

Is there a limit? Probably. But you won't reach that limit till after a huge fight that takes years. And most people quit way before that.