Experience vs Genetics. Greatest Influence of a Photographer?

[ben conover]

Interesting thoughts Karen, Pico, and others. I was thinking yesterday that in many ways I am the same person I was aged 10, it's odd. I have learned to play music, make violins, violas, & 'Cello's, drawings, paintings, photos, build houses, cook food rather well, etc. Heck, I even learned to love people. Yet I still feel the same inside as when I was 10. When I see Star Trek (usually by accident) I still giggle like I was 10.

 

Personally I think the first 4 years of life rte totally essential, the formative years. They shape who you are, environmental cues and the genetic bond between parents are very very strong. If those first 4 years are good, then likely the next 80 years will be good too. I lost my Dad when I was 2 but met him again 30 years later. It's weird coz he turned out to be a violinmaker too, he has a good eye.

 

I don't play golf because it's expensive in Ireland. I think Tiger Woods is a golf genius, but I doubt he'd have been able to excell to that degree if he'd not had the backing he got. Someone said that genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration, that may be true but the 1% really has to be there for the 99% to work.

 

"what in your makeup makes you the photographer you are?"

 

Well my mom is scared of cameras and electric drills so I didn't get it from her! I think it must have been my Dad and his line of genes.

 

"How much is training or exposure & how much is in your genes?"

 

I think training and exposure is the most important part, but it can only occur if the person wants it to, and if they can achieve their goals effectively.

 

Someone else said that those who can do it just do it, and those who can't become teachers.

 

Cheers.

[snapshot1]

.[. Z: still you have nothing to say. Come back when you can make a point.

[snapshot1]

Chris Waller: The force is strong in you.

[snapshot1]

Ben: your history is amazing & the lines run deep. I say run with what you see & see it as you feel. That deep cut is your savior. Nothing else is so true or clear. It can be so simple.

[._._z]

Karen I summarized what you have chosen to ignore. If you don't see it, that's too bad.

[ben conover]

Deep cut? like 18 stitches in your left index finger it comes and goes but you can still trip the shutter, if you try. Luckily though I'm right handed...

[mrstubbs]

Would this be any use to you Ben?<div></div>

[michaelging]

Anthony, Please tell me that Stubbs is your last name and not a nickname......................

[mrstubbs]

Both. Though now-days they tend to add mister. It could be the wrinkles.

[john_macpherson]

Damn....I wondered how long it would be before digital photography crept in here..........ah well...sign of the times I guess.

[neilpeters]

Great question Karen. I think its 3 things, genetics, experience and spiritual. We all chose photography because we are highly visual oriented people, maybe thats genetic. In the movie Amadeus, Because his wife and father were arguing, Mozart (naturally) retreated to his study to compose, he was driven to it, much like John Lennon saying art is pain. It (art) isn't a way of escaping life at all, its a way of seeing life from its little essences and perceptions, of rising above it without judgement. Music, photography, painting, etc., can inspire, regardless of the artist's or viewers personal idea of life, and that's spiritual.

 

On any given day, or piece of art, any of the things that make you an artist could be dominant, or all equally contributing.

[eugene_scherba]

In 2083 we will have Bayesian learning algorithms capable of

originally generating and rendering stuff similar to what you see on

this site

from simply parsing its archives.

[k5083]

Karen, I believe that your talent may possibly be nurture rather than nature.

 

"I've had obvious talent since I was 6 yo when I was finger painting at a 12 yo level & someone said give her art lessons."

 

The important part of that sentence is the last 7 words. The first part of the sentence has no meaning. There is no 6 or 12 yo level of finger painting. It's not like reading where there is a calibrated scale of expected progress by age. (If there were, then we would know for sure that art is a learned skill, like reading, and not innate.) The point is, someone believed in you and encouraged your talent. Then you were off and running. Otherwise, who knows?

[kellen1]

Well, have a look at my portfolio,

I have absolutely 0 training & have recieved decent reviews, so you be the judge...

[k5083]

Only a newborn infant has received zero training. You may have received zero FORMAL training, but we all trained in aesthetics every waking minute of our lives, and in photography at least every time we have looked at a photograph or discussed photography with anybody.

[michael_dimarzio]

I deliberately posted late to this thread to nobody would read my mundane, intellectually bankrupt, shallow, mispelled answer answer.

 

According to a great Three Stooges episode, two old guys in coat tails and beards made the old nature vs. nurture bet. They trained Larry, Moe and Curly extensivly in proper ettiquete. The test was to be a dinner.

 

Of course, it started with the Stooges displaying teh utmost courtesy and good taste, and of course it ended with t hem steeling the silverware and a pie fight.

 

If you are a Stooge, you are a Stooge, take some classes and you are an educated Stooge.

[scottmeyer71]

I was born in middle class conservative white suburbia. I worked as a machinist for 12

years was never really interested in Art then one day I picked up a camera and the world

changed.