v.anisimov Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Is there a talent test? How do you know if you have it? </p> Mike Johnston in his articile <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/columns/mjohnston/column51/"> "Secrets of Success" </A> puts talent (or creativity) at #5 out of 10: behind energy, commitment, persistence and love of subject - and I accept that. </p> I saw a documentary on Van Gogh, he couldn't even graduate an arts academy, his teachers thought he was beyond hope in terms of technique. </p> I assume that people will rarely admit certain things. E.g, alcoholics live in denial. Artists believe in their talent. Humourless persons keep making jokes. </p> However, a clever alcoholic CAN see the symptoms and then, using logic discover the problem and take corrective action. </p> Can a talent-challenged person discover the truth, given that others may try to convince otherwise? ("your pictures are great!", "you have an eye!" elusive feedback from people who don't know what they're talking about). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dickhilker Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Do you see talent as something you either have or don't, or is it something we all have in varying degrees? At what level do we become "talent challenged"? In Van Gogh's case, had he accepted his teachers' verdicts concerning his talent status, we would never known his real capabilities. Would it be a good thing if every aspiring artist had to pass a sort of litmus test to determine if his talent were sufficient to warrant further study and effort? Or, is being an artist more about the journey than the destination, with the personal experience and joy of even mediocre accomplishment becoming all the reward necessary? I agree, Vladimir, that someone who plans to make a living from his art had best have a very realistic perspective about his talent and its potential to create the desired level of income. I've seen too many aspirants with obvious limitations planning careers in the arts to think otherwise, but for the rest of us, perhaps "ignorance is bliss." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico_digoliardi Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 A vaudville comic (forgot who) had a routine: Comedy is hard work! I work hard to think up jokes! It took me thirty years to get here! Then along comes this other guy, and in a year he's got top billing! TALENT! I tell ya, it's just a cheap trick! (answer: Yes, some people have particular insight into a craft and the society in which they live so that they do have extra ability to communicate, to create.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_laycock Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 When talking about becoming famous then talent isn't restricted to the physical aspects of whatever is being produced. It appears to take more than just artistic talent to get to the top. We'll never know how many Van Gogh's and Picasso's went unnoticed because they lacked talent in dealing with people or fame. You need to have the character and personality to push yourself above the background noise....at least that's what I've been told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcampbell Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 a good gallery helps too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_hall1 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 The talent test would be develop a body of work... Of course photography can be art or documentary...and editing or selection is allowed. Certainly, there should be a best-shot-of-the-roll competence... Photography can be trivial. 100 shots of the same empty street at the same time of day and the same time of year would be trivial. But 100 shots of 100 different streets could be interesting documentary. Then choice of equipment, light and resulting color, composition, subject dynamics, and processing could make art. In other words for art don't shoot the street because it is there but shoot it because it has something being sought...and the body of work proves that the result is not an accident but intended. How does a person realize lack of talent when others praise them ? I think people tire of their own images but something can be interesting without being a masterpiece. If not a masterpiece is it interesting ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v.anisimov Posted May 28, 2006 Author Share Posted May 28, 2006 Thanks guys, love your feedback. To summarise: </br> - Talent is probably not an on and off thing, there are shades/gradations of talent and it can be developed further. </br> - Ignorance is bliss for us hobbyists.</br> - Talent is a "cheap trick" to get to the top (sounds like one of Rodney Dangerfield's lines:)</br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanky Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I suggest reading a book called "Art & Fear". The names of the two writers escapes me and I don't have my well worn copy near me but it is truely an enlightening read. It gives some interesting perspevtive on the notion of talent among other things. I cannot recommend it enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_waller Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 "The man of talent is like a marksman who can hit a target others cannot hit; a man of genius is like a marksman who can hit a target others cannot even see" - Arthur Schopenhauer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h._p. Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Talent and 'success' are two completely different things. It seems to me that a talent is a propensity towards performing a particular set of actions with ease. 'Success' is an arbitrary definition by a group, which these days tends to be a synonym for wealth. Someone could be immensely talented and not be 'successful' because they lack the drive to use their talent in pursuit of of the group's definition of success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcofrancardi Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 What H.P. said. Moreover, I feel talent is instinct. Success is hard work, with a bit of (optional) talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_waller Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Who was it said, "Success is ten percent inspiration, ninety percent perspiration" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 "How do you know if you have it?" When you no longer need to ask the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 <I>"How do you know if you have it?"<P> When you no longer need to ask the question.</I><P>I know a huge number of very talented people who worry about it every day, so I think a better answer is when you learn to stop worrying whether you do or don't have talent or how much or little you have and just get on with the work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy_laycock Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 "'Success' is an arbitrary definition by a group, which these days tends to be a synonym for wealth" I'm not sure this applies to the art world that much. It would seem that acceptance of your work by the art community and/or the general public would be more appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h._p. Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 You're right, of course, Andy. I think, on reflection, that the synonym comment should have been less prominent in my posting as it was very much an aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 "How do you know if you have it?" "I know a huge number of very talented people who worry about it every day,..." Then they don't know they're talented:) Everybody around them might know they're talented but they themselves don't yet know it. The question was; "How do you "know"..." Not when do you feel secure about the question. :) And when one stops with the insecurities, then they "know." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beeman458 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 The act of "knowing" implies a state of emotional security as in "I know I can do it." as opposed to "I think I can do it." or "Do you think I can do it?" or "If I try to do it, will I succeed?" Knowing one's talented does not imply there's not a need to continue the maturing process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_l3 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 maybe everyone has loads of talent, only they are not appreciated in their own time..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 "I know a huge number of very talented people who worry about it every day,..." I don't.Maybe they are not really talented if they have to think about. Like the rest of the dopes that have been posted on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Ooops, I meant the greats of today thread. Sorry�well, not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Success is hard work, with a bit of (optional) talent. How do you define success? ha, give me the talent, i'll give you the coin and glory. The eternal Artist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan2240 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Talent lies in the eyes of the beholder. If one group doesn't think you have it, find another group. Regardless, I'll take luck over talent any day (unfortunately, I have neither). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skygzr Posted June 5, 2006 Share Posted June 5, 2006 The Schopenhauer quote (scroll up) makes a valid point. van Gogh's contemporaries didn't appreciate his ability because they didn't understand his vision. New ways of thinking or seeing are nearly always viewed with suspicion by the establishment. An artist who needs to express hilself will do so with whatever means he has at his disposal. His creation is a valid statement even if no one else likes it (or even sees it). The notion of "talent" doesn't even make sense until we choose to compare that work to something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeffe Posted June 20, 2006 Share Posted June 20, 2006 ""The man of talent is like a marksman who can hit a target others cannot hit; a man of genius is like a marksman who can hit a target others cannot even see" - Arthur Schopenhauer." Genius is the ability to create something,or make intellectual connections that have never been seen before. Ray Charles, Einstein, Wordsworth. Talent is the ability to stand out from your peers but not necessarily by creating a new approach to their field. Wilson Pickett, Carl Sagan, Patti Smith. Who's a photographic genius? Steiglitz, maybe. Weston, HCB, Arbus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now