art - natural or learned?

For the artists here, would you art is natural or learned? Can a creative person with weak drawing skills become a good artist? I always been very creative but have trouble with pens and pencils, my drawings never look very good, but are creative. Can i fix this or is it something that cannot be fixed within natural talent?

Some are born with talent, and hardwork allows that sense of talent to flourish. Talent without a concept of discipline really means very little and will only take a person so far.

Mostly, in my eyes, art is about finding inspiration and doing so requires a lot of hard work and discipline to take advantage when the moment of inspiration strikes. I'd say that discipline will almost always trump pure talent because there is no written law which states that talent is anything extraodinairy in and of itself.

So yea, I believe that every human being has an artistic instinct within themselves. Some just are a lot better with nurturing that part of themselves. It takes work to see results, but that's half the fun!

is it ok though if at first you REALLY suck?

No one's perfect. Gotta start somewhere.

Natural.
Both of my parents were into art. My dad was into techinical art & cartooning but didnt pursue it to maturity.

My mom is a painter, loves portraits and displays her work at shows.

After years of experience with people I know that some have "it" and some dont.

Its not the use of any given media but rather the mindset to create and improve ones gift.

I did my new avatar like it?

Quote:

After years of experience with people I know that some have "it" and some dont.

In a lot of cases, I found out that "it" usually means the willingness to work their asses off.

I think the acclimation towards ability in art is natural. Sure, you can work your ass off to become good at it, but I personally think talent is embedded in us all, in one form.

You can work to become good at art, music, and all that jive - but some people just have a natural disposition in these regards.

Originally Posted by Sassafrass

You can work to become good at art, music, and all that jive - but some people just have a natural disposition in these regards.

Let me share with you a true-ism

It depends on what your vision of "artist" is. If you want to be a great artist, you're pretty well fucked unless you're born a genius. But, if you want to be that guy who scans his comics for his Live Journal and gets a C+ average at the local community college fine arts program, you could probably manage.

A teacher of mine recently quoted Mozart in telling me this : "There are two kinds of students. Those who can write two measures of music and those who can't". What it means to me is that to be an artist, the only requirement is to be able to create something, small as it may be, without getting a cue from anyone. So someone who isn't able to write something without first being pushed to do it will have a hard time ever being more than an artisan of his craft. However, wether this ability comes naturally or not is debatable.

I've never really had any problem with this part of creating, but I have seen people who did. I'm pretty sure it's something you can get over if you work at it hard enough, so I imagine one can develop artistic ability given enough time to do so.

From what I've seen so far, everyone has the chance to be great, the question is do you want to invest the time it takes?

The whole "natural" thing is absolute bullshit for the most part. Yes, some people can sketch better than others without any prior artistic experience. But as time passes if that person doesn't bother to do shit with it, it won't matter. If someone who was at first not so good, works at it and lives it, he can excel. Watching Ed, I've seen him progress from this (very basic shading and shapes, even a bit misproportioned):


To most recently this:


And he's had at least 3 years of experience, classes and learning to utilize references.

Or you could become a contemporary artist and throw paint on a canvas and give it a mystical sounding title. Given to the right crowd, you'll make plenty of money.

Originally Posted by Helloween

Or you could become a contemporary artist and throw paint on a canvas and give it a mystical sounding title. Given to the right crowd, you'll make plenty of money.

lol. I get more annoyed with the people who have great talent and painting skills but decide to create some of the most cliché art. Especially fantasy art gurus. I feel like I've seen the same half-naked woman, sometimes even part cyborg in over 50 pieces (recently).

Originally Posted by Sassafrass

I think the acclimation towards ability in art is natural. Sure, you can work your ass off to become good at it, but I personally think talent is embedded in us all, in one form.

You can work to become good at art, music, and all that jive - but some people just have a natural disposition in these regards.

What she said, and I think everyone has been on this situation:

On some classes/training/etc with others... you are an average student while someone on the class is just naturally talented. It doesn't matter how hard you try... you will usually end upped by this other person doing little to no effort, and God forbids if this person actually works hard on it! (Personal experience)

People may become great with effort, but those who are born with it can become genius/extraordinary with hard work. So, work is necessary but natural talent matters... a lot.

Originally Posted by Tafer

People may become great with effort, but those who are born with it can become genius/extraordinary with hard work. So, work is necessary but natural talent matters... a lot.

I personally think this is just an excuses for people without enough love.

Originally Posted by SCHNEE-5

I personally think this is just an excuses for people without enough love.

Love is overrated.

Absolutely, without question, artistic talent is natural. It cannot be manufactured; a person either possesses a strong sense of composition and design, or he doesn't. The difference between mediocre artistry and inspired artistry is always self evident; it's the innate ability to see what isn't there and to innovate upon that vision. Nothing can teach that; art schools exist only to instruct in techniques to further enable the ability to manifest itself repeatedly. Whether a person's craft is illustration, sculpture, flower arrangement, needlecraft, music, cooking or interior design, it's that same instinctual sense of expression that provides the inspiration. That's all artistry is: self-expression, and it's the basic urge of any good artist to represent himself/herself through the ability to create.

I've seen this seperation between true artistry and poseur. I've been through umpteen art classes and in each one, there is always a clear divide between those who function only so far as an external hand guides them and those who trust their senses to serve as their compass. In every single project, the students who dare to do their own thing earn the highest praises. Those who mimic the project examples or follow the instructor's suggestions to the letter produce lackluster work; their lack of inspiration shows.

Theoretically, anyone could spend a couple years studying and drawing, say, Ford Mustangs. In time, that person would learn to draw Mustangs very well, they would be an authority on Mustang sketching. But if you asked that person to use their knowledge of Mustang design to create a new vehicle, one not of the Mustang line, could they do it? Could they identify the individual parts, make alterations and reassemble them in a new and exciting way or would they become stumped, unable to see anything but Mustangs?

That's the difference between an artist and a person who merely learned a skill over time.

What about a person who finds the inspiration after years of mediocrity and produces fabulous art?

Time to wax idiotic.

Originally Posted by Crash Landon

In every single project, the students who dare to do their own thing earn the highest praises.

While I want to agree, and while there is potentially a lot to that, I don't agree. There is something to be said about art which contains a certain 'appreciable' reference point which allows it to be appreciated according to the artwork which surrounds it. I don't necessarily mean from a mainstream standpoint either. Accessibility is very underrated.

One of the things I hate about modern performance art is the fact that it's many times supposed to be "appreciable" by virtue that it's different and not on account of its sense of artistry. I've brought this point up before, but a man covering himself in shit and rolling around on a mattress and selling it to the highest bidder is the very thing that is destroying art in the first place.

Inspiration isn't about doing something different. That, in itself, is a form of conformity that many modern artists are too quick to jump on.

But yea, how something is said is just as important as what it has to say. In that, I don't believe an artist who strives to do something different for the sake of being different really deserves praise above other works and other artists merely on that account.
Each work should be praised according to its own sense of structure and purpose. In the end, if a work isn't executed well, no matter how different it strives to be, then it is all for 'nothing'.

Why do I say this? As an artist, I believe art to be a viable means for communication, between people...between souls. If we are so stuck in our own asses in appreciating our own sense of originality that it puts us outside of the means for communication with others, what good is it?

No man is an Island, etc.

The bravery of the artist in exploring untrodden vision according to itself should be greatly appreciated but the final result doesn't always reflect perfection and deserve praise. All in all, art that follows traditional norms is still plenty impactual.

Originally Posted by Crash Landon

That's the difference between an artist and a person who merely learned a skill over time.

Artistry is an on-going process. There are not a lot of Davinci's these days. Genius is so rare that when it comes along it is delightful and unexpected. There is magic in that. There is also magic to be found in people who have dedicated their lives to their art and improving themselves. There is plenty of beautiful art which surrounds us, created by hands which were not touched by the stroke of genius, but persistence, hardwork and vision.

In essence, there is no difference between an artist who has the gift to begin with and one who learns to utilize his talents to there utmost perfection over time. The end result is what matters.