Are you born with it?

[Ballistics]

It's all relative. Yesterday's know-nothing is today's genius. It takes an audience's opinion to make you what you are, not necessarily what you are doing. Obviously there is a technical side that feeds into that. You can't just be a 2 yr old with a paint brush and make art...

Oh wait...

Toddler fools the art world into buying his tomato ketchup paintings | Mail Online

If you are worried about being revered as an artist when you pick up a camera... you are doing it wrong.

Just take pictures for you, and not for anyone else.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

If you are worried about being revered as an artist when you pick up a camera... you are doing it wrong.

Ding!

 

[imagemaker46]

There are some gifted photographers as there are gifted musicians, race car drivers etc. There is a part of photography that I don't believe can be taught. It has been said that the late Nascar driver Dale Earnhardt could see the air. There are photographers that do have that gift of being able to really see light. If the average person with a camera is a 1 and the most skilled experienced photographer is a 10, what is it that makes that person a 10? Does that mean they are gifted with the ability to really understand light?

I know where I see myself on the scale, I really understand light and how to use it, but I also know photographers that are more skilled and experienced than I am, but in different fields. I learned about light from the first day my Dad handed me a camera, and as photographers go, my Dad is a 10 on that scale.

Ballistics said it well with "just take pictures for you". Be happy with what you shoot, some will never aspire to the top of the scale, and so what, you do the best you can with what talents you have.

 

[D-B-J]

Yes and no. Someone born with the ability to "see" the perfect shot may not have the ability to "light" the perfect shot. I was reading an article the other day where for an audi interior shoot, the photographer took 14 images, each with 7 lights, etc. So there is a balance between being born creative and learning.

 

[imagemaker46]

When I talk about seeing light, it's avaliable light, not setting up lights, that can be taught. Being able to use the light that is avaliable to everyone but not seen by everyone.

 

[mishele]

Are you born w/ the will to learn?? That is the real question!!

 

[KmH]

Word! ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑

 

[WesternGuy]

Here ya go - test yourself to see where you are on the scale? Fun to try anyway...

Right Brain vs Left Brain Creativity Test at The Art Institute of Vancouver

Cheers,

WesternGuy

 

[Neil S.]

This is a pretty complex and difficult one to answer well.

I would say that yes, some people are born with the ability to be superior photographers.

That being said, it takes a lot of time and practice to realize your full potential.

I have read about racing greats like Michael Schumacher, and most of them started racing early in life. Schumacher for example started racing when he was 6 years old.
Was he “born with it”? Of course, but what if he hadn’t started racing till he was 20 years old? Clearly his career in F1 would have turned out differently. See what I mean?

The difference between F1 and photography though is that one requires immense physical conditioning and a young body, while the other really doesn’t. You can still be a great photographer when you are old, but not so with F1 drivers.

I was watching Rambo last night, and remember something Trautman told him that was pretty wise.

“Let me tell you a story, John. There was a sculptor, and he found this stone: a special stone. He dragged it home and he worked on it for months, until he finally finished. When he was ready, he showed it to his friends and they said he had created a great statue, and the sculptor said he hadn't created anything. The statue was always there. He just cleared away the small pieces.
We didn't make you this fighting machine. We just chipped away the rough edges. You're always going to be tearing away at yourself until you come to terms with what you are. Until you come full circle.”

This is what I think about natural talent and ability. Some people are “born with it”, but it will require removing the small pieces as Trautman said before their full potential is realized.

Neil

 

[Overread15 3]

In my view a lot of people who are "born with it" are more the case that they simply showed a great interest/were encouraged into the subject from a very young age. When we are young we soak up info really easily and as we get older that ease slows - oh we can be very studious, but our minds don't quite soak it up the same.

In addition if you spend 10 - 15 years up till your 20odd learning and doing something, well you've all those years experience to draw from already before you're 20. Modern life seems to devalue the under 20's age group in some way with regard to learning a trade, we seem to do it after 20 (or at least after 15).


So I think its more a case that some are not necessarily always born with the skill, but are born with the desire to develop in a certain direction and are lucky enough to have the opportunity and support to allow that development to be realised.

That does not however preclude anyone else from learning the skills either, nor from them learning them to a very high degree = it just means if you start at 20 you've a ways to go before you've got that 10 years experience to draw from; and you might find you need to work that bit harder at the start to get the info to stick.

 

[bennielou]

I think it's a bit of both. But I think in this case, the eye is born before the artistic tweaking.

For instance, my strong point is photojournalism style shots. I can "sense" when something is about to happen. My husband on the other hand, just has a knack of DOF and lighting.

I struggle with posing, and do much better when things just happen. I have to work at what my husband is naturally good at, and he in turn has to work at what is naturally easy for me.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

I think its a mixture as well. I think everything can be taught if a person is willing and able to learn. However, I think some people are born predisposed to pick things up faster than others, whether its because they learn motor skills faster, or problem solve faster or whatever. Its a little subjective when we start talking about "Art" as well as "skills". Art doesn't really have a concrete definition. It can be anything to anyone in a sense. One mans art is another mans garbage. Skills you can learn. As Keith stated, there is a technical side and a formula to many things ( not just photography ) that can be learned and performed. There are many people shooting school portraits that just do the same mundane formula day in and day out. There is no artistic creativity going on, but they are making money and doing what they like in a field that is often considered "Artistic". Also, if you want to really dig down to the nuts and bolts of things, in a sense, many of us are just copying what others have done. I mean who was the first person to selectively color? Is anyone else using that technique less creative or artistic because they didn't come up with it first? I guess how you apply techniques and ideas to shots is where your artistic side comes into play, but then again, that's only if its received as art by the viewer. So now you have two variables, not only do you have to attempt to be creative and find your only reasoning or method to your madness, whoever is the viewer ultimately has the end say in whether you are a "genius" or a "hack". So perhaps most of it is based on you figuring out what your viewer will see as artistic or creative. Even if to someone else its not . Case in point, I can do some gaudy overbaked HDR shot and show it to my co-workers and they will think I am a god among men, however, if I showed it on this thread, I would be considered a hack. So really there is no answer to this question since there is no concrete answer as to what "artistic" even is.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

After pondering it more, in terms of photography perhaps being "artistic" is simply dependent upon the skills/tools at your disposal. I mean, once you learn techniques ( contra jour, selective coloring, HDR, backlighting, silhouette, cross processing, panoramas, black and white etc etc etc ) you then have to have the mindset to look at a scene and run through that rolodex of skills/tools and choose the best, or best combination, that fits. That simple decision, which is unexplainable ( although you may be able to rationalize your decision to a degree ) would be the one spot where art comes from. The more skills/tools you LEARN, the more chance you have at being deemed "creative"


My head hurts now. Thanks guys.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Learning skills and calling that talent, should be sorted away from creativity or creative thinking, which is what I see as talent. Creativity is very difficult to teach. It is a mindset. Look at how often people post "I am bored" or "I don't know what to do, give me some ideas". While others have a list of ideas for photogrpahy, but don't have the time to accomplish everything on the list. Look at an example of water drop photos, or smoke photos, and how they pretty much all look the same. So few push beyond the standard shots we have all seen 3000 times. Look at how people C&C stuff here and give one of the most typical, and vague "tips"..."try a different angle". This response doesn't help people see or think creatively because it lacks any information to use other than "a different angle". Look how many times people ask if they are getting better, or "good enough". It seems as though these people don't ever look at what is considered good or great photography and compare themselves.


So, sure, practice of technical stuff, makes perfect. But there is still that something else that is much harder to grasp, and attain. That is what I feel is innate talent. As mentioned here a couple times, some people naturally pick stuff up quickly, while others will spend ten times the amount of time to achieve the same level. That is natural talent.

I think sports is a poor example of talent. Sports is mainly practicing a skill.

 

[bennielou]

Thank you Goonies and Bitter for another wonderful philosophical conversation. (Damn, wish I could spell!)
I always enjoy what you guys have to say, whether I personally agree or not. You guys make me think and ponder things.

Love having you guys here.