If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
In article ,
Sandman wrote: My claim is that if one person is more skilled at a given task than another, it is because he has practiced it more, which in turn is a result from a more eager interest in said task. Not because he has a "born" ability to paint masterpieces or a "born" ability to play the piano. bull****. some people have natural talents and others do not and it has absolutely nothing to do with practice. if it did, there would be more einsteins, picassos, pavarottis and ansel adams. also, fix the line length on your newsreader. it's much too long and causes wrapping issues. As I said, some people are actually different, savants and autistic people. They are quite literally wired differently than other people which may lead to them being able to use their brain in a way a "normal" person can not. That, of course, can lead to perceived skill. I.e. someone that can remember thousands of decimals of pi but can't get properly dressed. But that's neither skill nor talent, that's just a brain that works in a very unusual way, leading to the person being able to do that most can not. you're contradicting yourself. if it was just practice then anyone could memorize pi to thousands of digits or any other so called skill. For normal people, talent does not exist, only skill. Learned skill. bull****. complete bull****. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
In article , Mayayana wrote:
Mozart composing as a young child.... must we assume he had a nanny who forced him to practice piano 8 hours per day from the age of 3 months in order to fit your theory? Of course not. Since we don't know the details of Mozarts exposure to his fathers work, it's hard to make any actual conclusions. His sister got piano lessons from his father when Mozart was three years old and we know that Mozart learned simultaneously, and at a greater speed than his sister (= greater interest). When Mozart was 8 (interestingly, five years later. Rings a bell?), he was "tested" with a complicated composition. Of course, we don't know if he "excelled" at it, the testers says he played it in a "masterly level", which certainly suggests it, but he was only 8 and someone testing him could quite possibly just be expressing astonishment of his level versus his age. But looking at the recorded history of Mozart, it is clear that he poured a *lot* of time into playing when really young. That time amounts to training. he didn't sit down at the piano at age 3 and compose a five piece opera. DaVinci's genius in drawing, painting and engineering.... He just happened to be "interested" in those things? Of course. And where did that "interest" come from? If it struck him then why aren't at least 1 in 100 people a Da Vinci? Because pouring that amount of time into an interest isn't feasible for a lot of people that have to pay bills, raise kids, etc etc. I'm sure you're aware of the fact that a lot of great artists lived their entire lives as really really poor people, where they had to sacrifice a *lot* to follow their interest. And you're not interested in the question of Art? Not as it relates to this subject, no. To my mind that's far more interesting than skill Ok... yet you didn't address that point at all. Since it has nothing to do with "Photographic ability", really. Or if it does, it was poorly expressed by Rich, the OP. If someone practices photography for years and develops an ability to take exactly the picture they want in nearly all cases, yet those pictures don't resonate with viewers, what's the value of their expertise? Ask them, not me. Not everyone values their efforts by the judgement of viewers. The original question was about "good photographic ability". Whether or not people articulate their thoughts about Art, I think we all assume that art plays a part in good photography. Not necessarily, but I suppose it could be interpreted that way. My comments have concerned the "ability" and "skill" part only. But I'm not surprised you didn't address it. Artfulness is something that can't be measured with scientific instruments and can't be taught in terms of practicing techniques. It's a wrench in the works of your theory. I have not expressed any "theory" of mine here. -- Sandman |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
| BTW: One of the most inspiring afternoons I spen, was when I was given a
| personal tour of Armand Hammer's office. I spent a lot of time viewing | his original Da Vinci sketches, You seem to have some interesting experience in the art field. Personally I've never really got Picasso (discussed in a lower post) but I do like his definition of art that you found. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
On May 19, 2015, Mayayana wrote
(in ): BTW: One of the most inspiring afternoons I spen, was when I was given a personal tour of Armand Hammer's office. I spent a lot of time viewing his original Da Vinci sketches, You seem to have some interesting experience in the art field. Personally I've never really got Picasso (discussed in a lower post) but I do like his definition of art that you found. Just for you, here is a Picasso I shot at the Munson-Williams-Procter Institute in Utica, NY. Interesting place to visit. http://adobe.ly/1JXRJSJ -- Regards, Savageduck |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
| Just for you, here is a Picasso I shot at the Munson-Williams-Procter
| Institute in Utica, NY. Interesting place to visit. | http://adobe.ly/1JXRJSJ | It turns out the real link is he https://assets.adobe.com/link/1a9456...7-362d6ce3b560 Why would you shorten that? In any case, thanks, but I see nothing on that page at all. It's almost entirely obfuscated script. I avoid allowing script in general, especially avoiding obfuscated script, and wouldn't allow either to run on Adobe's site. It could take days to decipher exactly what the script is doing and what other sites it's contacting, if that's even possible. And all that just to display an image! |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
On May 19, 2015, Mayayana wrote
(in ): Just for you, here is a Picasso I shot at the Munson-Williams-Procter Institute in Utica, NY. Interesting place to visit. http://adobe.ly/1JXRJSJ It turns out the real link is he https://assets.adobe.com/link/1a9456...7-362d6ce3b560 Why would you shorten that? I didn’t shorten it Adobe provides the shortened link for public sharing by default. There is no long url option. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_166.jpg In any case, thanks, but I see nothing on that page at all. That is your problem, other folks don’t seem to have an issue. It's almost entirely obfuscated script. I have never seen that. I have no idea of what you are doing to provoke that sort of failure. I avoid allowing script in general, especially avoiding obfuscated script, and wouldn't allow either to run on Adobe's site. Then don’t bother. I certainly am not creating any odd script to sabotage your system. It could take days to decipher exactly what the script is doing and what other sites it's contacting, if that's even possible. And all that just to display an image! That is what happens when you use MS Outlook Express as a Usenet client, it isn’t. As to whatever else you are doing to prevent that link opening in an internet browser I have no idea. I don’t believe the other Windows users in this room, such as PeterN, Eric Stevens, or Tony have a problem. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
On May 19, 2015, Savageduck wrote
(in news.com): On May 19, 2015, Mayayana wrote (in ): Just for you, here is a Picasso I shot at the Munson-Williams-Procter Institute in Utica, NY. Interesting place to visit. http://adobe.ly/1JXRJSJ It turns out the real link is he https://assets.adobe.com/link/1a9456...7-362d6ce3b560 Why would you shorten that? I didn’t shorten it Adobe provides the shortened link for public sharing by default. There is no long url option. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_166.jpg Let me fix that https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...enshot_166.jpg In any case, thanks, but I see nothing on that page at all. That is your problem, other folks don’t seem to have an issue. It's almost entirely obfuscated script. I have never seen that. I have no idea of what you are doing to provoke that sort of failure. I avoid allowing script in general, especially avoiding obfuscated script, and wouldn't allow either to run on Adobe's site. Then don’t bother. I certainly am not creating any odd script to sabotage your system. It could take days to decipher exactly what the script is doing and what other sites it's contacting, if that's even possible. And all that just to display an image! That is what happens when you use MS Outlook Express as a Usenet client, it isn’t. As to whatever else you are doing to prevent that link opening in an internet browser I have no idea. I don’t believe the other Windows users in this room, such as PeterN, Eric Stevens, or Tony have a problem. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
In article , Giff wrote:
Sandman: Like who? Plenty, sorry I can't give you an example of someone that we both know. Maybe you can give me examples of people that you know of that have spent an almost identical amount of time practicing a specific skill yet are not comparable in skill level? Or are you just in reference to anecdotal references? Giff: How do you explain that? Sandman: It's either lack of interest or lack of time. Either they aren't practicing the same amount of time or they are, but they're not as interested as the guy who ended up better skilled at it. You sound so certain. I feel pretty certain, thanks. Do you have scientific studies backing up your assertions? Of course, A good starting point is the studies by Anders Ericsson, specifically "The Making of an Expert" from 2007 or "Giftedness and evidence for reproducibly superior performance" from the same year. Probably not, also because such an experiment would be really difficult to perform. I guess we could say that this is your opinion, and that I have a different one. It's not my opinion only. There are many studies done in this area, and yes - they are psychology studies so they hardly result in cold hard facts, but you can draw reasonable conclusions from them. Also, it's my personal experience. I am an "artist" in the meaning that I paint, draw, take photos and much more creative work. I obviously wouldn't say I "excel" at anything of the aforementioned, but I know I'm better than your normal Joe at most of it. I also know that the reason I don't excel in it is because I haven't done it enough, not because I'm not "talented" enough or because I wasn't "born" with it. All of the creative things I do are pursued interests, things I enjoy doing into which I have invested time to be better at it. Probably not *enough* time to "excel" at it, of course, but being somewhere between "unskilled" and "excelling" at it means that I can discern what got me from point A to point B, and it wasn't some god-given "talent" in my genes, it was countless hours sitting with a pen and paper or a brush, and everything looked like **** from the start, but it progressively got better. The point is, the reason I'm not a better painter is not because I'e reached some supposed "talent threshold", it's 100% due to me not having or not spending enough time to hone the skills I do have. -- Sandman |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
In article , nospam wrote:
Sandman: My claim is that if one person is more skilled at a given task than another, it is because he has practiced it more, which in turn is a result from a more eager interest in said task. Not because he has a "born" ability to paint masterpieces or a "born" ability to play the piano. bull****. some people have natural talents and others do not and it has absolutely nothing to do with practice. Of course it does. if it did, there would be more einsteins, picassos, pavarottis and ansel adams. And there are. Sandman: As I said, some people are actually different, savants and autistic people. They are quite literally wired differently than other people which may lead to them being able to use their brain in a way a "normal" person can not. That, of course, can lead to perceived skill. I.e. someone that can remember thousands of decimals of pi but can't get properly dressed. But that's neither skill nor talent, that's just a brain that works in a very unusual way, leading to the person being able to do that most can not. you're contradicting yourself. if it was just practice then anyone could memorize pi to thousands of digits or any other so called skill. No, I was making a difference between practiced skill and an unusual mind. I.e. some of the things autistic people can do can't be practiced by a "normal" person. Sandman: For normal people, talent does not exist, only skill. Learned skill. bull****. complete bull****. Thanks for your opinion. You always manage to provide it so eloquently. -- Sandman |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Can good photographic ability be taught, or is it in-born?
On Tue, 19 May 2015 14:13:33 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On May 19, 2015, Mayayana wrote (in ): Just for you, here is a Picasso I shot at the Munson-Williams-Procter Institute in Utica, NY. Interesting place to visit. http://adobe.ly/1JXRJSJ It turns out the real link is he https://assets.adobe.com/link/1a9456...7-362d6ce3b560 Why would you shorten that? I didn’t shorten it Adobe provides the shortened link for public sharing by default. There is no long url option. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_166.jpg In any case, thanks, but I see nothing on that page at all. That is your problem, other folks don’t seem to have an issue. It's almost entirely obfuscated script. I have never seen that. I have no idea of what you are doing to provoke that sort of failure. I avoid allowing script in general, especially avoiding obfuscated script, and wouldn't allow either to run on Adobe's site. Then don’t bother. I certainly am not creating any odd script to sabotage your system. It could take days to decipher exactly what the script is doing and what other sites it's contacting, if that's even possible. And all that just to display an image! That is what happens when you use MS Outlook Express as a Usenet client, it isn’t. As to whatever else you are doing to prevent that link opening in an internet browser I have no idea. I don’t believe the other Windows users in this room, such as PeterN, Eric Stevens, or Tony have a problem. I see a photo. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A star is born! | Douglas[_5_] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | November 21st 07 11:11 PM |
40D GETS TAUGHT A LESSON ! | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 10 | October 27th 07 10:36 PM |
40D GETS TAUGHT A LESSON ! | Annika1980 | Digital Photography | 7 | October 24th 07 03:21 PM |
A new photographer is born | Mary | Digital Photography | 0 | January 28th 06 09:25 PM |
flatbed scanners with neg film scanning ability ? | Beowulf | Digital Photography | 12 | September 1st 04 11:10 PM |