|
Forums >
Digital Art and Retouching >
TALENT is BS
Natalia_Taffarel wrote: Some people are slow to start of with but once they establish and organise their thinking they tend to leave the 4 smart people behind. May 20 13 03:20 pm Link William Kious wrote: Nail on the head, its all about vision. May 20 13 03:30 pm Link Natalia_Taffarel wrote: Quite literally an expensive lesson to learn. May 20 13 03:51 pm Link Natalia_Taffarel wrote: So you're KNOWINGLY taking 36 out of 40 people as suckers. Where I come from, people who do that are called "grifters." May 20 13 04:24 pm Link David Sheldrick wrote: For Natalia's argument to hold any validity, each of those babies would have the same level of proficiency at the end of the experiment (assuming scientific methods were followed). May 20 13 04:24 pm Link Artists trying to simplify the workings of the human brain, instead of embracing its complexity. I am starting to think we're not learning from our lessons, and are devolving into a Fascist society. There you have it, it was only a matter of time before someone alluded to Nazis. May 20 13 04:44 pm Link This is a bit off-topic. But since the Op chose to question this talent, I'm here to state with certainty, that 'perfect pitch' exists, and it is inate. I have 'perfect pitch' and can tell you, it's a bit like seeing colors. Each note has a distinct sound that I can identify. Unless you're going to call me a liar, which many people call those with perfect pitch, then there's no basis for disagreement. Those who say that we fake it, just don't understand. I realized that the talent existed around the age of three, long before I even knew about the word 'perfect pitch'. Btw, it has it's down side as well. In fifth grade when they had us pick musical instruments, I picked trumpet. I was unable to keep up with the other players because all the notes seemed wrong. I was one note off. Later, in college in sight-singing class, the teacher would pick a randon 'do' ('C'), I couldn't sing the right notes, but by this time, I was able to learn the transpose, and then sing the right notes. If I was a 'fraud', why would I create those disadvatages. In my music fraternity choir, I was always asked to give the first note without the aid of an instrument. None of the fraternity members doubted by ability to do this. When electronic music became possible, I did tests with a 'frequency counter' to test my 'perfect pitch' and my pitch was very accurate. May 20 13 05:07 pm Link Peano wrote: Nice try. I know this after the class May 20 13 05:14 pm Link Clark Gault wrote: How accurate? May 20 13 05:26 pm Link Clark Gault wrote: Yes. Much like this. May 20 13 05:27 pm Link 16 colours in hi-res mode in delux paint...pixel by pixel using a mouse:  Tell Scuba that your dedication and hard work of smudging over a photo beats his talent of drawing this image from scratch.. May 20 13 05:37 pm Link Clark Gault wrote: Well, judging by your portfolio... May 20 13 05:45 pm Link In Balance Photography wrote: You didn't get what I said... No way in hell could that happen... May 20 13 05:45 pm Link Terrell Gates wrote: Are you saying that no one will ever become Mozart like? May 20 13 05:56 pm Link Natalia_Taffarel wrote: And you've given how many of these classes now? And still clipping 36 out of 40 suckers for the fee you charge? For someone who places such a premium on empirical evidence, you are oddly indifferent to the evidence before you about the people who sign up for your instruction. May 20 13 05:57 pm Link Peano wrote: Who says the students don't get value out it? May 20 13 06:05 pm Link Natalia_Taffarel wrote: I could make a long list of things you're not, but the mods don't allow personal criticisms here. May 20 13 06:05 pm Link In Balance Photography wrote: Natalia_Taffarel wrote: May 20 13 06:10 pm Link Peano wrote: In Balance Photography wrote: I interpreted what she said differently - specifically that they would achieve some level of recognition or professional success. May 20 13 06:15 pm Link In Balance Photography wrote: Don't worry about it... he just seems bitter May 20 13 06:48 pm Link 'In Balance Photography' asked how accurate my pitch was when I tested it with a frequency counter. It was much more accurate than 1/2 step at all times. This thread is about not believing in talent., my problem is someone who without proof will call all those who have a unique talent, fakes. Mine happens to be 'perfect pitch', that I was born with. It's similar to someone who was born blind, writing an article saying the sight doesn't exist. Btw, perfect pitch is not perfect hearing, it's simply the talent of being able to quantify something that most people cannot. As to talent not being relevant, Mozart is an example of talent being overridingly important as were the talents of Ted Williams, Michael Jordan, Albert Einstein and many others. People without talent can become very successful, but the combination of very hard work, luck and talent will provide the very best results. Zorka: Touche, it's a typo, I meant 'hearing colors'. May 20 13 08:08 pm Link William Kious wrote: Yes. ^ ^ May 21 13 01:50 am Link Oh Natalia. Get it already!!!!! Talent DOES exist!!!... and Peano doesn't have any!!  May 21 13 02:25 am Link After almost 200 post we are still at a standstill despite all efforts to solve this out. Although it is nice (and desirable) to have a broad range of interests in life, sometimes is better to let a mechanic to fix our car instead of doing it by our own (and keep asking him about his opinion on fine art, for example )... In other words, it is irrelevant what is Natalia's or Peano's opinion on a given subject (as I can tell, they almost had fallen in love with each other here!) as long as formal science is finding a way to give us sane and satisfactory answers to the problem of human existence. "There has been debate in the psychological literature about whether intelligence and creativity are part of the same process (the conjoint hypothesis) or represent distinct mental processes (the disjoint hypothesis). Evidence from attempts to look at correlations between intelligence and creativity from the 1950s onwards, by authors such as Barron, Guilford or Wallach and Kogan, regularly suggested that correlations between these concepts were low enough to justify treating them as distinct concepts..." Moreover, according to Robert Sternberg, American psychologist, psychometrician and the President of the American Psychological Association: "Correlations between creativity tests and IQ tests vary in magnitude from study to study and depend on which tests are used. Some correlations are no smaller than correlations among creativity tests, so they do not provide strong evidence that IQ and creativity are distinct dimensions. The findings can be understood in terms of a so-called triangular correlation (also known as the threshold hypothesis): Individuals in the lower half of the IQ distribution lack the requisite cognitive capacity to create and hence necessarily exhibit low creativity; individuals in the upper half of the IQ distribution have the requisite capacity but may or may not develop a disposition to create. Consequently, creativity and IQ are highly correlated at low IQ levels but weakly correlated at high IQ levels." May 21 13 03:11 am Link Natalia_Taffarel wrote: There - fixed that for you! May 21 13 03:15 am Link FLEXmanta wrote: +1 May 21 13 03:20 am Link |
