English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I would like to hear only from the naturally gifted artist ... not the learned (taught) artist. Not that I have anything against the artist that were not gifted with this talent from early in life. Anyone can learn anything they put their minds to; but when it's a natural gift or inherrited in the genes gift, there is no compare to the talent. There are too many want-to-be artist (amatures) than there are the real naturally talented artist. And there is a HUGE difference in their work. I had asked 1 question on this site and got one answer that didn't make any sense what so ever. Any honest artist out there?

2006-12-02 02:47:30 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Visual Arts Painting

13 answers

All great artists are naturally gifted artists - some just have some schooling. And yes, anyone can learn to put a brush to a canvas, but only an artistic soul can create inspired art.

The greatest difference between the two is the artist with some classical training learns to avoid common mistakes made by untrained artists by reinforcing the basic elements of design and colour. This makes the creative process a bit smoother - when there's something "not quite right" with a piece of art, we can detect it and fix it more easily.

I started out as a naturally gifted artist - my grade 3 teacher had me design the Santa faces, Jack-O-Lanterns and Easter bunnies for the other kids to colour in. I asked for and was allowed to paint a mural in the school at age 12, and it's still there.

But I wanted to learn more. The natural talent wasn't enough - I wanted to learn to express myself with power and ease. That training doesn't make me paint like other artists - it helped me find my own style of expression, and problems with composition and design are not a problem because they've become instinctive.

I run a small art gallery, and have had "self-taught" artists bring their work in for me to sell. I can generally spot it right away - there are perspective, value and compositional errors, and lack of technique that detract from what they are trying to express. It takes them twice as long to attain the level of other artists who have some training, and I think it's a shame they are so stubborn as to refuse themselves the gift of knowledge.

So don't be so quick to bash someone with classical art training. It does no good unless there's a creative spirit behind it.

2006-12-02 03:12:01 · answer #1 · answered by joyfulpaints 6 · 3 0

If you are a natural artist, then you can try doing just about anything and it will look great... here is the thing though... if that artist gets a few pointers from others, he or she will be even better... I do however think that if you go to school and get everything totally beaten out of you (from the natural gift you had) then you do tend to loose yourself a bit. It's a balance act. I always doodled and so on... my first art class was in HS... where I went straight to AP classes, where I was the only young kid and everyone else was graduating.... that sort of a thing. The teacher would teach everyone else, but let me do basically my own thing... it's been that way always w/ all my classes basically. But I did learn quite a bit from paying attention to what was going on. check out my site www.belaart.com most of the paintings and drawings there are from HS and beginning college.
Right now I do not do too much artwork b/c I have a day job designing ironwork for clients w/ plenty of cash, but when I do get a commission, it's pretty sophisticated. Like this bronze 400lb tortoise I made or this really cool glass piece of artwork.

2006-12-02 12:27:14 · answer #2 · answered by BelaArt 2 · 0 0

I started making art as early as i can remember on my own.
growing up i was always more "talented" then others in my classes, but i think that just came from my interest in it. I would be NOWHERE if I hadn't taken classes and studied under the people who helped become not only technically better but also have a deeper understanding of tasteful art.
im sorry but this question is ridiculous. I know people who didnt get interested in art until they were high school and college age and they are amazing artists.
sorry honey but there is no "art gene."
The difference between "amatures" as you put it and other artists is training. Just as any other subject a deeper understanding of art comes from a deeper study of art, both from others and yourself.
I think this is a horrible misunderstanding about art. Maybe it makes you feel special to be talented, but talent only takes you so far. This is just a bunch of pretencious hoohaa. Why wouldnt someone who is interested in art want to become trained and learn more?
Most people of normal to higher level intelligences can learn to become great artists, its just about the amount of time and effort ones willing to put into it.

2006-12-02 21:36:57 · answer #3 · answered by idontknowjustgivemeaname 2 · 1 0

Def here...I am a natural artist who is also trained. That to me is even better than just a natrual artist without training. The trained artist not only is able to fluidly create but he also knows the mechanics of it.

I played the guitar for 10 years before getting any formal training. After getting training I realized how much I didn't know about what I loved to do so much. Now I am much better at it.

2006-12-02 10:51:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I've given it a lot of thought and concentration, and I still cannot figure out what your question is exactly. If the question is 'are there any artist into fineart'? Then it's too ridiculous a question to answer. If the question is something ELSE, you're going to have to re-post it in a clear, concise manner if you wan't a real answer.

2006-12-02 14:51:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

You ahead honey, What's your real question? I started drawing at the age of three, took art in a large high school (straight A's, and sold the instructor my work). This profile has an e-mail address. I can do pastels, oils but prefer charcoal and acrylics. Haven't spent anytime on it since I stopped painting skatebords. So, what doesn't make sense?

2006-12-02 10:53:31 · answer #6 · answered by relaxed 4 · 0 0

I've never taken classes and I have my own styles. I'm not into the whole, "Modern" art trend. I tend to draw people and paint and take photos of Landscapes. I also write fiction stories. I have never been taught how to be artistic. I am me.

2006-12-02 13:27:52 · answer #7 · answered by queenofnightmares2000 2 · 0 0

I think anyone who doesn't try to learn more about their craft is selling their natural talent short. You may be good already, but isn't it worth more if you if you actually work to improve your art?
But I'm not really sure what your question is either.

2006-12-02 15:42:15 · answer #8 · answered by S H 1 · 1 0

What is your question for such an artist, I can't say that I am ,yet would like to know the question

2006-12-04 22:27:33 · answer #9 · answered by canvasman 2 · 0 0

I've been painting (fine art) for forty-five years. I had to learn so I guess I don't qualify. Try not to be such a snob about art, okay? Art is for everybody!

2006-12-02 11:01:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers