http://codesuppository.blogspot.com/2013/04/so-your-teenager-tells-you-they-want-to.html
This guy(who apparently is a veteran programmer in the gaming industry) is basically saying that if you are not born with talent and cannot do pixar level work at a young age, you have no hope of making it
What do you guys think?
that OP got no talent and should be banned from /ic/
>>2395350
The cunt is a programmer he has no say in the art side of things.
Any professional artist will tell you otherwise, and those are the people who've actually made it.
>>2395354 he claims to be an artist though his artwork is just "meh"
>>2395350
His idea of what talent is... it's kind of misleading.
He says this -
> Do they do art at a young age that looks like it could have been done by the best animators at Walt Disney or Pixar?
But backs it up with
>http://www.gameartisans.org/forums/forum.php
Granted, there are few that are pretty damned good, most of them look completely unremarkable - and for the hobbyist, on an achievable level.
>>2395376
I mean...
Wangxiaoyu stands alone of course, but these certainly aren't near the same level as Disney's top dogs, and these people certainly aren't 5 year olds either.
>>2395350
You totally missed the point of the article. Investing time and money to go to a college to become a vidya game artist is a wast he says. Especally if you are not already really passionate and skilled, which is a benchmark which shows a maturity to even attend college. Further more he says that it is a really bad investment because there are very few stable and good jobs in the industry because of the unreasonable deadlines and irregularities in projects to work on etc. So, if your not cut for it early on, don't have any illusions that it is easy or worth it in the end, because it won't.
>>2395381
>You totally missed the point of the article. Investing time and money to go to a college to become a vidya game artist is a wast he says. Especally if you are not already really passionate and skilled, which is a benchmark which shows a maturity to even attend college. Further more he says that it is a really bad investment because there are very few stable and good jobs in the industry because of the unreasonable deadlines and irregularities in projects to work on etc. So, if your not cut for it early on, don't have any illusions that it is easy or worth it in the end, because it won't.
He also says that you have to be talented as a child to make it,
there is UNDENIABLE proof that he is wrong http://fzdschool.com/entertainment-design/before-and-after
also sup ratcliffe, fancy seeing you here
>>2395385
I think that: talented as child, could be better substituted with tenacity to learn art at an early age in most cases, where the ratio to work and improvment is normal. Either way your example of people going to school to learn this type of stuff is what he is explicitly an opponent against, because a carrer in this field is not stable and flourishing with job opportunities nor particularly rewarding, economically, for the time put in to a project. Being put in debt to learn a skill that others mastered as a kid is not worth it. Better go to college and learn somthing that isn't related to entertainment even if you are good at art or bad.
The improvment before and after on the fzd school site isn't even that impressive, I would't know why you would pay to go in that school if that is all you got out from it, a few more finished pieces.
>>2395372
Which is why he's probably pretending like it's not his fault, he just wasn't born with "talent." Then he's projecting that insecurity onto everyone else, because it obviously couldn't be his problem.
I don't buy /ic/'s usual kneejerk 'talent doesn't exist' meme, I think predispositions do exist and some people find art (or certain aspects of art) far more intuitive than others, but saying "I can't draw because I'm untalented" is a terrible excuse. Acting like somebody needs to have the skills of one of the top professionals in the industry at a young age before they can even consider a formal education is fucking laughable.
>>2395984
PS. people apply the word talented to artist because they don't grasp that there is such a thing as funtamental principles in art as well that has layed the foundation for trend setting artist, excluding the modernist art which are secularist circle jerkers. What made every artist unique though, leyndecker, berkley, fruede and mouebius for example were their esthetic which enhanced their strong sides, No one can arrive at their way of painting/drawing things, because you need to have certian traits and experiences and inate ways of perciving the problem of making pictures, this is talent or genius, but we all have it. However, it needs to be unlocked first with grit and tancity in observation, construction and maturity that comes with experience.
>>2395350
> If you are not born with talent, you are hopeless
>What do you guys think?
All men are not created equal. Some are born smarter, or more beautiful, or with parents of greater status. Some, by contrast, are born weak of body or mind, or with few, if any, talents. All men are different.
Yes, the very existence of man is discriminatory! That is why there is war, violence and unrest.
Inequality is not evil. Equality is. What became of tumblr, who claimed that all are equal? It is in constant conflict because its tenets go against human nature! deviantART, which harbors similar sentiments, is constantly mired in sloth! But our /ic/ is not like them. We put an end to procastination and evolve with every study. /ic/ alone looks forward and moves toward a better future!
Algenpfleger going pro is yet more proof that our board is evolving.
Draw! For the future rest in the hands of the talented!
All hail /ic/!
>>2396106
>But our /ic/ is not like them. We put an end to procastination and evolve with every study. /ic/ alone looks forward and moves toward a better future!
That's awfully optimistic.
>>2395381
The topic has been beaten to death. The crux of the article stating that you're better off steering clear of most art and game design schools and that art is an economically challenging, and fiercely competitive field, is not lost on most of us.
I wager most here are more interested in what you define as talent - which from the looks of it, is uninformed and all over the place. A lot of those people worked hard to get to where they were, starting from the ground up. The road is as long as it's ever been for them, and they still strive to improve. It's the same for those pixar animators.
If you had any idea of how much went into fighting for even a modicum of their progress, you wouldn't call it talent at all.
If anything teens have an advantage, they have time. The real tragedy is selling your best years for it.
Talent doesn't exist. Grit does.
>>2396043
I feel like you're onto something there.
>>2395350
theres no such thing as talent
if your an average 115 IQ human being you can master anything if you invest enough dedicated time into it
>>2396854
Can you surpass the master though?
>>2396854
Average IQ is 100 by definition of the IQ.
talent is just a head start
everyone has natural predilections
Pic related:
>“People err who think my art comes easily to me. I assure you, dear friend, nobody has devoted so much time and thought to composition as I. There is not a famous master whose music I have not industriously studied through many times.”
>>2395350
I think he's just trying to turn away people from fun and into having a family as evident by him wanting to be with his family.
Which is just fucking dumb. Who cares about a family. It's all about what you want to do.
>>2395376
Have to agree, I doubt many even in the games industry can do art on the level of the best animators at Walt Disney or Pixar.
Let alone be expected to be able to do it when your just a kid. There is lots of people who've gotten into the games industry later in life and didn't start out super talented, look at cubebrush's early stuff , even mr jack a lot of it early on is very amateur which is of course to be expected.
Other than that I think the general gist of his article is correct. The games industry is a horrible idea to make a career on unless you really have a passion for it and are willing to work hard and actually do work instead of playing games.
90 percent of kids going to a degree in game art or programming will never get a job in the games industry. The art industry is very similar except the games industry actually pays well.
On the subject of "natural talent", it's very clearly a lie.
You can't be born with anything like that.
Take people who say that the are naturally gifted architects.
If you look far back into their childhood, you will find they may have had a lego set, but not many other toys.
Spending all their time with lego slowly built up their spatial reasoning.
But they forgot about all that, and find that somehow, they are suddenly good at negotiating spaces and construction when they are older. That's natural talent.
Or maybe someone who is good at mathematics was, as a child, interested in a hobby where calculating or understanding the abstraction of numbers was necessary. Even if it isn't immediately obvious that the hobby involved math, if the child grows up and finds he is somehow good at math and can't explain why, then that is "natural talent".
If any of you think you have a natural talent for drawing, I bet if you look at your earliest of early years, you will find you ended up in situations where you were forced to use areas of your brain that dealt in spatial thinking, color relations, or what have you.
The brain is incredibly malleable. It changes in order to reason as efficiently as possible while still conserving energy. You can have the same brain as the greatest artist if you force it to reason like that kind of brain would.
>Here is a link to her website. This is the quality of art that she presented me at the age of 19!
>Links an image from when she was 33
Other than that he's got a point in how extremely competitive the area is. If 4 years in college aren't going to bring you to the level that companies would be willing to hire you, then you might be better off studying something else and instead improving in your free time.
Or you could just live in a country with study financing and not worry about a 100k debt.
>>2396921
Typically "talented" folk are those who had exposure at an earlier age. Most abandon the prospect of art at an early age, but those who are surrounded by it have no concept of their own limitations and pursue it without even thinking twice about it.
That's really all it seems to be.
We already discussed this before. Basically what it comes down to is that
>he never invested in the craft seriously himself so he doesn't know any better.
He also uses a 2013 picture done by the Lackadaisy creator/artist Tracy Butler to "prove" his point. In so doing he erroneously implies that she hasn't improved as an artist in 14 years by saying that she showed him art of identical quality when she first started working with him 17 years ago-and of course he follows that up by suggesting that if your child in their late teens [i.e. you, /ic/] isn't as good as a 36 year old professional artist they should just give up now and probably kill themselves.
>"Here is a link to her website. This is the quality of art that she presented me at the age of 19!"
>She was 19 in 1999
Admittedly, her art for her own comic Lackadaisy she'd released 9 years after this aforementioned 19th birth year of hers was pretty solid in its introduction in 2008, but just compare it to her art from her more recent pages. People get better at art. Talent and aptitudes do exist as much as we'd like to avoid that subject, but the fact is they're beholden to many other factors. Would you really give up on something you truly want just because it might be marginally harder for you than someone else? I hope not.
tl;dr - don't rely on a programmer for advice about art or artistic progression, or really any other normie that barely has the critical eye to discern the difference in artistic quality between a Ruan Jia piece and one by Shadman, please.
>>2396560
>wager most here are more interested in what you define as talent- which from the looks of it, is uninformed and all over the place.
Yeah I agree there is alot of hard manuall labour to be done for anyone that want to master their tools and abilities. Talant is missguiding if you dont consider how much work was put in to the craft it self. However I think that some people progress faster than other because of intelligent and meaningfull practice, or superior neural placticity.
>>2397263
>tl;dr - don't rely on a programmer for advice about art or artistic progression
As an artist who has done some programming completely agree. Its kind of understandable though.
In programming there are concepts that you just get or you don't , of course you improve in programming but a lot of it is natural talent. And it also requires a certain level of intelligence that the average person doesn't have.So I feel on the programming side he is actually more accurate.
Art is more training your brain to intuitively do certain things, In a way I'd say art is a lot closer to athletics training than it would be to programming. You basically have to train your mind to do certain things and train so much it becomes intuitive.
On the other hand programmers can get by being really good at math and using reference books.
>>2397038
As a guy who was always rather "talented" in math and programming and stuff, I must say that as a child I did in fact spend most of my playtime on lego and had a big interest in numbers and scientific explanations. That said, these happened to be my natural interests. If you didn't do these things as a child, you're going to have a rough time. If I had spent all that time drawing, I'd probably be a pretty good artist right now instead of being mediocre. If I spent that time singing, I'd be a great singer. But that time is gone now and it's not coming back. The brain of a child is malleable, the brain of an adult not so much. The rewiring of a year for a child's brain might take years for an adult's brain because of myelination and stuff.
>>2395350
In a few months I have drawn things I never thought possible
fuck that guy
>>2395350
>veteran programmer's opinion on art
There are over 7 billion human beings on this planet. If you are not born with some kind of edge in addition to developing a strong work ethic of course you will not make it.
>>2399186
Considering the vast majority of them is subsistence farming somewhere while we are idling on 4chan, I somehow doubt we have to worry about the competition much.
>>2396980
The only toys I had growing up from an early age were LEGO. When I got into constructing shapes at the age of 13-14 I thought "wait a minute, I have always been trying to do this in my drawings"
I was also really good in technical drawing and physics in high school, and I have won some sculpture prizes.
It helps a bit that both my parents were architects. I considered getting into architecture.
>>2395350
There is no "pixar" level. That level doesn't really demand any talent.
People on this board constantly confuse talent and skill. It's just a bunch of fags who think that be all and end all of art is pretty drawings.
>>2397887
It should be a fucking mandate that kids have to play with lego or something similar so that they grow up smart and creative.
If I have a kid and it doesn't like lego I'm just going to scrap it and start again.
>>2400775
I grew up with legos, minecraft and spore, it helped
