>>2487706
>impossible to get good.
If you are satisfied with your ability, then you can't improve. So getting good is bad.

It is better to always think you can be better, and this does not require 10k hours.

>>2487706
Mastery =/= getting good.

10K hours is what it takes to become a "Master". If you take things slow you can certainly attain mastery over a slow period of time. You have a life time remember. Hell if 4 years is all it took to become a Master why isin't every kid that went to an Art school good?

Theres a certain amount of Aptitude and Skill + that 10K hours.

Fear nawt, Art is one of those things that you've seen your entire life. You probably already have a year + just by doing this shit causally.

>>2487706

you don't need to be a master to accomplish a lot of things in art. Making a career out of it is at least as much as who you know and how you promote yourself as it is about being competent, and you certainly don't need to be a "master" to make work that people will pay for. The best time to start is yesterday, the next best time is right now.

>>2487706
I don't think you would even be good if you tried to cram 10,000 hours in 4 years because your brain wouldn't even retain half the stuff you try to learn.

The 10,000 hours meme isn't to get good its to be THE BEST

>>2487706

10k hours is a meme for stupid people believing pseudo-science and bro-tier "knowledge".

For fuck's sake, be at least a bit analytical.

Oh, but don't be happy - this being a meme doesn't mean you'll ever be good. You won't. Not because of lack of effort, but plain stupidity. Lack of interest, lack of wanting to earn on your own. You are searching for Loomis that will be "after I read that book and do all exercises I'll git gut!", "after I'll attend these classess, I'll finally make it!".

You want formula and easy success. I don't blame you though, such sheepish mentality can be seen in all fields ("if I'll finish CS I'll be good programmer and I'll be earning 100k/year!", "after I'll finish engineering in MIT they will make me Senior FEA engineer!").

Reflect at least a bit what does it really mean "getting good". Also notice that all the famous artists including fucking Rotho were personalities with character, movers & shakers both in front of canvas and outside. Always curious, always asking, always trying something new and to marvel or puzzle the world.

You won't get good because you don't want to do any of that and you have nothing to show the world of yourself.

>>2487850
well said

>>2487706
> you would need to sacrifice all your free time to get good.

If that's what it takes, then do it

>>2487706
>I'll finish CS I'll be good programmer and I'll be earning 100k/year!"
You won't necessarily be a good programmer, but you can easily pull in 100k - see below

>after I'll finish engineering in MIT they will make me Senior FEA engineer!
Oracle hires out of MIT with 100k base - they just pick up all the lazy engineers who don't want to job hunt and self promote

Also, if you finished engineering at MIT, you first got into MIT, which is non-trivial, and second, you survived MIT which is also non-trivial. This means that you aren't a complete moron, and you will probably try hard to get a job to apply your skills.

The same MIGHT be said for a top tier art school. You first have to get in, and second you have to like art enough to endure 4 yrs of training. While at this point you may be a competent artist, this doesn't mean you are motivated to get a job since you can still art on your own.

>>2487891
Oops meant to reply to >>2487850

>>2487850
Harsh truth.

There's no shortcut. If you try to search one for even a second that's a sign.

>>2487850
As far as I can tell, he has the formula backwards. You get good, then you put in the 10,000 hours to be a master.
Lets put it in bike terms, since that's all I know.
I've put in around 5,000 hours of hardcore cycling in the past four years. Before that, I knew how to ride a bike.Before even that... I didn't know how to pedal, I completely skipped training wheels.
But anyways, imagine you have training wheels on your bike. It doesn't matter how many hours you put in, even 10,000. The reason is because you don't know how to ride without them. You might be able to get on a bike without training wheels and ride it at this point, but there's no way in hell you're gonna be breaking the speed limit any time soon.

>>2487706
10,000 hours is a meme statistic made to over-simplify the process of gitting gud.

What and how you learn are both more important than grinding. Obviously you're going to have to do a bit of grinding, but with the right resources and dedication you can get to an acceptable skill level within two years.

>>2487850
nice

>>2487899
If you grind 12 hours every day for 2 years you'll be around the 10,000 hour mark

So yeah, I guess it's possible to do it in two years

>>2488087
Yeah but this is disregarding the fact that artists are humans too (unless you're the big KJG) and are easily prone to being burnt out. At some point you're gonna get diminishing returns.

So here's a thought.

There's a proverb that says: "Before you make a friend, eat a bushel of salt with him."
You guys hear this and want to make a friend as soon as possible, shoveling as much salt in you as you can, prabably poisoning yourself.
But that's beside the point.
You just end up feeling like shit and you haven't become real friends either.
What it means is that it's going to take a lot of time spent together. Or to quote the best answer on Yahoo answers: If you've eaten enough meals with a person to use up a bushel of salt, you've probably spent enough time together to get to know him as a friend.

This 10 000 hours thing is not to be taken literal.
It is meant to say that it takes a long ass time of serious dedication to whatever you are trying to master.
By trying to cramp 10 000 hours of practice into the shortest timeframe possible you are missing the point.
How would you go about measuring the time spent anyways? Is it time the pen touches the paper? You analytically observe an image?

If I said it'd take 10 years, you can't slack it off in that time and then say"Well, it was 10 years I did something everyday." Just to meet the criteria. You still won't be a master.

I think advice like this is meant to give a reality check to deluded minds, not to give you an actual shedule.

tl;dr:
Don't try to just literally meet the criteria of a proverb. There's no quick trick. There's not the one advice.

>>2488144
If it's not meant to be taken literally, then why quote a fucking number.

The number means there must be an equation. We must solve the equation in order to git gud.

>>2487897
Again with the fucking sports metaphors. Getting good at drawing is like learning a language. Sure, you can beat the vocabulary into your head through repetition and 'putting in the effort', but beyond that determination alone isn't going to help you. There's people who never really learn how to speak a second language despite living in a foreign country for half their life, and there's people who are able to write god-tier prose in their second language. What's the difference between the two?

>>2487850
This guy gets it. As much as I hate to admit it, I played LoL for two years, which added up to around 3000 hours. Do you think I ever got out of silver? No. Why? Because I never learned from my mistakes. People don't automatically get good at things by putting in time and effort. Mastery is the result of gaining a near absolute understanding of the thing you are doing. You can repeat the same tihng over and over again for all eternity without learning a single thing about it. You're not grinding a character in an MMO. This is real life. If you want to improve, then focus on what you're doing rather than how much time you're spending doing it.

>>2487706

>is it possible to get /fit/ if you don't lift 7 hours a day?

gitting gud isn't about locking youself in a hole and grinding for x number of hours for x number of years,
it's about building and maintaining good habits for the rest of you life. start by drawing something you don't know how to draw every day. continually challenge yourself to learn new things and you will get better

It's possible to get good without drawing anything, if you're good enough at observing.

>>2488239
what, bullshit

I did this with a musical instrument when I was young and wasn't working as much.

It works but when you spend 7 hours a day shoving technical nonsense down your throat, you stop enjoying what you learn and start to enjoy learning. Then one day, all you're doing is studying and you've forget why you started this grind. Unless you're just trying to get to a professional level, which in case go for it.

I'm just this month picking up art seriously though so I dunno if it transfers over, but it works. You just miss alot of the good stuff. It comes back overtime though.

>>2488239
ebin meme

>>2488239
you are gonna get good at observing, not at drawing. to get good at drawing you have to be good at both

>>2487716
because that kid is a fucking twat who only did homework and never really did anything outside of class work.

skill and aptitude mean nothing, unless you want to say you are retarded or are not. creativity can play a roll, but not as much as you think. people pay you to get their ideas on paper, not for you to be the one thinking in most cases.

>>2488166
getting fit is an entire life style change, and if you wont commit you may as well not do it.

>>2487706
get good/get employed does not equal 10000 hours, being world class equals 10000 hours.

>>2487706
you can do 12h on weekends and 5h on weekdays, making it 7h per day. It also means you can have a job, though you wont really have free time other then higiene, buying food and other basic necessity. Also why would need to become master in 4years? Im pretty sure there are people who get good in in 1 years and continue to get better over time, there isnt some cut off time when you will start making money etc, just because you reached, you might start doing full time work in a year or you might never do it even in 20years.

>I was doing the mathematics

Developing a skill isn't some measurable science where you draw for 10 hours and reach level 2 artist, then 20 hours for level 3, until you max out at level 100 or something.

When you hear the '10,000 hours' thing it's meant to be "to get good at a skill you need to spend a long time on it."
the 10,000th hour doesn't just tick by and your quadruple ligameme sprouts with a golden glow, generating a constant steady flow of spark.

>>2488144
>This 10 000 hours thing is not to be taken literal.
>It is meant to say that it takes a long ass time of serious dedication to whatever you are trying to master.

No it is mean to be taken literal. The 10.000 hour number came about after scietific study found that experts and masters in their respective fields all had put in approximately 10.000 hours of deliberate practice, regardless of the actual field they were in.

>By trying to cramp 10 000 hours of practice into the shortest timeframe possible you are missing the point.

No, you've got the right idea. The sad fact is that the same study also found that more that 5 hours of deliberate practice a day suffers huge diminishing returns. So cramming 18 hours of practice into every day won't matter even if you could do it.

>>2488148
>The number means there must be an equation. We must solve the equation in order to git gud.
See above: experts have spent approximately 10.000 hours of deliberate practice, averaging 4 to 5 hours per day. Note that "deliberate practice" is technical term in this context.

The 10.000 hour rule was popularized by Malcolm gladwell in his book "outliers", based on work by K. Anders Ericsson. Want to know more, start there.