On 8-7-2010 9:03, scott wrote:
>>> Actually, no, that's not quite true. I learned why drawing is even hard
>>> in the first place: because humans see things as 3D objects, not 2D
>>> figures. And that means that when you try to copy something, you take
>>> the 2D image, mentally convert it to 3D, and then try to convert back to
>>> 2D by hand... which doesn't work at all. The solution is to directly
>>> draw what the eye sees, not what the mind interprets.
>>>
>>> Of course, I still have *no frickin' clue* how to do that.
>>
>> I've spent the occasional time trying to learn to draw as well.  There's
>> a difference between taking one class and spending *years* honing a
>> skill.  Itzhak Perlman, for example, is a world-class violinist.  You
>> don't seriously think he doesn't spend several hours a day practicing,
>> but just gets up on stage and performs without any preparation at all,
>> even with his decades of experience, do you?
> 
> I read somewhere (don't remember which book now) that you need 10000 
> hours of experience in something to become an expert.  Apparently if you 
> research many "experts" (including famous sports people, business men, 
> artists etc), almost all have surpassed the magic 10K hour mark.

that would be about 5 years (250 days a year 8 hours a day)?
Does that also work the other way and 10K hours implying that you are an 
expert?

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:
> that would be about 5 years (250 days a year 8 hours a day)?

I have actually read it's consistently closer to 10 years of practice to 
become an expert at something, whether it be walking and talking, or 
composing music or brain surgery.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message