Public Voice Network
- FMT170513 99
- NHL 2013 2323
- Vid of the Day 1502815028
- Made a memorial page for … 2020
- SNEAKERS 476476
- Kanye video projections i… 77
- Unique Insults 5959
- blog 5768757687
- movies on YouTube 114114
- Tip of The Day 201201
- Shooting of the Day 10531053
- 80's-90's MEMORIE… 12631263
- instagram 651651
- WTF Belvedere Vodka? 22
- Pic of the Day 7464374643
- documentaries 360360
- Belfast & Dublin, Ire… 2121
- Architecture of the Day 435435
- Bitcoin 111111
- DaftPunk 195195
- the gif animation thread 1840818408
- Chick of the day .Gif 4949
- Nature of the day 4545
- Quote someone 11461146
talent vs ability 4242 Responses
Last post: 1 year, 1 month ago | Thread started: Apr 13, 12, 6:40 a.m.
- bjladams
what do you value more, talent or ability? (in design).
we've got 2 potentials.
one has a lot of talent, great with ideas, and even does pretty well with final execution. but watching him work, it's all a matter of trial and error. i.e.: keep pushing stuff around till it feels right. always trying it from a different angle and evolving his style. 3 out of 5 designs are winners, but he can't put his finger on why.
the other understands the science of it. needs the structure of a grid and nothing outside it. explain the final product and show them styles and give them content and they can put it together perfectly. they've got great design ability, but are not innovative on their own to think forward.
which would you rather work with?
i'm be interested to see the perspective of employers vs directors vs co-worker.
- Apr 13, 12, 6:40 a.m. – Permalink
- d_rek
Tough call. Ideally one would possess both...
My take is that technique and ability can be taught while talent is a rather innate thing one either possesses or doesn't, and it can't be taught.
The 'capable' designer you mention sounds a lot like someone I used to work with. At that point, if a person needs content so they can put something together they are no longer a designer, they are merely a decorator - someone who has no responsibility or emotional investment in the creation of a thing, and often lacks the 'talent' to produce unique and interesting visual artifacts.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 6:47 a.m. – Permalink
- d_rek
My experience with the 'capable designer' was rather frustrating. The could never accomplish anything without a measure of handholding, despite their formal training. Stylistically they relied heavily on pre-packaged solutions - no custom typography, illustrations, photography... virtually every solution had some amount of 'stock' in it.
This person in my mind, to reiterate, was not a designer but instead a decorator. They can take all of the correlating elements and compose them in a nice way... but they'd be arsed to create any of the elements from scratch.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 6:49 a.m. – Permalink
- hellobotto
Sounds like I'd want to work with both. If I'm available to contribute to a project in a production capacity, yet creatively distracted by other projects, it's great to work with someone who's still putting their head in the clouds of innovation while my feet are glued to the nitty gritty ground.
Conversely, if I'm tasked with coming up with ideas and approaches, yet I'm too bogged down to shoulder implementation, then I would appreciate knowing our concepts are in the hands of a skilled production artist who knows what's what. (This said, I would view the "understands the science of it" in your example as a "strong production artist" and not a designer. It's a like a semantics game, but semantics and perception permeate all aspects of staffing.)
If it had to be just one person though, I'll play the rude card and answer your question with a question...which person is proactively seeking, or warmly receptive, to new avenues which may make them more versatile? Regardless if they're concept or production-focused, a person who doesn't want to stray out of their lane will be a root of frustration when you find yourself wanting something different out of them.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 7:08 a.m. – Permalink
- animatedgif
Both sound bad in their own way.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 7:26 a.m. – Permalink
- necromation
Give them acid, tie both of them together and give them one knife and she who's left... Works great here!
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 7:36 a.m. – Permalink
- animatedgif
^ Wouldn't that piss the art worker off when the first guy comes over and starts wanting things shifted around randomly till it "feels right" when they've worked hard setting up a system.
I'd go with the second as they seem to actually understand what they're doing, the first is floundering.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 8:38 a.m. – Permalink
- monospaced
#1
Then beat him into submission.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 9:40 a.m. – Permalink
- monNom
Do you want good ideas, or someone to hit deadlines?
#1 has a lot more potential, but will require significant investment on your part to develop his skills. You'll need to give guidance on technical approaches to design to bring up their productivity. In the mean time, you're probably going to have to pad out your estimates by a good deal to make up for the inexperience. This person is your typical junior designer and really shouldn't command a premium salary over the other until their productivity can keep up with the more experienced designers.
#2 would be a great production designer. Sounds like they have a good deal of experience, but if they aren't producing creative work it's unlikely that they will change. Not everyone is an artist at heart, some are more technicians. Salary would probably be higher than #1 as this designer should be more productive.
Long term #1 could be a great advantage to your company, but if you're swamped with work now and just need to get it done, #2 is your better pick.
Hiring both and teaming them up could be ideal.
- Dog-earApr 13, 12, 2:40 p.m. – Permalink
