In article , Andreas Skitsnack
wrote:

Sandman:
Intuition is when you're doing some based on what you feel is
true, without using reasoning.

Andreas Skitsnack:
Yes, and that's why intuition is linked to what we call natural
talent. An artist may draw a scene a particular way because
he/she intuitively feels that that is the way the scene should
be drawn and not because the artist has been trained to do it
this way, and not because the artist has practiced drawing the
scene.

Sandman:
If the artist is drawing a scene in a particular way, he or she is
doing so by choice, not by intuition.

Are you really this thick? When you choose to do something that is
not predicated on some prior input, that is choosing based on
intuition.

We'll add the word "intuition" to the already long list of words that have you
completely stumped.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intuition?s=t

Sandman:
Nope. When I've been to my children's school to watch the
drawings, I can easily discern which kids have taken an interest
into drawing. Your "example" is only valid if this was the first
time these kids ever held a pen.

What you call "taken an interest into [sic] drawing" is simply the
visible result of a natural ability.

Incorrect. When you're interested in something, you naturally tend to perform
or pursue that interest, which enhances your skill. For young people, this
usually happens at an accelerated rate due to eagerness and the access to a lot
more free time.

Andreas Skitsnack:
It's not just children. Give an adult his/her first camera and
send them out to take photographs. Some will come back with
very ordinary photographs and some will come back with
surprisingly good photographs from a subject matter and
compositional standpoint.

Sandman:
Which means that the ones that have "better" composed photographs
have an interest in composition. Perhaps they have been doing
some interior decoration at home, perhaps they're painters
already and already have learned the basic rules of composition.

Again, it's the visible result of a natural ability.

No.

"Taken an interest in" is an almost meaningless term in this
context.

Of course not.

A person can have taken an interest in a subject or process
without having any ability or talent in regard to that subject or
process.

Without having any ability, yes. Talent is a myth.

There are many people who have taken an interest in photography who
are unable to produce interesting photographs.

According to you, perhaps. Good photographic ability needn't produce a result
that you find interesting.

Skill != Art.

Not that this is bad thing, though. If the person enjoys the hobby,
or produces images that record important things to that person, then
there's no requirement that the photographs be particularly well
done.

What you consider "well done" isn't a parameter in this discussion, however.

Actually, there are other hobbies that come to mind more than
photography. There are people who have "taken an interest in"
pottery, painting, knitting, etc, and created nothing but hideous
results of their interest.

Again, according to a retired guy in Florida.

At least in photography you usually tell if it was supposed to be a
tree in the picture. Not so with some who develop an interest in
painting.

Skill is the subject, not any supposed judgement of the end result. You may
dislike the painting, and other may like it. It may still be the result of a
highly skilled painter that has spent thousands of hours practicing painting to
become skilled at it. Whether or not the result is "art" in your eyes is of no
concern to the subject or his skill.

Andreas Skitsnack:
Training and practice may improve everyone's ability in this to
some degree, but some will always be ahead of the others because
of an intuitive ability to see the subject and how to best
capture that subject.

Sandman:
No.

Such a ridiculous position. Pity.

I grow tired of repeating myself. Refer to my earlier responses regarding the
same claims if you want a more elaborate answer.

--
Sandman