RafaPolit wrote in post #12080299
...I have seen dedication you wouldn't believe from a lot of people... aspiring sportsmen getting even injured over years (decades!) or practice because they cannot match the 'better built' men, or artists trying to 'study' creativity (which can of course be studied, but you are not going to be Picasso or Dalí, no matter how many hours you devote to painting), or a friend who has had singing lessons from every available master, including Plácido Domingo himself, on yet is not at the level of 'better built' singers.
On most other aspects, I would agree with you, on creativity, art and sports, I don't, and I have been around all of them in many different circumstances. That said, I'm very glad you disagree... if you are right and I'm wrong, life is more fair and everyone has a chance. I, regretfully, believe that some people are just 'built better' than the most of us.
Rafa.
Createsean wrote in post #12080427fair enough, but this book isn't selling anything, it's just reporting the research some of which I've read the primary sources. Really, one cannot become successful on talent alone - it definitely helps, but without hard work and only talent you're destined for mediocrity. Every single successful person who people say did it on talent alone do not know the back story. Success comes from an incredible amount of hard work, not your dna (alone).
Gentlemen,
I agree and disagree with you both although I'm leaning more towards Asia than South America on this one.
To Rafa's point I'd say some people definitely have a better chance at succeeding at their chosen medium of artistry or sportsmanship because they are "built better". In some cases their handicaps give them a better advantage (e.g. guitarists Jose Feliciano and Jeff Healey (RIP).
But to Sean's point, what good is a talent that is a by product of good genetics, without perseverance, dedication, discipline and motivation to carry it forward?
I'd say an equal mix of both is necessary but that isn't always true. There have been artists and sports figures that have been thrust into their successes, merely because someone discovered they had just enough talent to nurture and develop and guided them into success to take advantage of them. And when they are no longer "popular enough" they are discarded and forgotten.
This happens in the music industry all the time. Had these fortunate/unfortunates not been at the right place at the right time who's to say where they would be now? Did they deserve the fame and fortune that was handed to them? Did they earn it? Sorry if I digressed.
So in regards to photography what is needed more, talent or experience?
What exactly falls under the talent category? A good eye? What is having a good eye exactly? Knowing how to frame a picture or when to go to a location to shoot it. Or perhaps which lenses, filters and equipment will be needed in your kit. Doesn't this fall under learned experience?
Certainly experience in shooting hundreds even thousands of pictures and then going into post to review what you have done should get you to the point where you can ask yourself "O.K. why did this work? And why didn't this?" and if you've learned from your mistakes then you should have the answers to those questions.
Anyhoo thanks for a good topic guys. I hope I didn't ramble too much. Please feel free to comment back. That'll give Rivest a chance to jump in the ring later today 
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/flipspecial/5554984526/ 
Yeah, I agree with your statement. I thought Sean meant that everyone can achieve genius level by sheer dedication. That I think is impossible. But, that the true geniuses out there need more dedication and study than we think is behind their achievements, I agree wholeheartedly.
