As you know I am very new to the art scene... I've been drawing all of 7 weeks! So I'm still at the stage where I ask myself a lot of questions.

The main question that keeps running through my head is - when does one become an artist?

Can you call yourself an artist when:

a) you can reproduce what you see in a way that is both accurate and pleasing

b ) you don't just reproduce what you see but add something of yourself to what you see... your interpretation.. in other words when you create something which wasn't there before

c) does it matter?!

Or to take another perspective.. is one an artist because they can draw or paint.... or because they feel compelled to do so to express themselves.... again - does it matter?

I wonder what your own thoughts are about this.

Well darlin... Art is a relative term. Someone introduced me a few days ago as her friend the artist. To her, I am an artist. To me, I am an interested observer who doesn't draw after 7 months, as well as you do after 7 weeks. Therefore, if your heart says you could be an artist and you are interested in being an artist, or we think you are an artist, then you are an artist...
And in my book Rose sweetie, you are an artist. You have the heart, the talent and the desire..

To quote Mary Engelbreit, (one of my favorites), she says to say to yourself, "I am an artist. Say it loud and say it proud"...

Repeat that to yourself out loud and often. I do..

Good question Rose. I think its based so much on people's interpretation of the word artist.

To some it is anyone who creates something, whether on paper, canvas, out of clay or rock or wood, whether for sale or not.

For others, it is someone who earns a living by creating in a traditional sense - drawings or paintings.

Others picture a bohemian starving in a garret, wanting only to express themselves.

Personally, I call myself an artist for a little of all those things. I create, I earn money by creating and I express myself as well in my art.

Thank you for your replies.

I guess my question... or rather the question I keep asking myself, was making a distinction between being an artist and being an artisan. I have this nagging suspicion that no matter how well I learn the techniques I shall always be an artisan rather than an artist. I can be pretty good at copying... not so good at creating!

It's like, I know I can write well but I have yet to write a good poem! In the same way, there may come a time when I shall be able to reproduce a scene perfectly but that is a far cry from putting your soul on paper... developing your own style... being original and creative in a truly artistic sense.

But I'm not giving up!

Rose I believe that even if you do "copy" a picture you are still putting something artistic from yourself into the work. I like to believe that I am an artist in training and always will be. I have never sold anything that I have done, nor have I tried to. I love art and creating pictures so therefore I am an artist. I think thats all that really matters.

Each of us can copy an image and each of us will have a different result. That is our own individual style and interpretation of the subject coming through.

In time you will create your own work and discover your own references and make your own art. Now, at the learner stage, you are an artist. You can create something real out of a blank sheet of paper. Whether someone likes it or not is irrelevant. Art is very subjective and the the interpretation of what an artist is also is subjective.