question about artist and their talent

Why not? It's the end product that matters. Coleridge and Byron used laudanum and opium, Huxley used mescaline, one of William Burrough's most famous works is 'Junkie', about his heroin addiction. No-one would argue any of these people weren't literary giants. Same with any form of art, really.

If an artist uses whatever creativity enhancing methods, the work they produce is still authentically theirs, thus it is talent. When deadlines and money making is dependent on the artist's production, it doesn't surprise me that there are artists creating under the influence. They have to unleash the depths of themselves for their work. Right or wrong, this is the artist industry. Talent is simply talent, the means seems less important than the outcome.