best photos of mine not always the "best" quality .

[gtaylor]

i've been going through old photos preparing for archiving and have noticed that MANY of my favorites are pictures I took under less than optimal conditions. Often the original was grainy and/or out of focus.

If I love the composition, I try to turn it into a "painting" using Elements or some such program, with sometimes rather wonderful results.

That is the main reason I am so turned off by "pixel peepers". I just don't understand the quest for the "perfect" camera. In my case, it is obvious that the actual tool isn't important. What IS important is capturing that magical moment and turning it into something worth looking at time and again for years.

Just had to get that off my chest.!

 

[Alex_B]

well, for some purposes, the tool is important. it really depends on what you are going to use the images for.

i have some really good images which lack in technical aspects, and I have some which don't. I prefer the second class of images, which does not mean I do not like the former.

Also, it is in particular those complicated non-optimal situations where a good digital camera can make a difference. in particular in low light.

 

[gtaylor]

well, for some purposes, the tool is important. it really depends on what you are going to use the images for.

i have some really good images which lack in technical aspects, and I have some which don't. I prefer the second class of images, which does not mean I do not like the former.

Also, it is in particular those complicated non-optimal situations where a good digital camera can make a difference. in particular in low light.

you are absolutely correct. I overstated myself when I said that the equipment isn't important. OF COURSE it is; what I was trying to say was that sometimes that perfect moment doesn't connect up with your perfect camera setup and one has to make the best of the situation.

 

[Big Mike]

I notice this when I go though old photo albums, either mine, my family's or even anyone that I see. Many of the photos are blurry, out or focus or have any number of 'technical' problems...but they are favorites because they recall a specific memory.

Now, I usually won't even process an image of mine that isn't sharp and well exposed...but hopefully my 'expertise, experience (and good gear)' allows me to capture more keepers than throw-aways.

 

[Alex_B]

you are absolutely correct. I overstated myself when I said that the equipment isn't important. OF COURSE it is; what I was trying to say was that sometimes that perfect moment doesn't connect up with your perfect camera setup and one has to make the best of the situation.

a technically imperfect image can still be an image with great impact.
well, and we also all agree, that a perfect setup does not make an interesting image

 

[Big Mike]

a technically imperfect image can still be an image with great impact

Not too long ago, I saw the winners for the '2007 Photos of the year' from one of the big journalistic outfits. All of the photos had great impact...and all of them had one or several major technical flaws.

 

[skipper34]

I love avian photography but I am not yet to the point where I would try to sell any of my images. I am using Canon DSLR but with an older manual focus telephoto lens via an adapter. It's funny because even those images that aren't tack sharp or the exposure is not spot-on seem to be enjoyed by everyone who sees them except me because I know what the technical shortcomings are. That doesn't seem to bother those who admire them in the least.