Sharpness is overrated

That is a photo that will last forever.
I know you refer to it as a "snapshot",but there is no way in the universe that you could ever make that happen on purpose.
I love it.
And wish that I could have ever captured something like that when my girls were little.
 
Gary, Lew... thank you for those nice words! :icon_hug:

They're both beautiful and I would like them to be my models :)
 
Wasn't it Ansel Adams who said 'There's nothing worse than a sharp photo of a fuzzy concept'.

It is clear that Adams was stressing the importance of subject, but the statement is saying nothing about the importance of technical proficiency.

At school I hear it all this all the time, about how 'story is more important' than technical. How you can shoot an entire movie using a shaky hi-8 camera in natural light and if the story were good enough, then it doesn't matter.

So frequently in film school we get wrapped up in this myth that if a story is good enough, we can just bypass all the craft - that craft is this sort of unnecessary technical inconvenience that our delicate "right brain" shouldn't need be subjected to. It does not help that in order to offset dreams of using $100,000 cameras to improve freshman's mediocrity, professors often rely on the "it's not the equiptment it's how you use it" line, which is certainly true, but likewise is extended to "it doesn't matter if you lack technical skills..."

As a technical artist, this pill is hard for me to swallow. So much of what I'm doing in school is tremendously technical, yet likewise aesthetically interesting. I can't just will this stuff into existence by virtue of my creativity.

The challenge with art is that it *is* technical, as well as creative. I will never be a great illustrator, not because I lack ideas - but because I do not have the manual dexterity that it requires. If you cannot figure out how to use a camera, you'll never be a great photographer, no matter how "creative" you are. There is no "single important aspect". You wouldn't say "it doesn't matter how bad your grammar is, so long as the story is good". Art is hard.

If the lack of sharpness (or whatever technical quality) distracts from the subject, it doesn't work. If the lack of softness distracts from the subject, it doesn't work. But no matter if the subject is better shot sharp or sharp you still need to know *how* to choose the right lens, the right focal length, the right aperture and the right focal distance. Otherwise photography isn't art, it's the occasional happy accidents.
 
There something nostalgic about this. I can't put my finger on it, but I like it.
I think it is the memory of fun and love between siblings. The color and softness lends a film appearance, heck, it may be film.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
There something nostalgic about this. I can't put my finger on it, but I like it.
I think it is the memory of fun and love between siblings. The color and softness lends a film appearance, heck, it may be film.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

or the memory of the same photo posted with the same title.

but I'll admit, yours is much more romantic.
 
If the lack of sharpness (or whatever technical quality) distracts from the subject, it doesn't work. If the lack of softness distracts from the subject, it doesn't work. But no matter if the subject is better shot sharp or sharp you still need to know *how* to choose the right lens, the right focal length, the right aperture and the right focal distance. Otherwise photography isn't art, it's the occasional happy accidents.

I think these specific sentences get to the heart of the matter. If technical issues detract or distract from the content, then technical issues matter. Too many people, when faced with the difficulty of being creative, are incented to profess that importance of technical issues is paramount. Being technically good with a camera is realtively easy compared to being creative.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top