Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 88

Thread: Must your image be technical perfect ?

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    North of Chicago
    Posts
    1,690

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    Sally Mann and The Angel of Uncertainty—

    https://www.nga.gov/audio-video/vide...-colldion.html
    ____________________________________________

    Richard Wasserman

    https://www.rwasserman.com/

  2. #22
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    17,049

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    This thread sounds like hunting for another Ivory Billed Woodpecker in an endless swamp. One man's version of "perfection" is another man's nightmare. To each his own. Yeah, I'm known for really crisp prints, especially in relatively large scale color. But there never has been and never will be a "perfect" print. If there was, it would probably be boring.

  3. #23
    (Shrek)
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,020

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    There's a famous scene in Waiting For God where Diana has taken up painting, and she is discussing her current work with Tom. It's of the gardener behind a tree, she starts explaining how the rake symbolizes the gardener or something. So Tom asks her: "So, you can't do faces, eh?"

    I'm a firm believer that when you're learning your craft, you need to learn to master that craft before you set about introducing deliberate imperfections. But then rules are made to be broken. It's more important to have heart than technical perfection.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    SooooCal/LA USA
    Posts
    2,633

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    I have always told students "You have to know the rules before you can break them"... You can't bank your career on "happy accidents", so you can direct the process to give it what it needs when you need it...

    We have all seen perfect results of scenes that the image is less than interesting, and I was thumbing through a book of photographs by artist Robert Rauschenberg with very interesting images, but wished the foto tech was much better... Some of the pop hipster stuff is deliberately sloppy, or maybe they are doing their best with what they have???

    I heard the f64 group mindset was a reaction to the "salon movement" of the early century and against the "fuzzy-wuzzyists" who thought an imperfect view was more natural like the eye "saw"... They tried to bring precision sharpness back, despite the eye would not resolve detail on every pebble, and extend DOF better than the eye could see...

    So we get to work in the range between these extremes, and our skill/experience will make us choose the rendition that works with the subject/series/mood that will convey the "married" image values to the viewer...

    Steve K

  5. #25
    multi format
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    local
    Posts
    4,612

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickMarq View Post
    The question is: do you want the complete image to be sharp, and have every detail in the shadows ?

    For a long time this was quite important to me, but I have seen my style changing over the years.
    Some views need to be completely sharp (except when using soft focus lenses). But I don't find this a must anymore.

    A landscape can have a soft foreground and a sharp main subject, or some shadows may be complete dark. I find this more natural as we see this with our eyes.

    Then you have of course the impression of the artist who deliberate places thing out of focus, or creates harsh images in black & white, or a shallow depth but this is something completely different.

    I see these questions pop-up on a regularly base in the forums so I'm curious, so do you go for perfection or more the natural way ?
    that is sometimes what people expect as a photograph, maybe it's a client., you, me, maybe it's someone else, that's their interest, what they like &c im glad they like that sort of stuff because it's what sells!

    I find anything that is "technically perfect, sharp every detail" to be extremely sterile, lifeless and boring, but that's me ..

    "modernist photography" and "f64" were reactionary movements to try to give photography legs and make it different than painting &c when photographers were making painterly photographs, and it seems now a lot of photography made with film &c. is reactionary to the digital mega-verse where it's like f64 and fauvism and hyper reality on steroids not much has changed since the mid 1800s.
    whatever .. I don't really follow trends very much, im glad people are enjoying themselves, ..
    Last edited by jnantz; 29-Oct-2022 at 11:12.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    klamath falls, oregon
    Posts
    1,607

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickMarq View Post
    The question is: do you want the complete image to be sharp, and have every detail in the shadows ?
    Yes.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    307

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Technical perfection is a must. Who wants a gray, wrinkled, stinky, fixer laiden print with uneven borders and grain-motion artifact?
    I agree here a print should be perfect or almost, otherwise all the trouble to create the film would be waisted.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Newbury, Vermont
    Posts
    1,748

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    ...do yourself(ves) a favor - watch the Sally Mann video for which Richard W. has posted the link above. Don't skip to the end, but do pay particular attention to her parting words.

  9. #29
    Mark Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Stuck inside of Tucson with the Neverland Blues again...
    Posts
    6,111

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    An image should be what you want it to be, and others can argue over whether you were right.
    "I love my Verito lens, but I always have to sharpen everything in Photoshop..."

  10. #30
    Peter Galea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz
    Posts
    148

    Re: Must your image be technical perfect ?

    "Strive for perfection, settle for excellence" - Paula Chamlee

Similar Threads

  1. Flat lens offers a perfect image
    By Sylvester Graham in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 27-Aug-2012, 12:43
  2. Technical questions concerning an image...
    By Carterofmars in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 9-May-2012, 19:51
  3. Technical versus non-technical approaches - which?
    By Robert McClure in forum On Photography
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 7-Jan-2006, 14:12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •