For some, it may be counter productive to chase photographic technical perfection.

[VinceInMT]

When I was working before retirement, I also found it easier to do my job than find meaningful personal stuff to do. Work is already directed for you. You know what has to be done and you have to get on with it. And it ends and some point either at 5pm or when the project is complete.

Not so with hobbies. You have to direct yourself, set objectives, and set aside the time to do it. In many ways, it requires more imagination and dedication.

I depends on the job one has. I’m a retired high school teacher and taught in an area with no mandated curriculum (drafting and computer programming) so it was up to me to direct myself, set the objectives, manage the time, use my imagination and dedication, not to mention assessing how the students were moving toward “perfection,” and it never ended at 5pm nor was the project ever done.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I depends on the job one has. I’m a retired high school teacher and taught in an area with no mandated curriculum (drafting and computer programming) so it was up to me to direct myself, set the objectives, manage the time, use my imagination and dedication, not to mention assessing how the students were moving toward “perfection,” and it never ended at 5pm nor was the project ever done.

I applaud you for your imagination and dedication.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The technical part of photography is pretty much automatic for me, I spend my time and effort on the composition, accurate framing and catching the right or best moment.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The technical part of photography is pretty much automatic for me, I spend my time and effort on the composition, accurate framing and catching the right or best moment.

The hardest and most meaningful part.

 

[bags27]

“Perfection is the enemy of progress.” -Winston Churchill.

A lot is (falsely) attributed to Churchill. Do we know where he said it? I see it a lot on-line, but no one I found cites where he actually said it.

I checked the International Churchill Society, and the quotation doesn't appear.

The closest I found is: "The maxim ‘Nothing avails but perfection’ may be spelt shorter: ‘Paralysis.’" in The Second World War vol. 4

I suspect it is a spin on the essential phrase "perfection is the enemy of the good." And that is also wrongly attributed--usually to Plato (which is especially nuts, because Plato believed in perfection!).
And here it goes back beyond Voltaire, but maybe not much further:

Perfect is the enemy of good - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I think it goes back to someone's mother who said, "My son is perfect." Now everyone is competing with her son.

 

[bags27]

I think it goes back to someone's mother who said, "My son is perfect." Now everyone is competing with her son.

Well, that mother is wrong. It's my grandson who is perfect.

 

[Cholentpot]

I think it goes back to someone's mother who said, "My son is perfect." Now everyone is competing with her son.

'If everyone's kid is a genius how come there are so many idiot adults?'

 

[Eric Rose]

A perfectly exposed, developed, and printed image of a boring subject, is just that, boring. An image that grabs you, even though not technically perfect is still the better image.

 

[nmp]

A perfectly exposed, developed, and printed image of a boring subject, is just that, boring. An image that grabs you, even though not technically perfect is still the better image.

Ansel Adams: "There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept".

 

[snusmumriken]

A perfectly exposed, developed, and printed image of a boring subject, is just that, boring. An image that grabs you, even though not technically perfect is still the better image.

But strangely, boring subjects can prove fascinating when photographed. Take the work of Peter Mitchell, for instance.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

But strangely, boring subjects can prove fascinating when photographed. Take the work of Peter Mitchell, for instance.

An argument could be made that the subject is not in fact boring, just that the viewer lacks imagination to see it in a non-boring way until someone else comes along and points it out.

 

[snusmumriken]

An argument could be made that the subject is not in fact boring, just that the viewer lacks imagination to see it in a non-boring way until someone else comes along and points it out.

Exactly so. That makes the photographer an artist, yes? In Mitchell's case, a single photo might not seem remarkable. But the entire photo-essay is pointing out something to which most people are blind.

 

[Helge]

At first I thought this was just a wind-up question. But then I wondered, 'What is it that's missing from all my reject photos?'. In the past I rejected many on grounds of poor technique, but as my technique became more consistent I realised that content is really the decisive factor (I include viewpoint, composition and timing in 'content'). Now I would say that selection of content both pre- and post-exposure is everything. It's what makes each photographer's 'voice'.

I am a fan of Elliott Erwitt. His book 'Unseen' consists of images that failed the first cut. It includes quite a few that were undoubtedly below par technically: out-of-focus or otherwise blurred, drastically under-exposed, or massively grainy. But because the content is striking, a bit of strong printing has played down the imperfections, and the content speaks.

It was a "putting you on", mind proby type question.
What is the content of a photo really?!
There are many layers nested within each other.
The "technique" of a photo (whatever it or that might be) is absolutely also content in most senses of the word.

 

[Eric Rose]

But strangely, boring subjects can prove fascinating when photographed. Take the work of Peter Mitchell, for instance.

Well that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.

 

[Helge]

Well that's why they make chocolate and vanilla.

You're back‽

 

[jtk]

Photos don't "contain" anything, they just exist....arguably.

 

[Cholentpot]

But strangely, boring subjects can prove fascinating when photographed. Take the work of Peter Mitchell, for instance.

These are not boring by any means. Mundane maybe. This is incredible stuff, the colors, the subjects the location. It's got everything.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You're back‽

Evidentially, there are no indications that it is a doppelganger.

 

[Helge]

Evidentially, there are no indications that it is a doppelganger.

I'm just thinking why? Why now? New moderators? None of my business really I guess. Though still very mildly curious.

 

[MattKing]

You're back‽

Is that said with incredulity, or joy, or dread?
And the existential question is, of course, how can you be sure he was gone?

 

[awty]

"Technical perfection" is a photographers concept, I try to be a picture maker and design and construct a picture, I really enjoy that aspect.
For social media I tend to be more melodramatic, more contrast, not too concerned about shadow detail make the viewer know.
For what I hang on my walls is more subtle because there is more time to view, so a technically better picture, but still not obsessed about perfection. Im just a hobbyist so dont expect too much.
With creativity I find it best to make new challenges and try different things, a fresh approach really lifts creativity even if the subject matter isnt too different. Look at it at a different perspective.
Thanks Don, I will name my next born after you......BTW whats outside my window is a blank wall.

 

[Helge]

Is that said with incredulity, or joy, or dread?
And the existential question is, of course, how can you be sure he was gone?

I never have had anything against Eric, though I know some here expressed less than favourable opinions on his demeanour (if that is possible in a text universe like this) and attitude.
I also seem to remember he kind of stormed off slamming the door, burning a few bridges or something.
Might be mistaken though.
And again none of my business really.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm just thinking why? Why now? New moderators? None of my business really I guess. Though still very mildly curious.

It is your business. Interested readers want to know.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Is that said with incredulity, or joy, or dread?
And the existential question is, of course, how can you be sure he was gone?

He had posted before that he was leaving in a huff. Which year huff I could not figure out.