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

[bags27]

Google says it was indeed Churchill, 11 October 1952 in a speech to the Conservative Party Conference.

Surely perfection is a point of aim, not a measurable quality?

awesome!

Of course, this isn't exactly the same sentiment. It suggests an unrealizable goal, but doesn't say that it's pursuit harms the acceptance of something less than perfect.

 

[snusmumriken]

awesome!

Of course, this isn't exactly the same sentiment. It suggests an unrealizable goal, but doesn't say that it's pursuit harms the acceptance of something less than perfect.

Presumably you can have a perfect compromise. Or can't you?

 

[bags27]

BAGS27, the website I removed it from said exactly where it was from, I should have footnoted it but since i didn't.

is this better?

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


Is it possible to quantify perfection, does perfection exist ? I don't think it does.

I apologize (sincerely!) before saying this, because it sounds so bloody pedantic.

But the assertion of perfection--certainly and admittedly not in our material world--but in the world of the spirit (soul) is the foundation of Platonism which in turn becomes a cornerstone of Christianity.

The largest part of the Western thought (besides Christianity, including Islam, less so but also in Judaism; and most ethical philosophy until Locke, the Utilitarians, and the Pragmatists) has some notion of perfectionism as a reference.

So knowing who said what exactly and when helps place that person within the history of ideas. It also helps us understand the nuances--and sometimes the irony--of such an aphorism.

I concede that it's an entirely defensible position that the history of ideas doesn't matter. I just don't subscribe to it personally. That's my problem, not anyone else's. Sorry for the thread drift.

 

[bags27]

Presumably you can have a perfect compromise. Or can't you?

what a great brain teaser!

 

[MattKing]

I apologize (sincerely!) before saying this, because it sounds so bloody pedantic.

As one who tends to pedantry, no apology is necessary!

 

[KerrKid]

The perfect picture may be the one you're deliberately trying to make imperfect.

 

[Eric Rose]

@MattKing This is a perfect opportunity to exercise that moderator ability to delete all those totally irrelevant comments about whoever being back.

Including this one.

I agree.

 

[snusmumriken]

I apologize (sincerely!) before saying this, because it sounds so bloody pedantic.

But the assertion of perfection--certainly and admittedly not in our material world--but in the world of the spirit (soul) is the foundation of Platonism which in turn becomes a cornerstone of Christianity.

The largest part of the Western thought (besides Christianity, including Islam, less so but also in Judaism; and most ethical philosophy until Locke, the Utilitarians, and the Pragmatists) has some notion of perfectionism as a reference.

So knowing who said what exactly and when helps place that person within the history of ideas. It also helps us understand the nuances--and sometimes the irony--of such an aphorism.

I concede that it's an entirely defensible position that the history of ideas doesn't matter. I just don't subscribe to it personally. That's my problem, not anyone else's. Sorry for the thread drift.

Interesting, don’t apologise. BTW, I think Churchill was almost certainly quoting an ancient aphorism but in his characteristically pithy way.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Interesting, don’t apologise. BTW, I think Churchill was almost certainly quoting an ancient aphorism but in his characteristically pithy way.

As long as we're allowed to be pedantic ...

It's not an ancient aphorism that he (or whoever) is quoting, but Voltaire, who wrote in La Bégueule (1772):

Dans ses écrits un sage Italien
Dit que le mieux est l’ennemi du bien

Not sure how "good" (le bien) became "progress" with time, but it's not surprising that the early 20th century would ascribe the quality of "good" to progress.

Full story here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good

 

[bags27]

I'm reading (because of other discussions on this site) the essays of Robert Adams and also the amazing Edge of Darkness by Barry Thornton. I think both would agree that chasing perfection is not a bad thing, so long as one accepts that perfection is not definable, much less attainable.

 

[busrider]

I apologize (sincerely!) before saying this, because it sounds so bloody pedantic.

No problem. But I still do not believe perfection exists, it's some magical thought since one person's trash is another person's treasure

Interesting, don’t apologise.

Yes apologize, there is nothing wrong with being civil and polite, it is because of the lack of civility (which you seem to think is OK?) that most of the internet is a cesspool.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

Ok, question . . . Who distinguishes between process/technical and what and why, what they photograph? For some their content is process, so distinction between. For others it is something completely different, so there is separation.

I usually organize all my process through. Before I get to “into” my subject matter. So I only focus on image. Process is following a procedure at this point.

 

[faberryman]

I would rather err of the side of chasing technical perfection than acquiescing in mediocrity. To achieve a healthy balance, I would encourage everyone to read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics or, if you are short on time, Goldilocks and the Three Bears.

 

[bags27]

Ok, question . . . Who distinguishes between process/technical and what and why, what they photograph? For some their content is process, so distinction between. For others it is something completely different, so there is separation.

I usually organize all my process through. Before I get to “into” my subject matter. So I only focus on image. Process is following a procedure at this point.

That's a really great question/point: whether one's focus is primarily on process or outcome. With film photography there are so very many ways "to go wrong" compared to digital. A photographer has to know what makes them happy.

It's the case, for me certainly, that I've taken a crappy photo but used the best developer/timing/agitation and got a "perfect" rendition of a crappy photo. I teach myself to get pleasure from that, even though I won't be showing anyone the photo.

 

[faberryman]

It's the case, for me certainly, that I've taken a crappy photo but used the best developer/timing/agitation and got a "perfect" rendition of a crappy photo. I teach myself to get pleasure from that, even though I won't be showing anyone the photo.

Yes, sometimes it is better to travel than to arrive. Of course, that largely depends on where you are going and what you do when you get there.

 

[snusmumriken]

Yes apologize, there is nothing wrong with being civil and polite, it is because of the lack of civility (which you seem to think is OK?) that most of the internet is a cesspool.

Cool it, man! Assuring someone that they had nothing to apologise for is civil.

 

[MattKing]

Interesting, don’t apologise.

Yes apologize, there is nothing wrong with being civil and polite, it is because of the lack of civility (which you seem to think is OK?) that most of the internet is a cesspool.

Cool it, man! Assuring someone that they had nothing to apologise for is civil.

As mentioned, please keep things cool.
FWIW I took "Interesting, don't apologize" to be equivalent to "Interesting, no need to apologize for that".
And while I think that was what was intended, I can't say that busrider's inference was illogical. It probably was a bit hasty though.
All of which is to say that communication often involves intonation and nuance, and text on a screen often is a poor medium for that. If there reasonably might be more than one way to interpret something, it is best to ask for clarification before reacting.
All of course in the interests of making your Photrio experience more of a perfect one.

 

[bags27]

As mentioned, please keep things cool.
FWIW I took "Interesting, don't apologize" to be equivalent to "Interesting, no need to apologize for that".
And while I think that was what was intended, I can't say that busrider's inference was illogical. It probably was a bit hasty though.
All of which is to say that communication often involves intonation and nuance, and text on a screen often is a poor medium for that. If there reasonably might be more than one way to interpret something, it is best to ask for clarification before reacting.
All of course in the interests of making your Photrio experience more of a perfect one.

There is the famous joke of Stalin standing before the Politburo announcing to his lackeys: "look comrades! A telegram from Trotsky admitting his ideological errors. It reads: 'You're right, I'm wrong, I apologize.'"

But then a little old guy raised in the same Jewish-Ukrainian neighborhood as Trotsky got up and said: "With all due respect Comrade Stalin, I think you read it wrong." I think he means: 'You're right? I'm wrong? I apologize?'"

 

[busrider]

C3 is perfect modern made in USA camera. If you disagree I'll throw one at you.

Funny that is how every Crazy Kat Comic ended, with the brick being thrown.

Cool it, man! Assuring someone that they had nothing to apologise for is civil.

LOL. that would be true if you were the person being lectured about quoting people on the internet.

As mentioned, please keep things cool.

I will try but I can't promise I will keep things cool if people troll me, it's like with a tailgater, I usually tap the brakes.

 

[greg zinselmeier]

lets get back on track please, . . .. . when people ( audience) look at your work. What happens?? many people don't care!!!!!! about you technical skill. or qulaity of camera!!. MOst dont even know there is a difference between film and digital,, , , that being said "MOST PEOPLE" NOT ALL. . . .want to talk about what you photograph? why you photograph? what drives you? ALOT of photographers/ artists I know want to talk about the stories behind their images. ( not process)

VERY RARELY DO I EVER HEAR THE TECHNICAL PSYCHO_BABBLE, . .. .about F stops/ circle of confusion/Tanning of neg.s/ C.I./ toning/ stand dev.high acutance/ fine grain. . . .etc. . . etc. . .

the question is . . . DO YOU HAVE A THOUGHT "other than" thoughts contained in the "technical psycho babble" circle (alluding to the Venn diagram) in regards to .. .. ( the other circle) An art work that represents or documents a active moment of ideation that operates or is to be considered "separate" from shifting idioms of representation?

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have a feeling I fall into this camp, that chasing perfection or it being a subconscious baseline seems to lead to a creative block. I know what perfection looks like, I've seen such prints in galleries and do marvel at them. However, I was recently falling into the trap of being too hard on myself and juggling what others expectations and standards might be. I almost literally lost sight of what matters most, that I love what I create regardless of what others might expect. Once working to let go of these constraints, things began to gel. If we don't strive to create for ourselves, then we are playing the part of a photographer and not being one. How do you feel about your own work and do you feel overly self-conscious about your creative and technical decisions? For some, their passion might lie in the technical side and give them more creative options.

Sean

I agree. I spend way too much time on the technical aspects of photography and wait a little on the creative and artistic part

 

[jtk]

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.

Yes. And if not "automatic" that dimension is probably not particularly important. JK

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I agree. I spend way too much time on the technical aspects of photography and wait a little on the creative and artistic part

That's why I recommend to new photographers to set their cameras on P or A and shoot away until they figure out composition.

 

[busrider]

lets get back on track please, . . .. . when people ( audience) look at your work. What happens?? many people don't care!!!!!! about you technical skill. or qulaity of camera!!. MOst dont even know there is a difference between film and digital,, , , that being said "MOST PEOPLE" NOT ALL. . . .want to talk about what you photograph? why you photograph? what drives you? ALOT of photographers/ artists I know want to talk about the stories behind their images. ( not process)

VERY RARELY DO I EVER HEAR THE TECHNICAL PSYCHO_BABBLE, . .. .about F stops/ circle of confusion/Tanning of neg.s/ C.I./ toning/ stand dev.high acutance/ fine grain. . . .etc. . . etc. . .

the question is . . . DO YOU HAVE A THOUGHT "other than" thoughts contained in the "technical psycho babble" circle (alluding to the Venn diagram) in regards to .. .. ( the other circle) An art work that represents or documents a active moment of ideation that operates or is to be considered "separate" from shifting idioms of representation?

Agreed. Mostly 'togs care about these things, espeically the tech stuff, so they can do it for themselves.

 

[winger]

I do what I can with the technical side and I think I'm doing ok as far as darkroom work goes (mostly). But letting go and trying new ideas or doing things just to see if they work is difficult once you've been doing something the same way for awhile.
I've been doing some art journaling kits where they send you supplies and post videos for a number of pages. You then have the rest of the booklet to fill your way (theoretically with what you've learned). It's mixed media, but mostly painting and collage. The saying they put on their stickers in the box says, "Y'all, don't be precious." They mean - use the supplies, try the new things, there's always more. That's really resonating with me because trying to be as good as I can be has usually been my goal to the point where I wouldn't always start something if I didn't think it would be great once it was done. So don't be precious!