Some brief thoughts on trying to get a ‘sharp image’ in photography.
There are times when a sharp image is very important. But honestly, I am amazed at how many people work themselves into a ‘lather’ arguing and fretting about the myopic details of sharpness.
The world is awash with technically perfect photographs that are just boring!
Being a good technical photographer is a ‘cost-of-entry’ into the world of photography. However, it is not the main game. It is not what’s important. Yet, ‘technical’ rather than ‘vision’ is where many photographer’s minds are at.
“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” ~ Cartier-Bresson.
We can get too caught-up worrying about sharpness at the expense of what is really important; like learning how to be creative and how to make great photographs.
Here are 5 photographs below which were impossible to get sharp because of the way I chose to capture these images. “Sharpness” was never a consideration. Yet each photograph is powerful and creative in its own way.
I have seen photographers lock themselves into a mindset of rigid tripods, mirror lock-ups, shutter release cables, particular apertures and shutter speeds just because these are what can produce a sharper image. It is the thought of a ‘sharp image’ which drives their method. Yet such a mind-set comes with an opportunity cost; they can miss a whole world of other creative possibilities.
Now of course, there is nothing wrong with that, if that is their purposeful technique and they understand its restrictions.
What I am trying to share with you is this: locking our photographic technique into any kind of mind-set can restrict the flexibility and options with which we might approach a subject. Whereas keeping our mind-set open and agile might provide us with a wider range of creative options…. just a thought.
I am still trying to find my own ‘voice’ with my photography, but I know that worrying too much about technical things such as ‘getting it sharp’, is like looking through the ‘wrong end of the telescope’.
Ideas, creativity, vision, story and emotion… these are the kind of things that make great photographs. Learning how to push boundaries, break rules and open up our creative vision is where I like to spend my time.
I am convinced that the two most important things that make a great photographer are first, how they have learnt to ‘visualise’ in their mind before they shoot. And second, how they ‘edit’ their work after it is shot. Everything else; cameras, equipment, hardware, software and other technical things, none of this is very important in comparison.
As always, if you enjoyed this post please do share it with others via the links below.
~~~
“Say Hello” ~ If like me you are passionate about photography, say hello on Facebook, here
If you would like to stay connected so that you don’t miss any posts on my blog, please go to either link below and subscribe via email or to the RSS feed from this blog.
Subscribe to Steve Coleman by Email
Here are some other posts I have written which may be of interest to you here:
- What makes a photograph great?: here
- Why photography? here
- Becoming a photographer ~ the struggle to see part 1: here
© Copyright 2010 – 2012 Steve Coleman. All rights retained. All images and writings are registered with the United States Copyright Office. Unauthorised reproduction or use of these images is strictly forbidden without the written permission of Steve Coleman. Sharing of this link in social media and blogs is granted if you have a link back to this blog
Please Share This Post, Thank You
Hi Steve,
I’ve taken a long time to come to this same conclusion. The most important thing is the composition. If the first thing someone says is “Wow, that’s really sharp”, then it’s probably a poor compositon. There are times, though, when sharpness is all important eg the classic shot of a very wrinkly old face, and, of course, macro.
I wondered if I might, respectfully, offer a little constructive critisism…
I’m not one of the faceless cowards that abound on the net these days, I’m just one of those people who believes that constructive critisism is very helpful.
If I can quote you from the top of the page: “Yet each photograph is powerful and creative in its own way.”
I’d agree that #1 is creative and powerful. Super shot.
#2, in my view, is neither creative nor powerful, and has no real merit that I can see? It looks like the sort of pic that may result from dropping one’s camera, and the shutter being triggered on impact. I’d be very interested to know what you felt was so engaging in that shot, Steve?
#3 is a standard, derivative fairground shot. I must have seen this shot 1bn times.
#4 I really like. It’s kind of chaotic, but in a very pleasing way. I find myself looking at the letters and then exploring between them. Well “seen”.
#5, again, is really well “seen”, and I like it that what appears to be a “fun park” (?) is presented in such an amusing and quirky fashion!
Thanks for the interesting post, Steve. Happy shooting!
Hi Mark, thanks for your thoughts. Most people who have ever commented on #2 have also not liked it… but that\’s ok. I do love it, yet I can\’t fully explain why. It appeals to an aesthetic in me. I like that it is perfectly, imperfect. We all see things differently. Cheers Steve.
Steve
Love your blogs, the way they are written, the content and the whole attitude behind them of sharing what you are doing and what you love for the potential betterment of anyone who is interested. There are so many strong images but the one that stood out today was the repeating shapes of the creek in the snow in the composition blog.
thank you
Thank you Roger. Your comments are most kind… and yes that picture is one of my favourites as well :) Cheers, Steve
Excellent points throughout this post Steve. I am of the same mindset. We let technical dogma block our true reaction to photographs.
One of the most important and fundamental elements of photography is sharpness (or the lack thereof) .
The first elements the viewer generally sees when one views either a live scene or a photograph is the contrast, colour and coarse composition of the image. The viewer is led by these elements to areas of interest in a the scene and attention or /focus/ settles on the primary subject and maybe flows from there to secondary supporting subjects.
The keyword is ‘focus’. Sharp focus is the photographer’s way of showing what part of the photo to give attention to. A sharp and contrasty primary subject captures the viewer’s attention, entreating it to linger, to ponder the meaning. This tells the story. If the primary subject is out of focus and other elements are in focus, attention is drawn away.
That doesn’t mean that all or any parts of the picture need be in focus. Very few painted images are ‘photorealistic’, or showing fine detail that would pass close scrutiny. Abstraction from texture or grain, bokeh and pattern can trick the eye into seeing detail that the eye itself does not resolve. This imagined detail is like seeing a the man in the moon, clouds shaped like a rabbit, or imagined menace in the shadows of an alleyway. The look of a silk draped over a a girl’s body. The mind plays tricks, filling in details based on our past visual experience. The impression left by that which is not there be richer, more engaging, more enduring than the microcontrast detail could have been.
For this reason, when shooting out of focus, you may wish to consider what micro detail you may wish to substitute for acuity. A little detail, such as a streak of motion blur, maybe the texture of the grain, these give the mind’s eye the substrate from which to grow an imagined image, just as a painting in a little grain or texture can soften blown highlights.
I consider the telling of a story without the use of a subject in sharp focus to be an advanced technique. It has the potential to be high art. It also has the potential to be utter rubbish. I suggest photographers wanting to learn this art shoot try shooting with a soft focus filter or a pinhole camera. You want to get it right in the finder or display when you are learning so an SLR or digital camera with live view makes sense. Later we learn to shoot on gut instinct and create emotive art with pre-visualisation and don’t have to see the effect in the finder before the shot is taken.
During the (lifelong) learning process, ask yourself what story can you tell and what impact can you give without detail? It helps to build the other fundamentals, which you will need to depend upon to shoot out of focus shots. While we develop as technicians, we learn the different ways that a blur can manifest. While we develop as artists, we learn the different ways that a each kind of blur can influence the way we perceive the image. Haze, focus inaccuracy, lens aberration, and camera motion blur and subject motion blur all carry very different connotations. Eventually, we reach a point where we can control the degree and manner of lack of detail, or deal with a situation where the detail is not available.
Another great post. What I love about your writing and photography advice it provides advice without being condescending. To often articles and blog posts online and in print offer suggestions which come with a bit of judgement, that is off putting to say the least. Not so with your writing, you come off as honest and upfront.
The notion of a ‘perfect’ image is completely subjective, and you hit that right on the mark. Are sharp images inviting? yes Are unsharp images inviting? absolutely? which of the two are better? thats where it gets tricky and photography gets exciting. Get out, explore, experiment, and never settle for what others tell you is ‘perfect’.
Thank you Jeff for that good feedback. Much appreciated. Cheers Steve
Guilty as charged. It’s taken — or rather, taking — me a while to get out of the mindset that it’s got to be tack sharp to be any good. This is a good reminder…
And by the way, I like the shot below the carousel (that looks like it was shot through a window cling of some sort) a lot.
Thanks for stopping by Paul. Yes, we all have a few mind-sets that help and can sometimes hinder our photography. Cheers Steve