From time to time I adapt things that I wrote elsewhere and re-share them on the blog. The following is something I contributed to a discussion about a question from a newish photographer who wondered how important it would be to upgrade his camera. 

I’m all for better image quality — which contemporary cameras, software, and printing processes provide in spades. And there is no question that, all else being equal, a photograph captured on a larger film or sensor format can potentially resolve more detail, and may improve other image parameters including dynamic range and noise.

As they say, “So stipulated.”

But the question (which was about choosing a sensor format) deserves a more nuanced and contextual answer than that. Fortunately, the most accurate and useful answer involves quite a bit of that nuance. I think it really comes down to something like, “Will replacing my cropped sensor camera with a full frame camera make my photographs look better?”. The best answer begins with, “It depends.”

As to the question (which also came up in the original discussion) of what is important in a photograph, image sharpness is not unimportant in many cases. (Though there certainly are photographs whose “goodness” is perhaps at least partially because they are blurred — softness and blur are not always things to be avoided.)

I think the issue in photography discussions is frequently about the balance among issues that affect the quality and effectiveness of a photograph. Here, it is not uncommon for some folks to exhibit a misplaced focus on the technical stuff, accompanied by insufficient attention to other things that are more important to their success as photographers. Some — including those of us who pay a great deal attention to the technical quality of our photographs — feel that here the balance sometimes shifts too far in the direction of looking to the technology for the solutions to the question of how to make effective photographs, and at the same time tends to deemphasize the many other equally or more important things that affect the power of a photograph.

Again, this is not to say that “sharpness is unimportant.” It is to say that how important is an issue open to some subjective context and differences of opinion. At one extreme we might find those who think that any potential increase in sharpness (or other image quality parameters) is automatically and immediately critically important, and that this should be obvious to everyone. At the other extreme we might find those who don’t think it matters much at all, and who are fine shooting all kinds of dated or “lesser” gear.

In the middle we find everyone else. Here it is quite reasonable to ask, “will it make a difference in my photographs?”. Knowing that larger is “better,” it still makes a ton of sense to consider whether that “better” will be visible or important enough to a particular person’s photography to warrant the expense and to ask how a choice intended to produce, say, greater sharpness might affect other aspects of one’s photography.

Few would suggest that because people made photographs with wet plate processes in the 1800s that we should go back there. However, it really is important to see great photographs of earlier eras and from our own time to get a better feel for how and why they do and do not affect viewers. Go to galleries and museums and find work that you think is beautiful, compelling, powerful. Take the time to look carefully and with an open mind. First let yourself respond to it emotionally as imagery. Does it affect you? How? Why? What does it make you think about? Feel?

Then — and only after forming a relationship to the photograph as a visual image — do as we all do and move up close and look at the photograph from the technical perspective. There is a lot to be learned — can you discern what techniques the photographer may have employed in order to create the effect of the photograph? What can you observe about the effects of compositional choices? How was light handled? What is it about the expressions on the figures that appeals to you? And, of course, how sharp is it? To what extent does (or does not) the technical virtuosity of the image inform your aesthetic response?

I have found, and I think you may, too, that many photographs that we might expect to be examples of technical perfection turn out to be not quite as ideal as we imagine before we inspect them closely — yet their power as images remains. Frankly, I’ve seen this in work by virtually every photographer whose work I like. The level of technical skill exhibited in the work is often very high, but “perfection” is illusive… and perhaps not that critical. We carry some imaginary ideas of how sharp the work is and of the extent to which it matters, but the power of the photographs remains.

So, technical image quality is important. But it isn’t usually important in quite the ways or to quite the extent that we might imagine. It is not something to be ignored, but it is also far from the most important thing, much less the only thing. You don’t always have to have “the best” gear to get the best photographs, nor does your image need to be technically “perfect” if it speaks in more important ways. And the latter is way more important.

If you find your focus as a photographer is more on photography equipment than on photographs, stop and reconsider a bit. Do you have the same or stronger passion about photographic images that you have about sensors and lenses? If you applied the same singular focus to creating images that you apply to figuring out which lens is .1% sharper or which sensor can resolve a few more lp/mm, how might that affect your photography? And which is more important? More rewarding?

Morning Musings are somewhat irregular posts in which I write about whatever is on my mind at the moment. Connections to photography may be tenuous at times!

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email

Text, photographs, and other media are © Copyright G Dan Mitchell (or others when indicated) and are not in the public domain and may not be used on websites, blogs, or in other media without advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.