Obsessing about technical “image quality” manifests itself in many ways. The drive to acquire, at great expense and physical weight, sharper lenses and cameras possessing extreme megapixel sensors is a prime example. Also, consider the instinctive desire to get the main subject in perfect focus.
Yet, for photographs selling for many hundreds of thousands of dollars, one might search to find a pot-pourri of technical imperfections including fuzziness, grain (noise) or perhaps less than stellar “dynamic range”.
For example, with all its imperfections, I absolutely love the photo below. Someone loved it even more to pay $965,000 for it.
In the end, a photograph can be great without being perfect but a perfect “shot” need not be great.
In my photograph below, I accidentally focussed way behind the women. Yet, to my eyes, it somehow works having the sharp mountains and farm in the background in contrast with the soft and somewhat nicely diffuse “main subjects”.
It is technically imperfect, but I like it almost because of the imperfections.
As far as equipment is concerned, I know my much admired EM-1 cannot possibly match the technical image quality of a full frame 40 MP DSLR. But I don’t care as I believe I will take better pictures with my lighter, more compact camera that just fits me better.
I think I have two points to summarize. First, I believe it is better to make something that “looks right” rather than “is right”. Second, it isn’t necessary to continually seek out new and “better” equipments because, in the end, it won’t make a difference in the value of my photographs.
What are your thoughts on the pursuit of ultimate technical image quality? Feel free to disagree!