Which is more important?

Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

Well, two very widely respect photographers, Henri Cartier-Bresson and
Robert Capa, are known for work that is often technically less than perfect
in terms of sharpness, etc., but deeply moving and perceptive of the human
condition. On the other hand, you have photographers like Ansel Adams, who
combine great compositional skills with technical mastery. Finally, a sharp
photograph of a dull and uninvolving subject has little to recommend it.

Just my 2 cents worth,

Doug

"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?


I think a technically perfect image of crap composition is still crap.
While a well composed image will often be quite appealing even if
technically it is less than perfect.

But then this is photography and recently I saw the worlds most expensive
photo be sold for millions and it was both crap technically and
compositionally...... go figure????? lol

"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

Depends on why you are doing photography.....For the FBI? - Or are you an
astronomer? - Then you need the best, sharpest work.....But if you are doing
it for the, "art", then all bets are off.......

TheDave© wrote:
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

The answer is simple... What are you trying to do?

or to paraphrase, "It depends."

TheDave© wrote in -
media.phx:

Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?


Composition, hands down. Good composition will compensate for
technical faults, while technical perfection won't change a boring
photograph.

Save money on lenses until after you've taken the art classes. Then,
you can make the best out of both.

And never, ever waste your money on a Leica ;-)


Hee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee...



- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net

"Al Denelsbeck" wrote in message
.7...
TheDave© wrote in -
media.phx:

Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?


Composition, hands down. Good composition will compensate for
technical faults, while technical perfection won't change a boring
photograph.

Not all the time. I was moonlighting a while back for the local cops, and
they wanted, and needed technical perfection. In this special case, nobody
cared about composition, as long as all the required elements were in the
picture. What they wanted was the ability to extract detail from the crime
scene photo.


Save money on lenses until after you've taken the art classes. Then,
you can make the best out of both.

And never, ever waste your money on a Leica ;-)


Hee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee...



- Al.

--
To reply, insert dash in address to match domain below
Online photo gallery at www.wading-in.net

TheDave© wrote:
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

They are not mutually exclusive.

TheDave© wrote:
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

If you are talking photogrpahic art - then Composition - but part of
composition IS technical understanding of photography - like the use of
muslitple exposures, deliberate under or over-exposure, lioghting, etc.
So I would be surprised if you don't have one with the other. I'm sure
there are some pros who are considered great but have poor technical
skills - but they would have to be the exception vs the norm.

A good analogy would be music - would you rather listen to a musician
who puts his soul and emotuions into every note but technically is just
okay - or listen to a computer generated piece that has absolutely no
human emotion in it? The choice is obvious.

I often think of the 3 most important elements of photography - the BIG
3 I like to call them - subject, lighting, composition - and for me I
think scomposition is the most important. What do you think? I'm sure
some would say the subject is most important, or that lighting is.

jim

TheDave© wrote:
Which is more important? Composition or technical
excellence/perfection?

If you are talking photogrpahic art - then Composition - but part of
composition IS technical understanding of photography - like the use of
muslitple exposures, deliberate under or over-exposure, lioghting, etc.
So I would be surprised if you don't have one with the other. I'm sure
there are some pros who are considered great but have poor technical
skills - but they would have to be the exception vs the norm.

A good analogy would be music - would you rather listen to a musician
who puts his soul and emotuions into every note but technically is just
okay - or listen to a computer generated piece that has absolutely no
human emotion in it? The choice is obvious.

I often think of the 3 most important elements of photography - the BIG
3 I like to call them - subject, lighting, composition - and for me I
think scomposition is the most important. What do you think? I'm sure
some would say the subject is most important, or that lighting is.

jim