A Philosophical Discussion - When Is Sharpness Excessive?

[Selex]

Here is an even more general philosophical approach, in part related to the fact that nobody really answered the question in any coherent fashion, most just stating that they didn't like too much sharpening and relied on their gut feeling to be the judge of that.

When is "insert any photographic feature" excessive?

Bam.

When is contrast excessive?

When is saturation excessive?

When is use of negative space excessive?

When is bokeh/blur/OOF excessive?

I think one can take all the above responses and just retype them related to all the other questions and so I think one gets the answer.

These are totally subjective features and are entirely up to taste. What is too much for one person is not enough for another.

To narrow the band of "acceptable sharpness" to some standard might actually be detrimental to the freedom of expression inherent in creating images (as opposed to just settling for what comes out of camera and only working with that).

 

[phil from seattle]

Here is an even more general philosophical approach, in part related to the fact that nobody really answered the question in any coherent fashion, most just stating that they didn't like too much sharpening and relied on their gut feeling to be the judge of that.

When is "insert any photographic feature" excessive?

Bam.

When is contrast excessive?

When is saturation excessive?

When is use of negative space excessive?

When is bokeh/blur/OOF excessive?

I think one can take all the above responses and just retype them related to all the other questions and so I think one gets the answer.

These are totally subjective features and are entirely up to taste. What is too much for one person is not enough for another.

To narrow the band of "acceptable sharpness" to some standard might actually be detrimental to the freedom of expression inherent in creating images (as opposed to just settling for what comes out of camera and only working with that).

Like I said earlier, I'll know it when I see it. And so will you. We just might not agree and that is the heart of the question.

 

[Glen Barrington]

I do not want people to say, "Oh what a sharp photo!" When they first see my stuff, I want them to say, "OH! Good photo!"

 

[phil from seattle]

I do not want people to say, "Oh what a sharp photo!" When they first see my stuff, I want them to say, "OH! Good photo!"

But I bet you also don't want people to say "not a very sharp photo" or some such when they look at it. Thus the conundrum.

 

[Glen Barrington]

I do not want people to say, "Oh what a sharp photo!" When they first see my stuff, I want them to say, "OH! Good photo!"

But I bet you also don't want people to say "not a very sharp photo" or some such when they look at it. Thus the conundrum.

I don't want them to say that, ever. But I don't show the bad ones, the ones I show are the ones I'm proud of.

If you think I'm saying sharpening is bad, you misunderstood me. Sharpening should serve content and intent, just like any other post processing technique.

--
I'm gonna look good old. . .
http://glenbarrington.blogspot.com/
http://glenbarringtonphotos.blogspot.com/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/130525321@N05/

 

[phil from seattle]

I do not want people to say, "Oh what a sharp photo!" When they first see my stuff, I want them to say, "OH! Good photo!"

But I bet you also don't want people to say "not a very sharp photo" or some such when they look at it. Thus the conundrum.

I don't want them to say that, ever. But I don't show the bad ones, the ones I show are the ones I'm proud of.

If you think I'm saying sharpening is bad, you misunderstood me. Sharpening should serve content and intent, just like any other post processing technique.

No, I understood your point. To be clear, I was saying that photographers very much worry about how people perceive their photos and sharpness (or lack thereof) is one of the first things people notice even though they may not say anything about it. Certainly on these forums, one of the more tossed out criticisms is sharness related (aka missed focus, motion blur, camera shake, ...). So, there is an impetus towards sharpening, especially among beginners when they start post processing. It's not bad but can be overused.

 

[teemodk]

I do not want people to say, "Oh what a sharp photo!" When they first see my stuff, I want them to say, "OH! Good photo!"

But I bet you also don't want people to say "not a very sharp photo" or some such when they look at it. Thus the conundrum.

I don't want them to say that, ever. But I don't show the bad ones, the ones I show are the ones I'm proud of.

If you think I'm saying sharpening is bad, you misunderstood me. Sharpening should serve content and intent, just like any other post processing technique.

No, I understood your point. To be clear, I was saying that photographers very much worry about how people perceive their photos and sharpness (or lack thereof) is one of the first things people notice even though they may not say anything about it. Certainly on these forums, one of the more tossed out criticisms is sharness related (aka missed focus, motion blur, camera shake, ...). So, there is an impetus towards sharpening, especially among beginners when they start post processing. It's not bad but can be overused.

And who decide when the sharpening lever has been overused? Maybe the "beginner" just like it that way. I assume anyone use the lever until he/she is satisfied with it. Expert or not.

 

[Glen Barrington]

No, I understood your point. To be clear, I was saying that photographers very much worry about how people perceive their photos and sharpness (or lack thereof) is one of the first things people notice even though they may not say anything about it. Certainly on these forums, one of the more tossed out criticisms is sharness related (aka missed focus, motion blur, camera shake, ...). So, there is an impetus towards sharpening, especially among beginners when they start post processing. It's not bad but can be overused.

And who decide when the sharpening lever has been overused? Maybe the "beginner" just like it that way. I assume anyone use the lever until he/she is satisfied with it. Expert or not.

Well, each and every viewer, of course! Art is actually a dialog between the artist and the viewers/consumers of the art.

It is perfectly OK for the viewer to say to the photographer, "you're not making any sense, and here is why." Just as it is OK for the viewer to go , "huh?", and move on, or gush about how great the photo is.

It's also OK for the Photographer to say, "I see what you are saying, but I disagree."

EDIT: IMO, though it is not ok for the photographer to refuse to think about what is said and refuse to examine the comments for validity.

--
I'm gonna look good old. . .
http://glenbarrington.blogspot.com/
http://glenbarringtonphotos.blogspot.com/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/130525321@N05/

 

[phil from seattle]

No, I understood your point. To be clear, I was saying that photographers very much worry about how people perceive their photos and sharpness (or lack thereof) is one of the first things people notice even though they may not say anything about it. Certainly on these forums, one of the more tossed out criticisms is sharness related (aka missed focus, motion blur, camera shake, ...). So, there is an impetus towards sharpening, especially among beginners when they start post processing. It's not bad but can be overused.

And who decide when the sharpening lever has been overused? Maybe the "beginner" just like it that way. I assume anyone use the lever until he/she is satisfied with it. Expert or not.

Well, each and every viewer, of course! Art is actually a dialog between the artist and the viewers/consumers of the art.

It is perfectly OK for the viewer to say to the photographer, "you're not making any sense, and here is why." Just as it is OK for the viewer to go , "huh?", and move on, or gush about how great the photo is.

It's also OK for the Photographer to say, "I see what you are saying, but I disagree."

well said. Like I said before, I'll know it when I see it.

EDIT: IMO, though it is not ok for the photographer to refuse to think about what is said and refuse to examine the comments for validity.

Slippery slope. I'm glad that van Gogh continued to paint his way even in the face of overwhelming rejection. Though, it contributed to his suicide.

 

[teemodk]

No, I understood your point. To be clear, I was saying that photographers very much worry about how people perceive their photos and sharpness (or lack thereof) is one of the first things people notice even though they may not say anything about it. Certainly on these forums, one of the more tossed out criticisms is sharness related (aka missed focus, motion blur, camera shake, ...). So, there is an impetus towards sharpening, especially among beginners when they start post processing. It's not bad but can be overused.

And who decide when the sharpening lever has been overused? Maybe the "beginner" just like it that way. I assume anyone use the lever until he/she is satisfied with it. Expert or not.

Well, each and every viewer, of course! Art is actually a dialog between the artist and the viewers/consumers of the art.

It is perfectly OK for the viewer to say to the photographer, "you're not making any sense, and here is why." Just as it is OK for the viewer to go , "huh?", and move on, or gush about how great the photo is.

It's also OK for the Photographer to say, "I see what you are saying, but I disagree."

well said. Like I said before, I'll know it when I see it.

Sure I agree to all that, I was only objecting against "but can be overused". The artist can't overuse, he make it as he want it. Of course we can disagree, but it doesn't make the picture "wrong".