dustie Loc: Nose to the grindstone

Thank you, srt101fan, for your kindness and encouragement.

On the aspect of technical excellency, top-of-the-line gear, and work that can grab attention: (and please do not take this the wrong way; the people here on UHH have certainly not made me feel despised nor unwanted; not at all !)
In a way it seems I am like a child toting my plastic xylophone into Carnegie Hall, taking it to the orchestra pit and declaring, "I'm here to perform with the orchestra in this world-class concert."
Or, it's like the child taking his T-ball gear onto the diamond at a major league game and announcing, "Well, here I am, ready for the big game."
Or maybe, like the child taking his pedal car to pit row at the Indy 500, looking around and asking, "So which pit is mine?"

That child may be able to do some feats of some sort within his tiny experience level and gear capabilities, but he's just not in the same league with those in the environments where he arrived to pursue an interest.
It has to be something beyond technical exactness involved, if he should happen to make a play that may be good enough to grab attention. Is it the content of the work, the audacity to show up among those much more experienced and better equipped, the kindness of experienced veterans giving understanding notice to a beginner trying to find his way? What drew the attention?
I hope that does not seem like absurd illustration, but it is part of what your introducing this topic stirs up in my thoughts:
-- if my efforts to make something are not noticed, no surprise, but if they are noticed, what is the factor that grabbed the attention and drew the observer in for a look?

So, the child has plenty of work ahead, if in doing what he wants to do because he is enjoying it, something is to be accomplished that happens to grab someone's attention. It won't be on the basis of the technical supremacy, nor on the quality made possible by the advanced, most refined gear.

I hope that has not gone astray from the good theme of your topic.

Thank you.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

If the image captures your attention, that's good, if the image can illicit an emotional response from the viewer, it's very good.

al13

It would be nice to see you post your pictures and comments again (Out of retirement maybe). :)

Peterfiore Loc: Where DR goes south

How far can content and story carry a technically flawed photograph?

In Fine Art, narrative is the story. Where the image needs to be able to represent the idea. "Flawed" or not. If that is achieved, it's not technically flawed.

lrm Loc: Sarasota, FL

I can only add my own experiences Have sold quite a few "imperfect technically photos where the "message" appealed to the buyer with both of us knowing it was not technically perfect. If the subject (or message) appeals to the buyer (generally just a layman, not a photographer). it is a good photo.

ELNikkor

Compare some of the great photographs that were done on film to some of the great photographs that have been done on digital; that will give some obvious answers...

Papa Joe Loc: Midwest U.S.

In my opinion, it depends on the content. Example: The (very bad technical quality) of the photo of the Viet Kong person being shot, as the bullet struck). Boxer's faces being smashed-in as the glove struck, airplanes heading for the ground about to crash... all 'technically' poor photos, but the content certainly over powers the quality. So, my answer - it depends on the content.
Papa Joe

Peterfiore Loc: Where DR goes south

Precisely!!!! All depends on intent. That’s also why we have “M” on the dial.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Great content with a technically avg/good photo will go a long way.....just look at each year’s Pulitzer nominees.

Blah content with a technically superior/stupendous photo will end up, maybe, on someone’s wall but most likely in storage.

controversy Loc: Wuhan, China

Here's a photograph from Allen Murabayashi's Blog (PhotoShelter) offering a thought that might be worth considering. The full blog entry is here: http://blog.photoshelter.com/2012/01/rant-i-love-photography/

frank west Loc: los angeles, ca, usa

It depends on whom you are displaying your photo to and the context, I believe. For example, if you are showing the photo at a gallery or art show the technical flaws will be prominently seen first. However, if you are showing the photo to friends, family, or strangers to casually look at their first impressions will be the story or message the photo displays. For example, I am a street shooter who does spontaneous, close up photography. Technically my photos are not very good simply because I don't have the time when shooting to compose them nor be concerned about proper lighting, etc. If I were to show these photos to a landscape photographer he'd write them off as simply snap shots. But, if I showed them to casual viewers or to my peers who understand the meaning of this sort of photography the story of the photo would be the most important criteria to judge the photo. So, to answer you question once again - it depends.....

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

WE have to balance what we see or take. Quality is important but it's what we see and how we see it. A great picture either taken wrong (angle, perspective or what ever) in not a good picture a great picture not taken properly (a bad technical shot) is also not a good picture. But, an important event taken poorly is still important in history but not photography but still in manny cases considered a good picture for what it recorded.
So much for my two cents. ( PS no more Two cents in Canada)

bkwaters

Here's a technically very good but boring picture I took.

(Download)

srt101fan

OP again...

Thank you all for a really good discussion of this topic. Many thoughtful and thought-provoking comments. When I started this thread I wasn't sure how you all would react (for example, would "tripod photographers" (no disparagement intended!!!) even show any interest in the picture of the nuns?).

So many types and styles of photography. And we (myself included) sometimes forget that commentary that fits one doesn't necessarily apply to others. So, as many of you have said, the acceptability of technical flaws "depends".... I still feel, though, that "good" content (or "soul" as someone said earlier) is very important!

The response to this thread is very gratifying. Lots of good folks out there with lots of good thoughts. I encourage newcomers watching from the sidelines to jump into these kinds of discussions. You probably have more to offer than you think!

For anyone still hanging in there, you might find this article interesting:
https://jaymiheimbuch.com/articles/how-to-value-content-over-quality-in-your-photographs/

Also, near the beginning of this video, Jaimie Windsor mentions "content" in his discussion of cropping:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX8dkkqF9eE

Peterfiore Loc: Where DR goes south

Fun and great food for thought.
Thanks for the link.