larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Id like to clarify that when I speak about the rabid pursuit of sharpness, I am not talking about moving to bad technique, nor of forgetting that lenses even have a focus ring. I am talking about the endless pursuit of the "sharpest lens," whatever that is, while declaring lenses with more pedestrian capabilities as "useless garbage."

And even though I do own a high pixel-count camera, I have not retired my cameras with more modest resolution capabilities. In fact, they get used quite a bit more in the overall scheme of things.

Focus is a key element of photography. It is what allows the intended detail to be visible. I do not believe that sharpness has ever come up in any discussion that I've ever had with any legitimate artistic photographer. Nor has the question of whether my camera (or anyone else's camera) been of sufficient resolution. Those seem to be the fodder of old men bragging about their toys. In fact, in our club photo contests, we have a hard limit of the number of pixels allowed on the long side of our photos. That limit effectively removes both resolution and sharpness as distinguishing parameters of any submissions.

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

I understand your point. As for me, I do not really care for anyone looking and aiming for the sharpest gear and shot they can have. That's their worry not mine. What bothers me is when such extremist belittle and look down on other photographers.
I would say again, "deliberately" shooting soft is OK. Likewise, getting unexpected result from operating a gear beyond its capacity is also OK.
On the other hand, being a sloppy photographer, well that's another story. Please note this is not aimed at anyone. Just a personal though. Also, being sloppy and not having enough skill is different. One is doing his limited best, the other is being lazy, having the capacity but chooses not to use it. The article is actually advocating this laziness with his #4 suggestion of spray and pray.

Expanding my comment on the linked article being overate, Notice that many of the images the author listed were not about sharpness being overrated but actually having the focus & sharp areas not on the subject or other aberrations.
As examples, the "Dog" & "Provoke, is sharp & in focus, but over exposed, grainy & with too much contrast.
Blurred bicycle was adjusted for shallow DOF and slow shutter speed. The stairs handrail were actually sharp.
St. Patrick has the background in focus and is sharp. It looks like a person accidentally crossed the frame as he pulled the shot.

Shooting OOF has its merits and its place. Learning how and knowing when to make one is great. But the way it was presented; raising its prominence by stepping on and dismissing another key element, making the reader think aiming for sharp images is wrong, ...that's not cool.
Besides, some of the samples he presented was not solid for the thought.

PAR4DCR Loc: A Sunny Place

Some very interesting images, others, not so much.

Don

Ed48 Loc: Superior, Wisconsin

I agree that some things are over-rated. Focus is one of them. A SLIGHTLY out of focus photo can be as perfect as can be when you are viewing with a little more distance. Sometimes, a slightly out of focus photo can be absolutely perfect. It all depends on the photo and the person viewing it!
Ed48

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Deleted. New discussion started in the Main section instead.