Striving for perfection
Why its not always desirable
Hello, I’m Gill and I write a photography blog inspired by the landscapes of Suffolk and beyond. Please subscribe to read more of my writing and visit my website to view my images.
It is 5am and I am standing on dew covered grass looking across the tranquil waters of the River Thurne towards the iconic white drainage mill on the opposite bank. A collection of modern hire boats are moored along the edge of the dyke, but it is early and their occupants are still sleeping. All around I can see a ribbon of mist covering the low lying fields, hanging over the reeds and drifting across the mirrored surface of the river. A few trees raise their canopies above the hazy band forming green islands in a sea of white. On the horizon fluffy clouds begin to catch the first rays of sun and their tops glow pink as the light intensifies. I bring my gaze back to the mill where a cormorant is sitting atop the highest sail surveying the scene below. I set up my camera and take a shot. The morning is perfect, but is my photograph?
I have been thinking about technical perfection in photography this week after a workshop client asked me if it was something we should be striving for in our photographs. Does a technically good image make a visually compelling photograph? Is it possible to create a perfect image and more to the point what is that?
I suspect we will all have different definitions for what makes a perfect image. Maybe it is one that is technically strong, with sharp focus and good composition. Maybe it is an image that evokes an emotion in the viewer. Perhaps it is a photograph that wows the judges and wins you a national award or scores you highly in a camera club competition. Or maybe it is simply an image that pleases you. Perhaps it is a combination of all these things.
Whatever your interpretation, one thing is certain - the definition of a perfect photo is subjective and it will be different for everyone.
So if that is the case does perfection in photography exist and is it worth striving for?
When I first started taking photos I was obsessed with perfecting my technique in terms of sharpness, focus, composition, lighting and post processing. All my energy went into making sure these things were as perfect as they could be. But somehow my images were missing something - that special ingredient that made them compelling.
I think (where my own photography is concerned) an over emphasis on technique can lead to sterile looking images that lack emotion.These days I don’t worry about technique nearly as much as I used to and my definition of a perfect photo is one that makes me feel something. I want my images to make me smile and make my viewer feel the connection I have to the landscape.
My images often showcase the smaller things that I find fascinating and appealing and now I am much more interested in photographing perfect moments rather than capturing perfect images.
I believe the route to a perfect photo lies in our mindset rather than our camera technique. The camera is a tool that enables us to take pictures but our mind is the source of all our creativity. I believe it is how we see the world and how we think about it that are the important aspects of photography, much more than camera settings and front to back sharpness. Maybe the route to a perfect photo starts with building a connection to the landscape rather than mastering techniques such as hyperlocal distance?
I don’t think anyone is going to stand in front of a gallery image and remark on the photographers skilful use of aperture. They are much more likely to comment on the emotion they feel when viewing that image. I believe the skill in portraying this comes down to the connection we build with the natural world.
So going back to the original question - I am not sure the perfect photo exists.
We all strive to be the best we can be but this is a continually evolving process. Perhaps it is the elusive nature of perfection that keeps us motivated as photographers and keeps us learning. If we felt we had achieved all we could then maybe photography would loose its appeal?
I think there is a tendency to place too much emphasis on technical perfection and there are more subtle messages we can communicate through our images. I am not denying that learning and perfecting technique is valuable but I think it is important to see beyond what the camera can do and work on creating that magical ingredient - emotion - in our images.
The photographs I have used in this post all make me smile. They are not ‘perfect’ by any stretch of the imagination but to me they tell a story. These are my dancing trees and I feel they speak of something fun and joyous within this little patch of woodland. They are not iconic scenes or perhaps award winning photos but they tell the viewer something about the characters, the landscape and about me as a photographer and I hope you enjoy them.
I love photographing my local landscape and after 15 years I still get excited about the possibilities. I definitely don’t feel the need to travel to exotic locations to create interesting images that tell of my love of the natural world. I can do that in my home county.
Good photography is available anywhere, we just have to learn to embrace the challenges and see with our hearts as well as our eyes.
This week I have been inspired by a couple of podcasts which discuss this theme. They are:
Lets Create, Lets talk by Mali Davis S7 EP6 Lets Talk with Paul Sanders
Creative Banter Podcast, 106 - Perfection is Subjective
What is your take on perfection in photography? Is it something you strive for or do you feel it doesn’t exist? I would love to hear your thoughts so please leave a comment below.
Thank you very much for reading and until next week enjoy your photography.
Gill
Although I used to consider myself a perfectionist (I now cringe at the futility of it) I am far more interested in how an image feels; evocation rather than record. I too made the effort to learn ‘correct’ technique but it didn’t result in images that had soul. I recognise that many of my images are now imperfect, but at this time they represent my way of seeing - which, uncorrected is imperfect. I enjoyed reading this Gill, thank you.
While I can certainly appreciate any amazing image, technically proficient imagery was not the path for me.
What I noticed when I started out last year is that although I could be struck by a tack sharp image of a place or object, it rarely evoked any emotion. It was just a great image of the place or object.
When I started experimenting with abstract photography, I started feeling something or having immediate emotional reactions to the images.