When technical perfection makes a picture better – and when it destroys it.
After the first two parts dealt with why perfection often bores and why mistakes often make a picture more interesting, we now turn to the crucial question: When does technical perfection make sense – and when does it destroy emotional photography?
Perfection is not fundamentally bad. It can enhance an image, make it clearer, more precise and more impressive. But when it becomes an end in itself, when a photo is nothing more than a demonstration of technical skill, then it robs a picture of exactly what makes emotional photography. Because it does not live from flawless technology, but from real moments that cannot be calculated. Technical perfection can support emotional photography – but it can just as easily suffocate it.
Technically perfect – and yet meaningless
Perfection alone is not enough – but sometimes it makes all the difference. The point is not that a technically perfect image is automatically boring. The point is that perfection is no substitute for content.
A picture can be perfectly exposed and still look cold. It can overcome every technical hurdle and still not sparkle. But there are moments when perfection makes the image really strong – when it doesn’t dominate, but supports.
That’s the point: technology can enhance an image or render it lifeless. The trick is to know when perfection helps – and when it destroys.
The work of Herb Ritts is a good example of how technical perfection and expression do not have to be mutually exclusive. His pictures are flawless – but they always have feeling. They convey something.
And then there are photographers like Davide Armando, who do the opposite: motion blur, extreme contrasts, light that breaks every rule – but that’s exactly what gives his pictures their raw energy.
Both are completely different – and yet their pictures are effective. This shows that it’s not about whether you work perfectly or not. It’s about whether a picture triggers something.
An exciting article on PetaPixel shows why the concept of perfect photography is a fallacy and how mistakes can enrich an image. You can read more about it here: The Failure of the Perfect Picture.
Why I decide on technical perfection depending on the situation
I don’t plan my shoots with light setups, fixed poses or meticulous sketches. No such thing. I make situational decisions – because I react to the moment, not to a template.
But that doesn’t mean that technology doesn’t play a role. I make conscious decisions about what I control – and what I don’t. My white balance? I never do it in the camera because I know that the light is constantly changing anyway. I often work with an open aperture – and my most important decision is always where the focus is.
For me, perfection is not an end in itself. It is a tool – but only if it makes the image stronger.
The gaze is captivated
A picture that is not technically perfect can be effective for precisely this reason. Because it feels different from the usual uniformity.
Motion blur draws the viewer into the image instead of just letting them look at it. Grain gives a shot a texture that “feels”, even if it is only visual. And unconventional image details break up viewing habits – which is precisely why they stick.
These are not mistakes. They are deliberate stylistic devices. Because a picture doesn’t have to be perfect to get it just right.
Take a look at my Collector’s Edition where you can see many shots that revolve around emotional photography.
Why technical “mistakes” often make better pictures
A slightly blurred image, a deliberate use of motion blur, unconventional lighting – these are all stylistic devices that can make an image more intense. Technically imperfect shots can convey real energy because they appear alive and thus convey emotional photography.
Motion blur gives the image a sense of speed and dynamism. Grain breaks up the sterile smoothness of digital images. Unusual image details direct the eye where it is not expected.
These are not “mistakes”. They are conscious decisions. Because a picture may not fit 100% technically – and still be exactly right.
When perfection was demanded – and I knew it was useless
I remember this exact moment in the Graphische in Vienna. A whole series of pictures – motion blur, oblique cut-outs, harsh contrasts. I was convinced that this was exactly my thing.
The result? A stain. “Not enough.”
The teacher was as creative as a roll of pudding – but that wasn’t the problem. The problem was that he only had one grid through which he judged photography: technical perfection. And that’s when I knew that if I stuck to it, I would never take pictures that really interested me.
I have no idea what the teacher is doing today. But I know that my pictures wouldn’t fit into his evaluation scheme – and that’s a good thing.
Perfection is a tool – but not a goal
Technical perfection can make a picture stronger – or soulless. The difference? Whether it serves the image or whether the image must serve it.
Emotional photography does not live from measured values or perfect setups. It lives from what happens when you let the moment happen instead of controlling it.
Because in the end, it’s not how perfect a picture is that counts. It’s whether you forget it after ten seconds – or never get it out of your head again.
🔸 SIGNED.FRAMED.ICONIC.
Fine art photography, limited, hand-signed – a new motif every week.
👉 To the series
🔸 Collector’s Edition
Exclusive collector’s items, large format, strictly limited.
👉 To the Collector’s Edition
🔸 The Book & An Other Book
Two books, €70 saved, one hundred pages of photographed truths.
👉 To the book bundle
🔗 Subscribe to our free newsletter now & never miss a thing!
