Originally Posted by mickeyobe
Just curious.
Why is it assumed that an unacceptable photographic image will make a good painting?
Mickey
Mickey, apart from what's already been said, I think sometimes we all need to stretch a bit what an acceptable photographic image is.
This forum is mainly equipment centered, so sharpness, contrast, the usual guidelines about focus, composition, exposure etc are valued - because they help standardize quality assessments.
However, without going whole-Holga

, there are 'artistic' or 'impressionistic' aims also in photography - maybe not the best for evaluating lens sharpness - which are good to keep in mind. And yes, some equipment lends itself to this sort of photography better than others.