Originally posted by Wheatfield Technical perfection is all well and good, but if the concept is fuzzy, the picture will fail. An excellent image will overcome many technical flaws if it is compelling enough.
I generally agree, except it does depend on the intended use. I shoot a lot of work for stock agencies. In general an image must be technically near perfect, and regardless of how wonderful an image it might be it is not going to ever get seen by anyone unless it passes the technical bar first.
On the other hand, a good image can overcome a multitude of technical flaws if it is being judged as an image or as art. Many (most?) of the really wonderful images I see have technical flaws if you look, but it does not matter because the image or concept itself is strong enough.
Most people (as in non-photographers) will never notice the flaws we see as a matter of course. They just look and enjoy the image without tearing it apart and complaining about WB, noise, dust spots, composition, and so on.
I had a shopper pick up a print at a show this past weekend, it is an old image taken with the k-x in fact. Not my best by far with lots of little flaws if you look. And the flaw he found? One of the clouds is actually a distorted vapor trail instead of a cloud. He didn't care a whit about all the things I saw as problems, but that vapor trail was a no go. And I lost the sale.