Sharpness is easy to chase and hard to quit, especially when a slightly soft frame feels like a personal failure. The bigger risk is letting sharpness decide what you shoot, how you shoot, and what you think “good” looks like on a screen.
Coming to you from Hunter Creates Things, this contrarian video pushes you to stop treating sharpness like a finish line. Hunter lays out the basic recipe almost everyone learns early on: a decent lens, a smaller aperture, a faster shutter, and a lower ISO, then you pat yourself on the back. The twist is what happens next: you can do all of that and still end up with a perfect, useless picture. If you have a folder full of technically clean shots that feel dead, the problem is not your camera. The video keeps pulling you back to the same uncomfortable point: sharpness is a tool, not a requirement, and it is often the wrong tool for the job.
One of the strongest parts is the way Hunter ties sharpness to mood, not gear. When the goal is intimacy, longing, grief, or any messy human feeling, ultra-clean detail can read cold, even staged. He points out how memory actually shows up in your head: not as crisp, clinical detail, but as something hazier and more selective, with edges that fall away. He also connects this to the “cinematic” look that people keep chasing, using Drive (2011) and cinematographer Newton Sigel as a reference for images that land without being razor-sharp. You still get focus, you still get intent, but you are not worshiping pore detail.
Then he goes wider and pokes at the history you’ve probably absorbed without noticing. Hunter name-checks Frank, Winogrand, and Parr to make the case that a lot of celebrated work is not tack-sharp in the modern sense, and it does not suffer for it. Some of that is film and older optics, sure, but the more practical point is about expectations: you are comparing your frames to a recent, screen-first idea of “quality.” The video also calls out how phone viewing changes everything, since extreme detail can look crunchy when it gets squeezed onto a small display. He even nudges you toward printing more, which changes how sharpness feels when the image is not backlit and thumb-scrolled.
Another thread running through the video is how technical obsession can shut down creative instincts. Hunter talks about how many memorable photos come from near-misses or moments that did not go according to plan. When all your energy goes into perfect settings and technical control, you leave no room for surprise. He contrasts that with a looser approach, where skill supports instinct instead of smothering it. This part of the video is less about technique and more about mindset, especially for people who feel stuck making competent but forgettable images. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Hunter.
3 Comments
The title of this video is: "Stop taking sharp photos... they're boring." I wish that photographers would totally strike that word (boring) from their vocabulary. Period. Implying that the author knows what constitutes a compelling image, and why other images are boring, is a stupid assertion for him to make. Certainly as photographers, we don't set out to intentionally take boring images. Some viewers will find our pictures boring, but some will find them wonderful and fascinating, for a multitude of reasons.
The article also fails to recognize the one inherent unique quality that photography has different from every other art form. Which is the capability of a camera lens to render detail that the human eye is often unable to discern. That's not a new idea. Edward Weston hammered on that concept in the early part of the 20th century during the height of the straight photography vs pictorialism debate. If you want to make blurry, emotionally driven images, fine, but don't criticize technically well executed images as being inherently boring. That misses a major reason for using a camera. A great photograph, in my opinion, is one with good lighting and exquisite detail worth exploring. However, we've become used to images displayed on tiny little electronic devices where skilled photography is no longer recognized or valued. If it's bad enough, technically speaking, we can even call it fine art.
Sadly I see too many articles and videos where there is some sort of general assumption the author believes applies to most things. Definitely deciding what is boring or exciting or what works and what doesn't is implied to be some sort of commonly held view when it usually isn't. Even more frustrating is such an article/video accompanied by poor quality photographs resembling nothing more than throwaway snapshots. Photography is subjective but then saying that doesn't make for interesting reading/viewing.
Agreed... but I guess that's how YouTubers operate. Throw some weird thought or idea out there and see how many folks fall for the bait. It amazes me that these people garner the huge number of followers that they do.