There's a fine line one treads when people wearing anything less than the sort of clothing one might wear to a formal dinner are involved in art: Where does something cease to be art and start becoming un-artistic pornography?

Every time somebody bumps up the number of megapixels, there's always another set of blog posts about how useless the megapixel race is. But I don't think they get it right all the time...

This came up the other day on the photo discussion list at work, where one of the guys pointed out one of the many millions of flame wars on the subject and stated that there had to be one correct answer to the question of how the 1 over focal length rule (meaning if you have a 50mm lens, you need to have your shutter at least at 1/50) applies to digital SLRs with crop-factor.

There are a lot of half-truths going around about photography. Generally, the various photographic equipment companies spread one or two of them, and then the various photography magazines and megasites play along because they realize that to go against what the photography companies want is a great way to not get access to the latest and greatest for review.

I visited one of my old art teachers last month, just to say hi and show him some of my recent work. He asked how Mr. Foo and Kiki were doing and I told him about one of Mr. Foo's projects... making a neon version of a certain famous disturbing image on the Internet.

Why do photographers obsess so much about sharpness? Why are there millions of threads online about which lens is sharper than the other?

Some thoughts based on a conversation I had with a friend quite a few months ago.