1.e4 vs 1.d4 for beginners

Which do you consider sharper and why?

capablanca played d4 when he first started, so he wouldn't get into trouble in the opening

e4. 1.d4 openings are usually closed, there are exceptions. 1. e4 openings are usually sharper, more tactical. There are exceptions too.
Why? In the e4-e5 games there are a lot of gambit lines, the sicilian is usually sharp, (if white wants) almost every e4 openings can be tactical. But the white player can usually choose in e4 lines between positional and tactical openings. So if you want sharp games, play e4.

My chess program has great replies to 1.e4 that are difficult to refute and it makes me wonder...

"The view is sometimes expressed that 1. d4 is a more positional move than 1. e4. Actually, I can't see much difference. There are many sharp openings after 1. d4, just as there are many quiet openings resulting from 1. e4." - John Nunn, Understanding Chess Move By Move.

I liked 1.b3, my bishop cannon! ^_^

When you play 1. e4, the pawn is not defended.
When you play 1. d5, the pawn is defended. 

Which do we consider sharper? I think this needs clarification. "Sharper" can mean a few things.

If you like to play a solid, positional game I would suggest 1. d4. 
If you like to play tactical positions and sort of a, "this for that" type of game then 1. e4 will probably lead you into 'dangerous' or 'unclear' lines.
This isn't to say that 1. d4 is a solved opening, simply because it's a little bit less reckless than 1. e4 may be considered.

The queen's gambit is my favorite line to take with 1. d4.
For 1. e4, I play the King's Gambit.

I believe that there is something to be said for these two openings. People are used to defending 1. e4 with 1...c5 and 1...e5.  Sicilian we all know gets insane, really quickly, and 1. e5 can lead into the Ruy Lopez. 
Ruy Lopez wore a golden Rook around his neck. So there's that. 

Bobby Fischer, however, said "1. e4 is best by test!". 
Mathematically speaking, it opens up the most number of possible moves for your SECOND move. If Black doesn't play 1. e5, he/she will have LESS responses to choose from. Usually, in Chess, the player with more options will find an easier/quicker approach to the position and what it entitles, than a player who is working with 3 ranks, on significantly less squares. We've all seen this...

If you want to play a Tactical game, or a sharper game, with 1. d4, all you have to do is open the board up. Play 2. c4 (almost) no matter what, and depending on how they defend, or if they capture, you've got a myriad of options are your disposal. For instance..

After 1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4!   Your eyes should be bulging out of your face, because they just gave you the center of the board, and both bishop diagonals open...your C pawn, that would normally be blocked by moving to C4, by a WELL PLACED Knight on C3 , would normally block off. You can play 3. e4! and open up the C pawn to the F1 Bishop's fire. Black has violated opening principle by moving a piece/pawn twice in the opening. I know the phrase is, never move a piece twice in the opening, but regardless it takes two moves so it can be considered as hindering development, which it does. Kind of hard to argue that accepting a Gambit does in fact, slow your development. 

There are exceptions to every rule. Open positions are deadly, because you need to account for everything. Just play at your own speed, and you can't really do any worse than you would have done...had you played slower or faster. Just take it easy, and get every piece out as fast as possible.

 He played something like 7/8 years without a lost. Trouble in the openings ? No, his innate ability is well known. 

when he played against Corzo he wanted to avoid e4, because he knew he would get owned in the opening

c4

I wouldn't go onto the English before getting a decent grip of e4/d4

e4 is more open so is more sharper if you want positional games then play d4 

I think you thread title is asking two different things :D. However, the response to both is the same. 1. e4 is easier to learn as the plans are generally more straightfoward and also leads to sharper positions (in general of course).

Thanks

I think for learning it is good to know both, as well as the flank openings. For serious competition, stick to what you know best.

I agree... and anyone new to chess should learn the most common e4 openings.  Even if they later decide to play d4.  It will give a greater understanding of the game.  Which is never bad...

I agree

For a beginner to use ..... I say e4.

There is one main difference between 1.e4 and 1.d4 that leads to the misconception that 1.e4 is automatically sharper than 1.d4.  With 1.e4, Black can attack the pawn immediately, and it's unprotected.  1...Nf6 drags the pawn forward in 1 move.  1...c6 and 2...d5 or 1...e6 and 2...d5 force White to immediately advance, exchange, or guard the undefended pawn.

With 1.d4, the pawn's already protected by White's Queen.  Therefore, it's harder to directly attack White's main strongpoint and instead Black must manouver around it, or build up more pressure on d4 before White has to do anything than he would need to build up on e4, and so conflict occurs at a later point, even if it's only by 1 or 2 moves.  That's one or two more pieces that White can develop before he has do to do anything.

I play d4 exclusively and I just a few days ago stoped starting new games until my current roster of games ends.. Reason, I am going to for the first time in my two years of playing alot of chess learn an e4 open for white.  Crossing 1600 I've found that if a player wants with d4 he can close it up and turn the game a into an extremely closed and difficult position.  I have no intentions of not using d4 I just need to add something that is less likely to close up and be more open tactically.  to wit; I am being outmanuevered in these closed positions with d4 and taking cues from some sicilian games I've recently starting playing I'd like to see how e4 works..