Right now I am just focusing on tactics and it's working fine for me. What rating level do you think is appropriate to start looking at openings(if I ever get there, that is)

                                                                          _______________________

At what rating should I start bothering with openings?

 Before computers it was customary to develop an opening repertoire and build an opening tree when you reached a rating between 1600 -1900 USCF.  The most time consuming was building an opening tree.  Before computers it took me 8 years to build an opening tree by hand. 

Today computers have automated the task of building an opening tree and it only takes about 2-3 years to complete the task.  Selecting a rating at which to start bothering with openings depends on more than just building an opening tree and creating an opening repertoire with 3 openings as White and 3 openings as Black complete with an understanding of all variations and transpositions 35-40 move deep is going to take a bit more than just 2-3 years.

It is necessary to build a visualization pattern memory bank consisting of thousands of memory banks in your brain.  The most basic visualization pattern memory bank is K+p vs. K.  It consists of a 3 step winning technique (K goes in front of the pawn, establish the Ks in opposition, establish control of the 3 squares in front of the  queening square on the queening file.)

This is a pretty controversial subject around here. Just about everyone agrees that one should start by learning principles. Some people think that one should at first be satisfied with reading a few sentences on the subject, but I think that one is more likely to have some degree of comfort in the opening if one reads something like the exposition in Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006).
"... For beginning players, [Discovering Chess Openings] will offer an opportunity to start out on the right foot and really get a feel for what is happening on the board. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Perhaps the purpose could be served by reading the discussion of opening play in some general beginner book. The real disagreement arises on the question of when one should go on to the next step. I myself think that it is something of a mistake to think in terms of a next step. Better, in my opinion, to think of opening knowledge as gradually accumulating. One first experiments with ideas and slowly learns more about some of them. Detailed suggestions are provided by Moret in his My-First-Chess-Opening-Repertoire books.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9033.pdf
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9050.pdf
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/vincent-moret/
Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014) combines explanation of principles with starting opening suggestions. Of necessity, his opening descriptions are less detailed (than those of Moret) because he tried to offer choices to the reader and give some indication of how a player might choose what to try.
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/
https://www.mongoosepress.com/catalog/excerpts/openings_amateurs.pdf
Some players may not like the idea of relying on the limited selection of an author. It is a pretty daunting project to try to learn a little bit about a lot of openings, but, if one wants more freedom to make choices, it would make sense to look at a book like Yasser Seirawan's Winning Chess Openings.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
While reading such a book, don't forget that the primary purpose is to get help with making choices. Once one has chosen openings, I again think that there is wide agreement that the way to start is by playing over sample games. Some of us think that it can be useful to use books like First Steps: 1 e4 e5 and First Steps: Queen's Gambit
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7790.pdf
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7652.pdf
as sources of games with explanations intended for those just starting to learn about an opening. Be sure to try to use the openings in games in between sessions of learning. Most of the time, one faces a position with no knowledge of a specific move indicated in a book. One has to accept that as part of chess, and think of opening knowledge as a sometimes helpful aid. After a game, it makes sense to try to look up the moves in a book and see if it has some indication of how one might have played better in the opening. Many opening books are part explanation and part reference material. The reference material is included in the text with the idea that one mostly skips it on a first reading, and looks at an individual item when it applies to a game that one has just played. Resist the temptation to try to turn a book into a mass memorization project. There are many important subjects that one should not neglect because of too much time on opening study.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/learning-an-opening-to-memorize-or-understand
https://www.chess.com/article/view/3-ways-to-learn-new-openings
https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-understand-openings
"... Overall, I would advise most players to stick to a fairly limited range of openings, and not to worry about learning too much by heart. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... If the book contains illustrative games, it is worth playing these over first ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... the average player only needs to know a limited amount about the openings he plays. Providing he understands the main aims of the opening, a few typical plans and a handful of basic variations, that is enough. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... Everyman Chess has started a new series aimed at those who want to understand the basics of an opening, i.e., the not-yet-so-strong players. ... I imagine [there] will be a long series based on the premise of bringing the basic ideas of an opening to the reader through plenty of introductory text, game annotations, hints, plans and much more. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627055734/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen38.pdf
"The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line." - GM Nigel Davies (2005)
"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf

Personally, I think it is worth knowing a little about openings, even at the very first stages of beginning. You at least wan't to know about some of the elementary traps and how to deal with them. That will save you time and losses at the board. You also need to know opening principles.

Knowing the above doesn't involving learning reams of theory. Which traps to learn depends on how you normally open.

Now.

Learn 4 or 5 moves, anyway.

Say you play 1.e4, have something to do after 1...e5

If you notice players are playing 1...c6, then have something, whatever it is , for that.

If 1...e6, same thing.

Figure out which middlegames you are getting, you like. And figure out which ones you don't. Fix the second ones.

Find the correct plans for these middlegames. Know how they should be played.

As you advance in rating, then learn more.

Holy crap.

I posted all the above, before I even looked at your rating. You are really 1600??

You should have a very strong foundation in opening, already.

I bothered to learn the names of all the major openings, at 1200.

"... This book is the first volume in a series of manuals designed for players who are building the foundations of their chess knowledge. The reader will receive the necessary basic knowledge in six areas of the game - tactcs, positional play, strategy, the calculation of variations, the opening and the endgame. ... To make the book entertaining and varied, I have mixed up these different areas, ..." - GM Artur Yusupov

Some people say that they didn't work seriously with openings until they were already 2200!

It depends what do you mean with seriously.

The discussion around when begin to study concrete lines instead of playing by principles is basically related to one point. It is better to study other aspects of the game like tactics,  endgame and strategy because openings are time consuming. And your opponents will very soon deviate from the main lines. 

But things are changing. With today's technology everybody can learn openings in a much efficienter way than in the past.  This means that you can begin rather early to build up a repertoire IF the study of other aspects of the game are not neglected.

Use spaced repetition to learn openings. For example in Chessable.

Actually when I really started to re think this subject was when another user posted here(I think it was IMBacon) saying that some people learn tactics and get to USCF Expert level playing sketchy openings whereas others play "sound" GM openings and never get past C level.

@BobbyTalporov,

I never said it had to do with their opening choices. On the contrary I was trying to stress that players who study tactics go farther in the rating ladder.

I am a beginner, but I have included some opening study in my training ever since I started playing. I don't mean that I would spend hours with computer analysis, or looking through a database to see openings 10 moves deep. Instead it has grown naturally along playing games. I analyse all of my longer time control games (10 min+), and usually at the same time look if my choice of opening was any good. Then I'll get curious and try to see other options. Slowly I have learned some openings fairly deep (like up to 10 moves+), and then there are others where I know the few best engine options.

I think it's pretty important to know by heart at least couple moves to every opening your opponent might throw at you, because it helps you to identify on the later stages where your pieces would naturally belong. Having few pieces already on the board makes it much more easier to place the rest of your undeveloped pieces, compared to having an open board where you can just drop them as you'd like.

Lately I have started going through some openings a bit more deeply with Chessable opening books, and I know that it's going to improve my game. Of course openings are just a part of the game, but I don't think one should completely neglect any opening study. Being able to play comfortably at least few first moves without feeling completely clueless can really help you to play better positions in the middlegame, and get playable endgames that way. It's not much use to train tactics all day long, if you are unable to get positions where tactics start to work in your favor. And usually getting to that position requires a good opening. Playing a bad opening can easily ruin your whole game.

A beginner should learn something about openings from almost the very start.

Same with ending [such as how to win with K and Q vs a lone K]

The trick is to build up a repertoire where you also consider dubious sidelines. The best way to learn these sidelines is to play Daily Chess and use a database to see how strong players crush players using dubious openings. In Daily games I usually follow blindly first my opening repertoire, and when I am out of the book I follow a choose a line from a database (chessgames.com is good enough for my level), and when my opponent deviate from the database (for example winning a pawn) it is time to play chess, to think what is going on. Usually you have already there a winning position.

When I began to play learn openings I was able to crush players which much more experience than me only because they didn't know much about openings. Like in the QGA where people playing black were trying to hold material and so on. The better you get, the more  you have to understand middlegame and the passage from middlegame to endgame and such stuff. But at the level I am playing (1600 in Daily, probably similar rating in rapid if I would play this more frequently) it is already enough to have a basic repertoire for black and white, basic concepts in middlegame and more than basic concepts in endgames. 

I see a lot of 1400-1500 players in Daily Games playing really dubious lines where would be difficult for me to face in a blitz game, but in a Daily Game I will often crush them in less than 20 moves.

Some of these guy really understand the game. Sometimes they come out of the opening with a horrible position, often with less material, but are able to fight with smart moves until the end of the game. With more opening's knowledge these people would be rated something like 200 points higher.

I think these people are often infected with the opinion that you should not learn openings until you are 2000+. Good for me!

You are aware that we are allowed to use opening databases in daily chess? When I play weak players (like 1800 daily and below) I try to play sidelines or less well known openings to bring my opponents out of book. Once they are on their own, they play inaccuratly and it is not too difficult to win the game rather easily. 

See #  15

chessable improves the speed of opening learning by factor 3 approx.  Everybody who does not check this one out misses something, regardless of your rating

I agree that Chessable is obligatory for every serious chess player. I would be not surprise if several IMs are also working there with a fake account (without giving the rating), especially with the books on endgames and strategy. But at least one of the books on tactics is also useful for a strong player. In the openings an IM would profit immensely from the repertoire by Alex Colovic based on the QGD. I would even say that the speed of learning  is even faster than by factor of 3. I think it is more. I think that it is not only the efficient way to learn, but also the efficient way to review the lines that you think you already know is something very useful. 

At least for me (with a miserable memory) is Chessable the only way to learn new patterns. I have also to say that I was learning with spaced repetition in the past, with cards, but the system was very time-consuming.  

And it is fun!