Composition.

[Scott Murray]

I am just wondering and I know I am guilty of this, but how many are thinking, Hmmmmm I have enough megapixels I shall just crop to suit?

This to me is digital zooming and yes I know it has its merits in some cases but how many of us are "guilty" of cropping due to convenience and not bothering walking a few extra metres.? I guess its like the old 50mm prime, it makes you work for a shot, but if you can get an ok shot at 200mm and crop in to 400mm then why waste time stalking etc. For me I will tell you why, even though you will get a satisfactory web post card print in most case, the sharpness will not be desired or will the quality of larger prints. Also limiting the number of available editable pixels increases the over all noise in an image regardless of original megapixel. I have been trying to not crop my shots, this is hard as its part of my processing, and I am guessing alot of others do it for convenience aswell. Lets make a pact, let us show case our photos with no cropping at all. What will this achieve? I think I for one will benefit from it and gain patience and understanding from this. I am interested in hearing others opinion's.

 

[Dave_W]

It's funny you should bring this topic up. I spent a great deal of time and effort towards in-camera cropping so that the entire image could be usable and I think I got pretty good at it, too. But then I started doing a lot of printing. Printing, as I've complained about in many other posts, ends up forcing you crop and sometimes crop again just to fit in standard frames and matte boards. So now I'm trying to unlearn my in-camera cropping and always try to shoot a little fat so as to leave open the possibility of a crop.

 

[Scott Murray]

Yes I hate it when you print something out and it wants over flow. Pfft I want my image as is no over flow. But they do not understand.

 

[RON_RIP]

Same here. I have had to resort to custom sizing my mats and backing boards in some instances just to get where I want to be.

 

[WayneF]

I am just wondering and I know I am guilty of this, but how many are thinking, Hmmmmm I have enough megapixels I shall just crop to suit?

This to me is digital zooming and yes I know it has its merits in some cases but how many of us are "guilty" of cropping due to convenience and not bothering walking a few extra metres.?

Cropping is part of the process. We cropped the dickens out of them in the dark room enlarger, back in the day. It is about getting the picture you want.

Forgive my stupid example, but some artist might have the notion that using a number 2 pencil is the only way to draw. It's what he learned, and he's done it for years. He appreciates how it makes him work for it. But now he discovers others are using <gasp> color, or ink, or water colors, or charcoal - and so are corrupting the purity of the art (in his notions). So now, he is welcome to feel smug while everyone else is doing the art.

Do what you want to do, it is your picture. Actually, it is the result that counts. Cropping is one of the best tools.

 

[Moab Man]

Like Dave_w I have had to back off on the in camera cropping because I shoot and edit to print and I need flexibility.

 

[Scott Murray]

Cropping is part of the process. We cropped the dickens out of them in the dark room enlarger, back in the day. It is about getting the picture you want.

Forgive my stupid example, but some artist might have the notion that using a number 2 pencil is the only way to draw. It's what he learned, and he's done it for years. He appreciates how it makes him work for it. But now he discovers others are using <gasp> color, or ink, or water colors, or charcoal - and so are corrupting the purity of the art (in his notions). So now, he is welcome to feel smug while everyone else is doing the art.

Do what you want to do, it is your picture. Actually, it is the result that counts. Cropping is one of the best tools.

I am actually an artist and use pencils from a #2 through to charcoal and my fingers. Yes the photo is yours for the "taking" as is the painting for the doing. There is honestly two reason's I would crop in on a photo that could not make it to print one to show on the web, and 2 to be able to see enough detail to replicate that in, coloured pencil, oil pastels, chalks, oil paints, water colour and honestly any other medium that involved more than a sensor. I recall painting the roman colosseum from some dirty house paints and a 5 inch square photograph which I transferred to life size and stage size.

I guess what I am trying to say is, compose for what you want to achieve. If you can get an available print from a lion thats cropped in 80% then thats what you aim for. But aim for as high as possible and not "just what you can get" as there is no fun at all in that

 

[Rick M]

I'm backing off to accommodate 4x5 formats. When printing for sales, I can get sales on the 4x5 format and rarely on 6x9. For example, I recently ordered prints for a train show, the 8x10's were $1, 8x12's $1.90. 11x14's only $2, on average the 6x9 format costs me almost 100% more to print. Cuts down the margin too much.

 

[WayneF]

I am actually an artist and use pencils from a #2 through to charcoal and my fingers. Yes the photo is yours for the "taking" as is the painting for the doing. There is honestly two reason's I would crop in on a photo that could not make it to print one to show on the web, and 2 to be able to see enough detail to replicate that in, coloured pencil, oil pastels, chalks, oil paints, water colour and honestly any other medium that involved more than a sensor. I recall painting the roman colosseum from some dirty house paints and a 5 inch square photograph which I transferred to life size and stage size.

I guess what I am trying to say is, compose for what you want to achieve. If you can get an available print from a lion thats cropped in 80% then thats what you aim for. But aim for as high as possible and not "just what you can get" as there is no fun at all in that

I can envy your being an artist, because I am far from it. I can appreciate your goal to create what you envisioned, but also maybe appreciate my goal of getting something, anyway I can. Sometimes it takes me days to find something in that batch, somewhere, hopefully.

It is always said "get it right in the camera". It would be fine if we did, but of course, we simply cannot. Our tools are too coarse. White Balance is difficult, the camera controls are too coarse for the many variations we get, of daylight, of incandescent, of flashes. Exact exposure is tough too, at least without retries, due to reflective meters. And sometimes we can be surprised that cropping can find two or three pictures in one frame. The important thing to my style is about how to fix it later. Not meaning any creative photoshopping, I don't. I only mean necessary corrections.

I am reminded of the Indiana Jones movie where the eastern swordsman was approaching swishing his sword in impressive ways, but Jones simply shoots him from a little distance. It may not exactly be style, but it seemed a good result.

But should we ever win the great cover shot on the leading magazine (natl geographic, or the old Life, or whatever), it is only the result that counts. No one is going to ask how we planned and executed it, if we crawled through the swamp first, or if we cropped it later.

 

[Scott Murray]

It also reminds me of abstract artists as I am unsure of what they had envisioned in their minds. Especially Picasso. lol I always drew myself to be a nat geo artist but never got to that ability.

Here is an example which I drew years ago. Before I got into DSLR's

And the film photo

And the colosseum lol in house paints.

 

[Michael J.]

Scott, I take my hat off to you.

 

[Scott Murray]

Scott, I take my hat off to you.

Why Michael? I do not expect that! I am just stating that we all compose for our own reasons even if we do not think we do.

 

[snaphappy]

I think of all the PP things used for convenience cropping is the least of them. Here especially if you haven't PP'd the heck out of a shot it's considered at snap. If you want to cut out the lazy photography you have to get everything right in camera. Then you'd be using your feet to prevent shadows etc, moving to make sure litter or other ugly stuff isn't in the shot instead of removing in PP and making sure exposure is perfect. For cropping I think it's mostly done when you just don't have the lens reach to get the shot otherwise or for printing to a certain size. JMHO if cropping is laziness well then really all PP is laziness. PP or dark room stuff is really what makes a photo an image but if you are pressing the shutter and have a list of things you need to PP to make it a good shot, then perhaps the feet need to move a bit more

 

[Scott Murray]

I think of all the PP things used for convenience cropping is the least of them. Here especially if you haven't PP'd the heck out of a shot it's considered at snap. If you want to cut out the lazy photography you have to get everything right in camera. Then you'd be using your feet to prevent shadows etc, moving to make sure litter or other ugly stuff isn't in the shot instead of removing in PP and making sure exposure is perfect. For cropping I think it's mostly done when you just don't have the lens reach to get the shot otherwise or for printing to a certain size. JMHO if cropping is laziness well then really all PP is laziness. PP or dark room stuff is really what makes a photo an image but if you are pressing the shutter and have a list of things you need to PP to make it a good shot, then perhaps the feet need to move a bit more

Processing is a part of life as is zoom lenses, I am just trying to make people aware especially the new comers that a photo doesn't come to you, you need to got to the photo.

 

[WayneF]

Wow! I'm impressed. We are certainly on very different levels in any artistic regard.

I am the last one that should give any art opinion, but I suspect Picasso was just having a good laugh at us. We have seen several of the great museums and Vatican in Europe, and mostly, I just don't get all of it, not the appeal today. I can appreciate the development in the older work, perspective and media and even styles in some degree, but mostly I just don't get the great reverence shown for it today. I suspect it is mostly a collector thing. Michelangelo was easier of course, but I saw stuff in Rijksmuseum by (to me) obscure names, about same dates, that I thought stood out way ahead of Rembrandt and such. Obviously not a correct opinion. The old B.C. sculptures were fantastic though, that even then they could do this.

I am not aware that Rembrandt or Michelangelo cropped their work, so maybe you may have something. But to me, cropping is a very strong and major tool. If it needs it, do it.

 

[Scott Murray]

Wow! I'm impressed. We are certainly on very different levels in any artistic regard.

I am the last one that should give any art opinion, but I suspect Picasso was just having a good laugh at us. We have seen several of the great museums and Vatican in Europe, and mostly, I just don't get all of it, not the appeal today. I can appreciate the development in the older work, perspective and media and even styles in some degree, but mostly I just don't get the great reverence shown for it today. I suspect it is mostly a collector thing. Michelangelo was easier of course, but I saw stuff in Rijksmuseum by (to me) obscure names, about same dates, that I thought stood out way ahead of Rembrandt and such. Obviously not a correct opinion. The old B.C. sculptures were fantastic though, that even then they could do this.

I am not aware that Rembrandt or Michelangelo cropped their work, so maybe you may have something. But to me, cropping is a very strong and major tool. If it needs it, do it.

Everyone crops what they see
An artist crops with their eye and then their brush/pencil. They portray what they want the world to see, and they disregard anything that doesn't help them in their goal. Digital art is the same, we portray what we want the person to see, if we do not then we fail as an artist. Photography is art and it is a persons perception of that particular object. Most might not see or agree with what they are portraying but art is never explained, its understood and if it isn't understood then its not for you.

 

[snaphappy]

Sorry Scott not good at explaining myself clearly. I get what you were saying. I think what I really meant to say was simply my last sentence and forget the rest of my rambling

PP or dark room stuff is really what makes a photo an image but if you are pressing the shutter and have a list of things you need to PP in order to make it a good shot, then perhaps the feet need to move a bit more (or more thought put into lens selection and camera settings)






​