Do you crop a lot or not so much?

[Dennis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I believe the crop is legitimate, is the last labor of love you are doing for your photos. It's also accepted by the code of ethics of photojournalism. In my case, I crop a little (as pixels), but I do crop almost all my photos. One extra pixel, a distraction in a corner, can make a huge difference. Huge. But wait: it's not about to compensate a mistake I did when I composed. It's about to have already a great image already, and make it better.  

After the crop, the picture story and context remain the same, but you have two significant advantages:
First, the final picture looks exactly as you want, and this is essential. It's your way to express a particular reality, and this is your own art, your POV, your perspective. Second, it's about respect. Once you pressed the shutter and you made the first magic step, whatever is film or crop, the next part is to refine (and indeed to improve) what you already did.
Personally, my indisputable and favorite part is and always will be shooting. It's where the wonder happens. But after that, culling and crops are really enjoyable for me. Then, in the end, a slight Post Process. IMHO to crop, is to recognize what you already did and bring it to its best. It's a legitimate and lovely process. Essential.

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[fotografr]

37 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Walker Evans on cropping (link)

" Stieglitz wouldn’t cut a quarter of an inch off a frame. I would cut any number of inches off my frames in order to get a better picture."

HCB did (very rarely) crop as well: Derriere la Gare Saint-Lazare

It's interesting to note that in the image you linked, HCB not only cropped out the unwanted post on the left, he ALSO cropped a substantial portion of the bottom of the image, clearly because he felt it wasn't an important part of the photograph. Thus, even he was willing to violate his own rules on occasion.

Edited July 26, 2020 by fotografr

[Dr No]

2 minutes ago, fotografr said:

I'd never show you my work. Since I've admitted that I crop as I see fit, your stated standards have already prejudged my images.

You applied my standards to your work that I have not seen, and said that I applied them and that I shouldn't (when I didn't) and also that you won't show me your work because you've already applied these standards (that I shouldn't apply).

O...K...that seems like a strange or overly complicated way to live.

I'm unsure if you'll be offended or not but I will say it anyway—I hope you enjoy taking and viewing your pictures. 😁

[fotografr]

2 minutes ago, Dr No said:

You applied my standards to your work that I have not seen, and said that I applied them and that I shouldn't (when I didn't) and also that you won't show me your work because you've already applied these standards (that I shouldn't apply).

O...K...that seems like a strange or overly complicated way to live.

I'm unsure if you'll be offended or not but I will say it anyway—I hope you enjoy taking and viewing your pictures. 😁

Well, once again you have misstated me and misrepresented what I said. But thanks for your good wishes about enjoying making pictures. I shall. 😁

[Jeff S]

4 minutes ago, Dennis said:

I believe the crop is legitimate, is the last labor of love you are doing for your photos. 

 

A critical, but often not the last step, for me.  Next comes the editing and selection process to determine the presentation worthy pictures.  And if that display is a print, there are many more visual choices... paper, inks, matting, framing, and display lighting (the latter highly underrated as an important aesthetic variable). Photography is a long chain of editing choices, judgment and decisions.

Jeff

[Dennis]

31 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Photography is a long chain of editing choices, judgment and decisions.

Jeff

Correct. And this is fascinating. 

[T25UFO]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

I would argue somewhere in between.  Every millimeter to the left of the sweep of the arm chair is total waste of real estate. The wall plug at the top also needs to go.  The picture(?) on the wall bisected by the arm of the chair is truly unfortunate, but were it me, as I like the asymmetrical sweep of the chair, I'd retain all of the right side and brush that out.  The face would wind up offset, not smack in the middle of the frame which, coupled to curve of the chair would, for me, inject a little pace into the photo. 

 

5 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Since we're into camera club critique (😉) I immediately noticed the second image had been processed - the tops of the shoulders just look wrong, and I can see this is due to editing out the inside of the sleeve on the left, and the chair top on the right. I would leave them untouched. If I was dealing with this image for printing (even as a family snap) I would have removed the socket/thermostat, though, and cropped a bit from top and left, as Tailwagger suggests. Thanks, T25UFO, for hearing all this advice with good nature!

First @LocalHero1953 you are right about poor editing on the sleeve.  It's one of those things you don't notice until someone mentions it and now it's the first thing I see.  Urgh!

So, here's the final attempt, taking on the advice from both of you.  The socket and thermostat removed, the chair left in place and a small crop moving little Fliss slightly off centre.  And yes, I agree it looks better.

This thread started as a discussion on whether cropping was legitimate.  I remain on the side of cropping is fine, but perhaps it should be handled more carefully.  Good lessons to learn and thanks for you input.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[LocalHero1953]

26 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

 

First @LocalHero1953 you are right about poor editing on the sleeve.  It's one of those things you don't notice until someone mentions it and now it's the first thing I see.  Urgh!

So, here's the final attempt, taking on the advice from both of you.  The socket and thermostat removed, the chair left in place and a small crop moving little Fliss slightly off centre.  And yes, I agree it looks better.

This thread started as a discussion on whether cropping was legitimate.  I remain on the side of cropping is fine, but perhaps it should be handled more carefully.  Good lessons to learn and thanks for you input.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Well, that's probably something like what I would have ended up with!

As to cropping or not, it's just one of those matters which I see as entirely my choice - the choices of others, which I assume are equally valid for them, have no bearing on mine. 

Edited July 26, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[Guest]

I prefer not to crop but will to correct my mistake in composition or the need to just shoot a special moment where i cannot frame better.

A few years ago i was in scotland and the lochness monster was clearly visible ahead of me but i only had my 35mm lens so i quickly changed to the required  90mm but the monster had vanished!!

We all have regrets,if only i took the shot and cropped.

 

[Fontan]

I wonder if shooting with other than, say, 35mm focal length is a blasphemy? How is that any different from cropping? 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Fontan

[Mikep996]

"I wonder if shooting with other than, say, 35mm focal length is a blasphemy? "

I do not currently own and, in my previous Leica life, did not own a 35mm lens.  To me it's neither fish nor fowl - too short for normal use, too long for wide use.  TBF, in both of my Leica "lives," my previous fairly long one and my current fairly short one so far,  I had/have  a MATE which has the 35mm setting but then and now, I seem to only use the 28 or 50 when shooting with it.

We are going to Newbury/Highclere castle for two days and the lenses I am carrying are the 21 Super Elmar and my 50 Cron.  I could take my current whole kit which includes the MATE, a 90 Elmarit M and the 28ASPH but I'd rather carry less.   I can crop (!😜) the 50 into anything longer and the 21 is as wide as I need.

"How is that any different from cropping?" 

Good point - changing lenses is just the "old" way of cropping in the camera!  Nowadays, most digital cameras can crop in the camera.  SO, if I 'enlarge' the image as I view it on my iPhone and then take the shot, I guess I'm cropping the image - just as if I digitally crop it in post.  Heck, now I'm wondering if "cropping" is a term that no longer even applies to photography...🤔

[LocalHero1953]

8 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

I prefer not to crop but will to correct my mistake in composition or the need to just shoot a special moment where i cannot frame better.

A few years ago i was in scotland and the lochness monster was clearly visible ahead of me but i only had my 35mm lens so i quickly changed to the required  90mm but the monster had vanished!!

We all have regrets,if only i took the shot and cropped.

 

Nah - that would have been overriding the photographic truth with your subjective perspective - anathema to real reportage. I bet you don't file your negative holders either. (I can foresee a new photo thread with this title, along the lines of "Should have gone to Specsavers" or "I bet he drinks Carling Black Label").

[astrostl]

Prior to this thread I had never known "anti-cropping" to be a thing.

I crop regularly for cleanup or saves. I maintain the aspect ratio, though (even if I flip between portrait and landscape).

[fotografr]

17 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

 

A few years ago i was in scotland and the lochness monster was clearly visible ahead of me but i only had my 35mm lens so i quickly changed to the required  90mm but the monster had vanished!!

We all have regrets,if only i took the shot and cropped.

 

What an amazing coincidence. The exact same thing happened to me when I was hiking on a mountain trail in the Pacific Northwest. Bigfoot ran across the trail a ways up from me and before I could change from my 24mm to my 90mm, he was gone.

[Tailwagger]

52 minutes ago, fotografr said:

What an amazing coincidence. The exact same thing happened to me when I was hiking on a mountain trail in the Pacific Northwest. Bigfoot ran across the trail a ways up from me and before I could change from my 24mm to my 90mm, he was gone.

Odd, exactly the opposite thing happened to me just a while back up in New Hampshire.  By the time I could remove the 90mm and get the 28mm mounted to be able frame the rather large head and combover, the subject was whisked away by a group of men in black. 😁

[farnz]

58 minutes ago, fotografr said:

What an amazing coincidence. The exact same thing happened to me when I was hiking on a mountain trail in the Pacific Northwest. Bigfoot ran across the trail a ways up from me and before I could change from my 24mm to my 90mm, he was gone.

I had a similar experience several years ago on the night before Christmas when I was on top of a hill shooting the lit up city with my 28 mm Summicron and suddenly noticed a sleigh with reindeer flying across the sky.  The sleigh was being piloted by a large man in a red suit but by the time I'd changed the 28 Summicron for my 90 Elmarit they were no more than a speck in the sky.  I never got to find out who he was.

Pete.

[fotografr]

Seems we need to get someone at Leica to engineer a 24-200mm M zoom lens.

[jmahto]

On 7/24/2020 at 1:39 AM, Mikep996 said:

One of the items that is often discussed in all digital camera forums is the ability of a higher MP and/or larger sensor to provide a greater capacity for cropping/enlarging.  I have pretty much always shot digital as I shot slide film...I get what I shot and that's that.  As a consequence, I haven't personally seen the need for a great number of MP's since I usually don't crop much.  As an example, below is a pic I shot in front of the Royal Crescent in Bath yesterday.  The first is straight out of the camera,  an unmodified DNG though reduced to 1600 pixel width/converted to JPG to be able to post here.  The second pic is about as much cropping as I would normally do with same DNG converted to B/W (since I've been fooling with B/W lately) also at 1600 width/Jpg.  

So just curious, do many folks typically crop "extensively?"  Obviously, as has been discussed, the ability to do so can reduce the number of prime lenses needed depending on the subject/intent of the pic.  

Though not part of the point of the post, FWIW, lens was the 21mm f3.4  Super Elmar shot wide open at 1/4000 sec, ISO 200.  No aux finder used, just estimating the field of view using the rangefinder.  I find that if I "look around" in the rangefinder I can determine the FOV pretty much as accurately as my Voight 21/25 VF can.  But most of the time I just look in the RF and 'estimate' how much more I'll get in the pic.

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

I haven’t read other responses so far since I am jumping into this thread just now. So here is my thought. 
 

I have also shot enough film as digital. But in digital (M240 is latest) I do crop since I can. It also allows me to carry one lens, one camera. My usage is mainly nature shots and I can find interesting compositions during PP in my 28mm shots by cropping. Depending on final display device, I can crop up to 90mm equivalent. Just because digital resolution is so much higher. 
 

I can’t do that in film, which I still shoot in 35mm, because I just don’t have enough resolution to crop later. 
 

I do understand the concept of perspective etc and I don’t think cropped picture is always equivalent to in-cropped picture, but in many situations cropping is good enough.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jmahto]

On 7/24/2020 at 6:21 AM, adan said:

.... indeed still scan my 6x6 film to include the natural black border...

I noticed that in my Leica IIIc coverage on negative I get slightly more pic than from M2. In that sense, IIIc is more MP than my M2 😁

[jmahto]

On 7/24/2020 at 10:15 AM, 250swb said:

....it still looks like a crop

(IMHO) it looks like a crop only after he showed the full pic. If only crop is shown then one will never know it is a crop.