Strange cropping saving a picture ?

12/19/2002 07:24:45 PM · #1

Is it me only ? I have somethies the feeling now that any dimensions is allowed that a lof of time a picture is 'saved' by cropping a part of it instead of omoving around, tryin g a different angle.
If the picture is 'thought' originally panoramic (horizontal or vertical) I think it makes sense but I am a feeling that several times, people jsut 'extract from a picture' they have take, just getting rid of the disturbing element instead of 'composing' the picture.
I am not sure I am very clear but I think you get the impression ...
Lionel

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2002 08:37:30 PM · #2

I get what you're saying, but I'll disagree. I don't think someone should be penalized for being able to see the "good image" within a cluttered scene. We "extract" an image every time we use the viewfinder to eliminate objects visible peripherally, every time we zoom in, every time we crop. I don't think it's critical at what stage it happens. I don't thnk it's fair to try and guess whether the photographer "visualized the scene that way" or cropped away detracting elements -- I try to just judge the final result. If a particular crop doesn't work for you, so be it. But to vote an image lower because you assume it was cropped narrow to eliminate a telephone pole seems unfair to me.

Before, everyone wanted non-standard crops so photos could be improved, presumably be eliminating elements forced into the picture with the constrained dimensions. Now it sounds like you want to go back to a full-frame, uncropped capture to see who can create the best set-up. I mean, what you seem to be complaining about was the very rationale for making the rules change.

Message edited by author 2002-12-19 20:41:37.

12/19/2002 09:36:01 PM · #3

I am not saying I am going to vote down based on a 'system' and there is some I like becasue they fit the subject of the picture ..
And I am not saying we should not crop ... I am cropping .. but I always try to crop in 'proportion'.
I am saying that I globally prefer images that correspond to 'standard proportions.

And I am sorry, I still make the distinction between :
- being 'active' on the scene, trying to find the right angle, the right zoom (zoom is <> than crop, not the same result), the correct composition and ...
- cropping to 123x457 or 622x243 or 509x525

I am not saying I want to go back .. panoramic are legitimate, verticals are legitimate .. just ... sometimes I think it's too much 'saving a picture' and I had this feeling several time this week.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2002 09:51:53 PM · #4

It just happens I woke up this morning and took a picture which makes for a good example for this discussion. There was a gorgeous sunrise, which I'm hardly ever up in time to see.
I live in a very urban area, so there's really no place to get a clear shot, certainly not one which I could reach before the light was gone.
I've made a couple of different crops, and applied the same slight tone curve to each. Which version would you recommend I use to make some prints? You can click on the links to go to larger versions at pBase.
Original Captured Frame:

Panoramic Crop:

Tighter Crop:

Message edited by author 2002-12-19 21:52:52.

12/19/2002 10:09:04 PM · #5

It's an interesting approach.

I am not sure in that case ....
In all 3 I would have cropped a little more on the left (last one to remove the pole), second one to keep only the main pole, first one as well.
Not for dpchallenge ... (maybe we can do it?) .. I might have tried to make the pole vertical with the perspective tool .. just to see the result.

I am not sure, probably not the last one because I like the tree/electicity contrast.
So ... I do not have an answer in that case .. panoramic does bring something to a picture ... no question about that ... I just do not find the mutiplicity of the rations appealing.
I tried to play the game on that one .. but I am a little dry ...
Other people ? any comment / thoughts ?

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2002 10:15:20 PM · #6

Yes, this was quickly done. I myself don't object to the wires so much, particularly then they follow the contours in the clouds -- it can be made to look deliberate. I can't straighten to poles because the horizon will probably be off -- their tilt is a consequence of my lens (or lack thereof). I'll submit a "final" crop later tonight when I get home from work...

12/19/2002 10:18:56 PM · #7

Cropped (yes ;-) ) and slight use of perspective on the left.
humm .. looking at it too much sky on the top ...
And yes .. we're going to get to a non standard ration .. and yes (in my own taste) it's a little too much for me , which does not mean it should not be done if you like that sunrise and want to get the best of it :-)

Message edited by author 2002-12-19 22:20:54.

12/19/2002 10:24:40 PM · #8

like this ?

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/19/2002 10:34:09 PM · #9

That last is a good job straightening it out! I'd take a little more off the bottom and right, and leave more sky -- maybe to where the topmost wire meets the right edge.

12/19/2002 10:41:26 PM · #10

You're right for the bottom. Have you used the perspective tool in photo shop already ?
If not (sorry if you already know) you crop the usual way, check the 'perpective' check box, and then make the left borderline parallele to the pole.
It's not always valid because depending on the picture ; yo might get something that's .. not right for the eye (but you might want it) because the eye do not see the regular way(for example I updated the perspective for that building , on the left but I think that now it looks .. well .. strange : building ). But when you do not have the expensive 'architecture lens' (do not know howto call them ) that 'redress' the perspective .. thats 'good.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/20/2002 04:44:29 AM · #11

Ok -- I tried using the perspective tool. Here's a version with a medium crop; bordered image ready to print...
Bordered Version:

Message edited by author 2002-12-20 04:45:13.

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

12/20/2002 06:09:51 AM · #12

I disagree with you too Lionel :)

35mm format foes not have traditional ratios anyway - it came about as a tester thing for film making originally.

If what one sees and wants to capture is tall and narrow or short and wide - and for my I often want to focus on something which isn't conventiently of a 480x640 ratio - then moving around and changing angle is irrelevant.

Our eyes don't "see" in 480x640 or 640x480 and the way I look at a scene isn't therefore limited to that either. I look at the scene and decide what ratios I am aiming for in my final image without reference to what my camera can take. Then when I take the shot I ensure that the bit I want is captured within the frame that I have - as large as possible so that cropping is purely to alter ratio to what I want.

I agree that a lot of people take a shot more randomly and only later when they get home do they see the picture within the scene. That's not how I work, and it's better not to purely for reasons of maintaining resolution. If one has only 35mm film or a low res camera - the more you crop the less res you have left for printing enlargements. But if it's only for use at low res/ small size thats fair enough. As I said, not the way I work but fair enough.

Basically, I am really mostly interested in the final image.

Arachnophilia

Logitech ClickSmart 510

12/20/2002 07:24:52 AM · #13

well, i think the method used to get to final image is irrelevant.

if you take a picture that's 12 megapixels, and extract a 320x240 tiny little rectangle out of it with no resampling, that's up to you. cropping is a good technique to master. ...and it IS part of composition.

12/20/2002 08:14:42 AM · #14

I understand .. the result only matters ..
Now that I read what you guys said .. I would say it differently ...
I have been thinking several time .. 'the person saved the picture with a 633x443 resolution' and not 'oh .. now that the rules are more free .. this person has been more creative'
True you can never be sure .. but still ...

I understand that the 'process' in itself should not matter .. there is some high note that Elizabeth Schartwkopf I think could not do, one in a whole piece of music, and somebody else did it and they patched it in in studio (somebody can correct my story if it's something like that). If nobody hear the difference . .does it matter ? I would say no.

I guess same for picture ... the 'pure' part of us would always prefer things to be achieved without too much manipulation.

But if looking at the picture .. I get the feeling that it has been saved ... well .. I will like it less ... like others like less pictures if they this or if they that.

But actually .. do other people have this feeling or is it only me ?

I should reread myself more before posting .. I do not.

What about the analogy that .. to make a good picture is like shooting an arrow with a bow ? You have to think about it, follow the arrow during its trajectory ... until and a little after the arrow hit the target ?

Some of us are lucky to do that without thinking ....
a) some needs to think ...
b) some mix ..
c) some do it instinctively
d) some do not at all

for those falling in d) .. I think they should try to do it more ....

ok .. sounds arrogant or petulant maybe (really not what I mean, forgive me in advance) .. but itconveys my thought I think ..
Lionel

Message edited by author 2002-12-20 08:16:13.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

12/20/2002 11:30:26 AM · #15

I think for that one, rather than croping I'd clone out the wires :)

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/20/2002 02:14:08 PM · #16

Originally posted by Gordon:

I think for that one, rather than croping I'd clone out the wires :)

But I've been re-programmed to do things by "DPC Rules!"
I also have no problem with people seeing it how it was, the subject being "Oakland" as much as the sunrise. But you're right -- it's probably not too hard to ditch the wires, if I (you) thought the photo was otherwise spectacular enough to be worth the work. I have to get my graphics tablet working again -- I hate cloning with the mouse!

GinaRothfels

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

12/20/2002 06:07:21 PM · #17

I have to disagree with Lionel. Some of the photographers here have really made creative use of unusual shapes. Seeing them has got me so excited I'm really keen to try one myself.

12/20/2002 07:39:57 PM · #18

I am not saying that unusual shape is not creative .. not at all !
I am just saying that when it's used to save a picture without making efforts to do better at the shot time, it's not good (I am taking the worst approach)
Anyway .. seems like I am the only one .. so .. that's probably me only ;-)
Lionel

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/20/2002 09:42:36 PM · #19

Hey Lionel,

Don't feel picked-on. People just have different ways of getting things done. Besides, if you want a really good example of what you're talking about, wait until you see my entry from THIS week! Any better "save" and I'd try out to play goalie...