Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I crop in quite a lot of photos to get the diesiered effect, but we all have our own ways.
Just give yourself more time taking photos looking at all sides of the viewfinder and you won't need to crop all the time. Also the rule of "thirds" most especially on horizontal shots make a difference.
Paying attention to what's on the viewfinder lessens the need to crop. Even when you think you got the shot you want, there are times when certain "objects" or "things" get included in the shot. It could be a small cigarette or a leaf that got blown, a small piece of paper, a cumulous cloud in the corner, a shadow on the ground.........anything and everything that can affect the outcome of a photo.
i don't agree much with the " if you check the viewfinder you will crop less statement".
i tend to crop alot .. why? because photography is the opposite of painting.
a painter works very hard at thinking about what to include in the painting.
as photographers we should be working hard at what to exclude in the photo.
That may be true but you can work hard to decide what to exclude from the photo before you take the photo, not after.
And of course, if you crop too much in post production, you won't be able to enlarge the image as much. Your enlargements are limited the more you crop. Every professional photographer I've ever known as discouraged against cropping when possible, for this very reason. I was taught in photography school to "fill the frame" and often required to use full frame negative carrier to prove it prints were uncropped. That is not to say I never crop nowadays... but before I shoot, I make an effort to reduce the likelihood that I will have to.
But I suppose if you're finding that you have a tendency to OVER crop, then perhaps it's best to zoom out a little or take a step back and worry about cropping later.
Quote:
the other reason is you never want to tight crop a photo unless you know in advance what size you may be printing that photo in.
the big mistake i made early on was excluding everything i did not want and filling the frame tight with the subject at the scene.
well go print a different size photothan your native resolution and chunks of your subject are now gone.
Yes, it is annoying that the ratio of a 35mm negative/sensor (2:3) is not the same as some standard print sizes. The standard "snapshot" sized print - 4x6 - is the same ratio and an 8x10 enlargement is the same ratio of a 4x5 negative (which I'm pretty sure was deliberate) but I'm not really sure where 5:7 or 11:14 came from. That's just in the US, then in the UK/Europe, you have standard international sizes like A4 which is roughly something like 7:10.
However, a good printing company will be able to print custom ratios and many now include full frame ratio print sizes in their standard pricing quotes, like 8x12 instead of 8x10. Custom print ratios will be harder to find pre-made frames for but you can always buy a custom matte board for it to fit a bigger, standard sized frame. Or get a custom made frame. To me, those options are better than getting into the habit of cropping like crazy in post processing.
Why not? If a picture is good, does it matter if it was unplanned? And similarly, if it's bad, does it matter if it was planned?
A big part depends on the type of photography. Some lend themselves easily to planning, e.g. portraiture/modeling, product, macro, stock, etc. Other types may not be as easy. For commercial/professional photography, planning is crucial to making a sale.
There is also the question of how one defines "planning". I do a lot of travel photography (as a hobby). Many of my favorite shots were unplanned -- I just happened to see something that caught my attention and I shot it. However, when it caught my attention, I thought about how best to capture it -- I thought about the angle, the composition, the lighting, etc. So I came upon a scene unplanned, then did a quick few seconds of planning, and shot it. Does that count as an unplanned or planned shot?
In the end, I don't really care whether an image was planned or not. I don't care if others consider me a photographer or a snapshooter, an artist or a hack. What matters to me is whether I like shooting and whether I like what I shoot -- obviously, photography not being my livelihood allows me that freedom. If I had to depend on someone buying my pictures to make money, then I'd probably plan a whole lot.
Some scenes that I happened upon unplanned...
I largely agree with what you're saying, Fuzz. In fact, the most successful shot (in terms of sales and licenses) was unplanned. And yeah, I think there are shades of gray in planning -- stumbling across a scene and devising the best way to capture it is a plan to some degree. My remark was more to the OP's point that they never plan.
Nice shots, btw. However, let's be real here. Being in such scenic places right at the golden hour with incredible skies and just happening to have your camera and most likely a tripod handy was no accident, even if you didn't have a specific composition in mind when you started out.
Here's that unplanned shot I told you about. I just happened to passing over the Hoover Dam right at dusk on the day they connected the main supporting arch of the new Bypass. As if that wasn't cool enough, a welder was connecting the rebar and the red sparks were falling into the Colorado River. There are thousands of shots of the Hoover Dam Bypass posted all over the internet, but as far as I know, no one has a shot like this.
Of course it was no accident that I had my camera and tripod in the car. I knew I'd be coming home through the desert around sunset and so was prepared for anything.
Here's a shot that I planned months in advance and then spent a weekend to get. A simultaneous moonrise right at sunset perched just over Cathedral Rock in Sedona. Moonrise and sunset times were taken into account, plus the azimuth angle of the moonrise was mapped-out to choose my location to get this orientation.
Tonight is the Supermoon, but here's my shot from last year.
To me the best shots you'll ever take are the ones where you have a preconceived vision which you work at to fulfill.
I had big plans. I got up at 5:30am this morning so I could photograph the "Super Moon". I drove to a location all the time looking at the moon and watching it go behind clouds. I thought for sure by the time I got to my location it would be covered. It was there but not nearly as great as I was hoping. I should have shot it in the middle of the night. By the time it was close to the horizon it just faded away into the clouds :c rying:
Last edited by Coolcin; 06-23-2013 at 03:39 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
thanks Clark.. I do use the crop , not because I dont like the pics, more to experiment.
Super Moon
