Yep - wrong treeAn puzzling/interesting aspect (at least to me) of (too much) cropping is the relationship between field of view and depth of field, also known as perspective.
If the cropped image looks too much different from the fully framed version taken closer of with a longer lens, then maybe the crop is just too much?
Or am I just barking up the wrong tree here?
Bill (BSP)
Again it is the end result which matters.
Yep - wrong tree
While this is technically correct, so even though perpsective does not get altered in itself, cropping, especially significant one, does bring subjects closer to the front and changes visual impact every time it is done, not necessarily for the better, of course.Yep - wrong tree
Perspective is formed from the relationship between items in the scene and the apparent depth between them. It is controlled entirely by the distance between the subject and the camera.
Cropping gives exactly the same result as switching to a longer (narrower angle) lens and has no effect on perspective.
If instead of cropping or switching to a longer lens you decide to walk closer to your subject, you will be changing the perspective while adjusting the relative size of the elements in the image.
Framing by intuition is of great value in cinematography, because aspect is fixed and zomming in post can be painful, they require several people very well coortinated, one moves the crane, another one adjusts focus on the fly, another one frames and the actors have also to speak when they have focus on them
That's why you don't see much "street cinematography." The allure and challenge of street photography is the captured, candid moment.Cinema cameras viewfinders always show more than is captured/ soft or hard matted - precisely so that you can see booms etc before they wander suddenly into shot - essentially the context of a rangefinder and the precise framing of a reflex. If everyone is well rehearsed and you aren't trying to pull focus at a T1.0-T2.0 range on long glass at close range, focusing is as much question of hitting your marks in the correct order. Working handheld documentary style is trickier but really a question of understanding what your available depth of focus is.
Post zooming is really largely producers trying to exploit the resolution of a format to interfere with/ 'improve' a shot.
That's why you don't see much "street cinematography." The allure and challenge of street photography is the captured, candid moment.
I realize you might have been making a point about movie cameras and their viewfinders. And there are shots in films that are candid moments, unstaged or unplanned that would compare to still street photography. But there is no genre of (mainstream) cinema that I am aware of that is composed entirely of those shots, as is street still photography.That's not what I was saying - there are however plenty of shots in films that do exactly what you describe. What I was getting at is that a cinema camera can give both the contextual view of a rangefinder viewfinder and the precision framing (ie what's inside the lines is exactly what will be captured) of a single lens reflex viewfinder.
I realize you might have been making a point about movie cameras and their viewfinders. And there are shots in films that are candid moments, unstaged or unplanned that would compare to still street photography. But there is no genre of (mainstream) cinema that I am aware of that is composed entirely of those shots, as is street still photography.
I like it. Actually, the only time I ever hear about 'purity' in regards to cropping is from people who crop when they talk about people who don't. I just tend to choose from the infinite number of possible images that I can make full-frame...as opposed to using any of the infinite number of possible images that are created by cropping the image on the film. Those who do both (full-frame/crop) do not have any more choices, because infinite is infinite...there is no more, and no less, infinite...The only time I don't crop is when cropping is needed.
Careful study of ones work (proof sheets are nice) can help one go from the mundane to the interesting without cropping (printing only full-frame just pushes the issue). Then make more prints and do more study to make images that go from interesting straight to meaningful.Cropping can sometimes make an interesting picture out of an otherwise mundane shot...
More like 98%.Because like 90+% of what calls itself "street photography" it'd be unwatchably banal.
But I'd bet you are not taking candid "street photographs" with those cameras.I like it. Actually, the only time I ever hear about 'purity' in regards to cropping is from people who crop when they talk about people who don't. I just tend to choose from the infinite number of possible images that I can make full-frame...as opposed to using any of the infinite number of possible images that are created by cropping the image on the film. Those who do both (full-frame/crop) do not have any more choices, because infinite is infinite...there is no more, and no less, infinite...
I am using 5x7, 8x10, and 11x14 cameras, printing the full negative (including its rebate as part of the final image). Cropping would mean that I would be showing a print that is presented significantly differently from the rest...which is fine in some situations, but mostly not when working on portfolios. YMMD
I use modified darkslides to expose two 4x10 images and two 5.5x14 images on 8x10 and 11x14 film respectively...while keeping a rebate around each image...so technically, I am not cropping down from an 8x10 image to get a 4x10 image.
To photograph and depend on cropping to find the best image is no different than the shotgun approach of some users of digital cameras -- it can be very effective.Cropping is cheating. yeah, some ladies feel attacked when I say that. And I don’t care.
I suppose that means the world of photography is a collective of cheats and wannabees.Cropping is cheating.
yeah, some ladies feel attacked when I say that. And I don’t care.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?