Cropping in the darkroom

[cliveh]

If you need to crop, don't you need more practice in camera framing? Or do you need to use a different format ratio suited to what you are trying to achieve?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm framing with my need to crop in print.

 

[cliveh]

I'm framing with my need to crop in print.

Why?

 

[FujiLove]

There are few formats which perfectly match commonly available paper sizes, less if you include a border. I find I often have to crop simply to fit the paper (a 6x7 negative on 10x8 paper yesterday).

 

[cliveh]

There are few formats which perfectly match commonly available paper sizes, less if you include a border. I find I often have to crop simply to fit the paper (a 6x7 negative on 10x8 paper yesterday).

Are you saying you let the paper size determine the composition of your original camera exposure?

 

[FujiLove]

Are you saying you let the paper size determine the composition of your original camera exposure?

No, I'm saying the camera I use (mostly) is 6x7 and unless I cut down the paper or have uneven borders the image simply doesn't fit uncropped. I also use 6x6 and you can't commonly buy square paper, so it's either crop or print small/leave white space. I do both.

I don't think there is any problem with cropping a photo. It's not cheating! It's an artistic decision.

 

[FujiLove]

Having said the above, I think yes, I do need more practice. I often crop and rotate a small amount to account for what I can later see is not an ideal composition or a sloping horizon. If I had all the time in the world, could be bothered carrying a tripod all the time, and didn't have my other half in tow hurrying me along, I'm sure I wouldn't be cropping so much!

 

[Brook Hill]

Surely you should frame or crop to suit the subject to get most satisfactory pictorial result and in many cases this wont correspond to standard film /camera format or a standard paper size. Adapting a no cropping principal means that a manufacturer's standard product dictates and limits your creativity. The tail is wagging the dog!

Tony

 

[cliveh]

Surely you should frame or crop to suit the subject to get most satisfactory pictorial result and in many cases this wont correspond to standard film /camera format or a standard paper size. Adapting a no cropping principal means that a manufacturer's standard product dictates and limits your creativity. The tail is wagging the dog!

Tony

No, your choice of format means the dog is wagging it's tail.

 

[bdial]

I fill the frame in the camera when possible, and appropriate. But sometimes that doesn't work out, so cropping with the enlarger is the next best thing.
Leaving two wide borders when the paper doesn't fit the negative proportions isn't a problem either IMO, I print a lot of 8x8's on 8x10 paper.

Cropping using a paper trimmer works well too.

 

[palewin]

Its really a bit of both. When I shoot 4x5 on a tripod, the composing is done on the ground glass, and unless I am going for a more panoramic image, there is little to no cropping in the darkroom. If I am grab shooting in 35mm, there is more cropping to achieve an image I am happy with. My 6x6 is slower, closer to 4x5, so less need to crop. Bottom line, it is best to compose as best you can in-camera, but that just doesn't work in some situations, mostly where things are moving fast and you are hand holding the camera. But that final image should have nothing to do with paper dimensions, there is nothing wrong with asymmetrical borders; if you mount and/or mat your prints, you won't know if paper borders were uneven, or you "wasted" some paper.

 

[coigach]

Not ever cropping is just a philosophy, like any other bent.

Agree with this part of the response above. That said, I do try to compose using full frame, and the vast majority of the time, this is the final result, but I'm not averse to cropping sometimes. Does depend a bit on the format though - I use a mixture of standard 35mm, Xpan 35mm pano, medium format 6x7 and 6x17 pano - and the style of picture I'm shooting...

 

[cliveh]

Please don't miss-understand my original post, as I am not suggesting never crop, but rather if you have to do so it should be quite minimal, otherwise you have not given enough thought into how you framed the original image in the camera (given the format in question).

 

[DannL.]

Mr. Adams explains one aspect of cropping and trimming in "The Print" . . . "The visualized final image may not fit precisely in the format of the camera; the world was not designed in 4 x 5-inch rectangles or 2 1/4-inch squares!"

As for myself, I suspect that I crop & trim 100% of the time. When out and about shooting, I don't have time to scrutinized the hundred ways each subject could be printed. So, I leave that for printing time.

 

[mooseontheloose]

I mostly shoot square because I prefer that aspect ratio, however, I am not averse to cropping in the darkroom if it improves the final image. The same can be said with any format I shoot - I compose with the full frame in mind, but I'm not a slave to it. And, depending on the situation, sometimes I know I will need to crop when I'm shooting because I can't get close enough, or get the angle I want, or...there are a variety of reasons. The only camera I shoot with that I never crop is a Holga, because I want to have the Holga look. That said, I never understand why some people think its such a big deal to crop - there are so many variables involved (camera, lens used and/or available, setting, movement of subject(s), paper sizes, etc). For me, the print is the final say - there are no rules about how I should get there.

 

[markbarendt]

If you need to crop, don't you need more practice in camera framing?

Practice is good and helpful but sometimes one simply can't get the camera close enough to the subject. Time, cliff faces, and bodies of water don't care about our camera position.

Or do you need to use a different format ratio suited to what you are trying to achieve?

Your question assumes that using as much of the frame as possible is the best choice. That's not always true.

There is a great saying I heard long ago which goes something like this; "Inside every medium format 1/2 length portrait is a great H&S portrait, and an 8x10 headshot." That idea can be stretched a bit to say "inside every 4x5 full length portrait is a great 3/4 length portrait, a 1/2 length portrait, a H&S portrait, and an 8x10 headshot."

At it's essence this saying teaches portrait shooters that a single larger negative can provide a variety of salable prints, simply by cropping differently.

Framing a bit loose also allows for more choices in the darkroom where there is comparatively lots of time available to perfect the framing.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I learned to crop the composition before I take the photograph, therefore I rarely crop in the darkroom. I do occasionally crop in the darkroom if I find something I want to remove from the print or if when I took the photograph I could not move in close enough and in that case I will crop in the darkroom however that is a planned crop.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I crop as I see fit. No rules, as I often feel that art is boundless, and we should strive to make the best at every stage of the process. We can't always make it perfect in camera, and it's FUN to explore possibilities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[canuhead]

anyone who has used rangefinders KNOWS that framing is more or less approximate and cropping will be needed if you want to clean up the periphery. I crop if I need to, esp if I see a picture within the picture (either at exposure or post)

 

[Alan W]

I agree with Canuhead.Most of my cropping happens to rangefinder shots.Shooting with a Hasselblad or most any of my Canon or Nikons tends to enable me to print the whole frame because I rarely get anything extra.

 

[Luis-F-S]

If you need to crop, don't you need more practice in camera framing? Or do you need to use a different format ratio suited to what you are trying to achieve?

Really? maybe you just need to spend more time photographing and less time on the computer.......L

 

[Bill Burk]

I don't usually crop, you can find my commentary regarding dirty black borders which can be summed up "It's too late for me, save yourself".

Today I was thinking about cropping in these specific cases:

The birds flew by today while my camera was tilted on the tripod. I hadn't had time to straighten when the decisive moment flew by. I took the shot anyway.

If it turns out to be worth it, I will have to crop.

There are a couple tufts of pampas grass near the lower-left corner of one of the compositions that felt good today.

If I didn't successfully exclude them from the frame, and if I choose to print that shot, I will have to crop.

As I was wrapping things up and heading back up the trail, I heard a loud slapping sound. I thought maybe the waves were crashing into a cave or something. But no, it was a whale breaching repeatedly. I was about 800 feet up on a bluff and only brought an 80mm slight telephoto. I took many shots, just of the whale and some horizon. If needed, since it's Panatomic-X, there is some potential to enlarge beyond the usual 10x. So I could crop closer to show the whale in more detail.

Honestly though, I think today's shots will work fine without cropping, and I think the crooked shot and the whale shots probably won't be worth printing. Some of the beauty that I saw today didn't make it to the film.

I need more practice.

 

[MattKing]

I find photography to be a continuous voyage of discovery. Sometimes, the most important discoveries happen after I have released the shutter, and before I make a final print.

If you consider cropping a failure, slides are your perfect choice for a medium.

Would you have the same opinion of a writer who works with an editor?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

One thing that forces me to crop a lot is that it's nearly impossible for me to get a picture perfectly aligned in the viewfinder. It's sheer luck if I manage to get a horizon straight, for example. It's something to do with my vision that I can't help, and it has nothing to do with practice or skill.

If you don't like to crop, then don't. If you like to crop, then do.

To me it just seems silly not to crop on general principle when a photograph could be made much better by doing the crop. What good is a rule like that? What does it actually accomplish in the end?

 

[Sirius Glass]

One thing that forces me to crop a lot is that it's nearly impossible for me to get a picture perfectly aligned in the viewfinder. It's sheer luck if I manage to get a horizon straight, for example. It's something to do with my vision that I can't help, and it has nothing to do with practice or skill.

That is why I choose a view screen for the Hasselblad with horizontal and vertical line coming out of the center of the screen. It helps line up the vertical with buildings, trees, ... and the horizontal is a great reference for the horizon.