This is what I was trying to say all the time, I wouldn't be surprised if the publisher/editor/graphic designer had a hand in this...
The original framing of the seated figure has more 'discours', to my humble opinion although...
Here's a fairly extreme example of cropping that I've just discovered. It's from "English Cottages and Farmhouses", a collaboration between historian/writer Olive Cook and her husband, the photographer Edwin Smith. The book as a whole is wonderful, although I wish the page size was larger and that the photos were less cruelly handled. The original of the one at bottom right of this page can be viewed here. That comparison is extreme enough, but Smith did another, wider version with a seated figure, which can also be seen here. It's wonderful. Why in the world would anyone use less than that full picture?
View attachment 296648
I would say the photographer had a share in it, through the way he framed (cropped in camera) the shot that was published. It's possible that the book designer (Pauline Baines, quite well known for her work) never saw the bigger version with the seated figure. Or that she preferred the humourless-looking lady at the top of the page and thought two figures sitting by fireplaces was too much.I wouldn't be surprised if the publisher/editor/graphic designer had a hand in this...
... It's liberating, I do what I want.
Probably because the book pages are vertical and the full picture is horizontal, and the person cropping it lacked aesthetic sensibility. He didn't do the photographer any favors by running the images all the way to the edge of the paper either.Why in the world would anyone use less than that full picture?
Yes, Jonathan, again we see how unfounded assuming and viewing from a distance can be...I would say the photographer had a share in it, through the way he framed (cropped in camera) the shot that was published. It's possible that the book designer (Pauline Baines, quite well known for her work) never saw the bigger version with the seated figure. Or that she preferred the humourless-looking lady at the top of the page and thought two figures sitting by fireplaces was too much.
Remember cropping? Here's a example: a "renowned" photographer, who shall nameless, is offing prints (inkjet) of photos taken with a digital Leica (24x36 or 2:3) in three sizes: 20x30 (2:3), 30x40 (3:4) and 40x60 (2:3). So if you go for the 30x40, you get a cropped version. What's that all about? Fitting the photograph to a standard size paper? Aesthetic integrity?
Is that the paper size with differing margins to keep the aspect ratio the same, or different aspect ratios to fill the full paper?
It is unclear. Could go either way. You are not asking me to give him the benefit of the doubt, are you? If so, selling a 26.66x40 print as a 30x40 is a real problem.For all I know, he may have cropped images for the 20x30 and 40x60 versions but kept the 2:3 aspect ratio. You just never know with these cropper guys.
Also available:
"This work is the first to offer NFTs as licensing tokens. NFT owners earn a percentage of all streaming royalties, including when the artist licenses the work to additional streaming platforms."
The initial streaming platform is SuperRare. I need to read up on it. The photographer's images there appear to be presented in a 2:3 aspect ratio.
Remember cropping? Here's a example: a "renowned" photographer, who shall nameless, is offering prints (inkjet) of photos taken with a digital Leica (24x36 or 2:3) in three sizes: 20x30 (2:3), 30x40 (3:4) and 40x60 (2:3). So if you go for the 30x40, you get a cropped version. Five inches whacked off the long end. What's that all about? Fitting the photograph to a standard size paper? Aesthetic integrity?
Fahey/Klein is a respectable gallery and I would surmise that the different print sizes are to fit standard frames and mats. The borders most probably vary by the size of the prints rather than change the cropping.The photographer is Robert LeBlanc. The portfolio in question is Gloryland. The photographs are of Pentecostal snake handlers in West Virginia. Here is the link:
GLORYLAND — ROBERT LEBLANC
This NFT collection will consist of 40 photographs, all 1 of 1 edition. GLORYLAND will be available through SuperRare on the Ethereum blockchain. GLORYLAND was awarded the Fellowship Futures Grant. The grant supported the first mint of the collection and acquisition for the Fellowship estate. Fellowwww.photosbyrobertleblanc.com
Note that while many of the images shown are in a 2:3 aspect ratio, others are not. Yet all are offered in 20x30, 30x40, and 40x60 sizes. So if not cropped to fit, the images will come with varying sized borders. One image, the one of a young man with what looks to be snake bite damage to his hand, wrist, and arm, appears to be a photograph of an older photograph. I guess if the snake handler who was injured or the person who took the photograph, or his heirs, gave permission for Robert LeBlanc to photograph it and sell copies of it, there is no problem. I see no prices listed, so I guess if you have to ask, you can't afford the prints.
Call the gallery to get cropping info. You have to anyway to get prices and to order.
If you go out and produce a painting of a landscape scene like Claude Monet, do you then go back to the studio, get out a pair of scissors and cut 3" off the side and bottom of your painting? Of course not, a photographer should compose in the given format of their choice.
I don't think anyone here is really interested in buying the photos. It is the question of principal. Not that the photographer can't crop the images anyway he sees fit, but offering different croppings would seem strange.
There are instances when one cannot compose properly in the viewfinder. Such as not having a long enough lens or an immovable obstacle such as a wall or a river in the foreground with no way to elevate the camera to eliminate it. Would you rather forego a good, cropped photo on principal?
If you go out and produce a painting of a landscape scene like Claude Monet, do you then go back to the studio, get out a pair of scissors and cut 3" off the side and bottom of your painting? Of course not, a photographer should compose in the given format of their choice.
A painter or other artist has the advantage of being able to make sketches beforehand to determine and compare compositions and cropping. And the freedom to change anything and everything if he or she so wishes.Yes this is so obvious to good photographers who eschew the crop, crop crowd.
When that happens I adjust the format or focal length or both.
The luxury of having all that at hand.
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?