Reasons why I crop in the darkroom:
* the film aspect ratio is wrong for what I envisioned when I composed the shot
* I only had a lens slightly wider than the image I envisioned when I composed and moving closer changed the composition or was impossible
* I am using a classic rangefinder with parallax or other framing issues and I left a bit of extra space to crop off the image I wanted
* I noticed an image inside the image I thought was worthy of printing on it's own. No problem with large format
* some unnoticed detail is able to be removed without affecting the integrity of the image. For example the bed of the camera when shooting in the dark with a slow wide angle lens.
The only one I don't like is salvaging an image from a mistake which only works sometimes and never feels right.
Because I have yet to read/hear about anyone who ecourages the cropping of most images rather than those who seem to have strong opinions about cropping...
Try using an 8x10 view camera for an interior shot of a car in motion.
No, I have not tried that. My response was to a post about choosing the camera that would give you image ratio wanted without cropping. A 4x5 would do the trick in this instance, but it would still be difficult to accomplish when there are dozens and dozens of other cameras and formats (6x4.5 or 6x7come close) that would do the job easier and most probably better, but you would need to crop the image.In the past couple of days L Gebhardt, Matt, RalphLambrecht, mshchem, and Don_ih, and [trumpet blare] you have all unashamedly said you crop, and Vaughn and I, who don't crop, have said we don't object to other people cropping if that is what they want to do. Apologies if I left anyone out.
Have you tried to do that? If so, did you have excess image to crop? I am sure I could find some 4:5 aspect ratio compositions in the interior or out the windows of a car. I have a pretty versatile little 4x5 camera I could get in a car, but it would not be my first choice. Choose the right tool for the job.
It occurs to me ... when you share this view, does that make one a sharecropper?
<Runs away laughing madly...>
That brings to mind a non sequitur: Josef Koudelka--who has stated the format of the camera influences him--was shooting a Fuji 617 panoramic camera and he approached Leica about taking a Leica S2 and making it monochrome, masking the sensor and adding lines to the viewfinder to 6x17 proportions. He was please with the results and stopped using the Fuji, which was bulky and the film expense (plus the lack of 220, necessitating frequent roll changes) and fewer labs was becoming a problem for him.
In reply to your points above:-
1) You are using the wrong format for the photography you wish to do.
2) You are using the wrong focal length lens.
3) Valid, but why use a rangefinder camera for close shots?
4) Then why didn't you move closer?
5) Valid.
The only one I don't like is salvaging an image from a mistake which only works sometimes and never feels right. You have answered your own question.
Blame it on HCB and those who think art needs rules.
HCB was trained in painting and was wedded to strong compositions long before he started taking photographs. He took his background in strong geometric compositions and applied it to his photographic compositions. Cropping his photographs in his mind would destroy the composition that he had made, hence his prohibition on cropping. He was strongly single minded about this.
It takes more consideration and effort to distance yourself from your early training.
HCB was trained in painting and was wedded to strong compositions long before he started taking photographs. He took his background in strong geometric compositions and applied it to his photographic compositions. Cropping his photographs in his mind would destroy the composition that he had made, hence his prohibition on cropping. He was strongly single minded about this.
As has been stated elsewhere in this thread, cropping or no cropping are working methods adopted by photographers for diverse reasons. They are not principles.
I don’t believe he did think art needed rules. He didn’t want to do the darkroom or layout work. Composing the image was what he did, and he wanted to retain authorship of that image unaltered.Blame it on HCB and those who think art needs rules.
Not a hero, but a consistent ability to make exquisite compositions in the camera and not need to crop impresses me.Not cropping photos doesn't make anyone a hero. There's no reason anyone else should care.
1) if I can successfully get 90% of my shots where I’m happy with the camera aspect ratio I think I’m doing fine.
2) they don’t make a zoom for large format and I only want a small lens set with me
3) the super issolette is only approximate at all distance. I also don’t fully trust my Mamiya 7, but it’s better
4) usually something is in the way
why do you think my art is invalid if I crop off something extraneous that I didn’t want that surrounds the image I intended to take? My lenses have a much wider round image area. Is it also wrong not to shoot a 20x24 and get it all on film? Even then I could have stepped back more to include more, or pointed it in a different direction.
I don’t get the dogmatic thinking I see in this thread.
Not a hero, but a consistent ability to make exquisite compositions in the camera and not need to crop impresses me.
A non-standard aspect ratio is a bit of a give-away. And then grain size.Yet the vast majority of photos you will ever see, you can have no idea whether or not it was cropped.
Figuratively speaking, yes you do.You take a picture of something and then you can crop the picture. You don't crop the world with a camera.
Incidentally, there is no "in-camera" cropping. That's called "composing". Cameras don't crop. You take a picture of something and then you can crop the picture. You don't crop the world with a camera.
A non-standard aspect ratio is a bit of a give-away. And then grain size.
But I guess you are saying ‘Does it matter?’ Only if the photographer wishes to establish who was responsible for what.
Figuratively speaking, yes you do.
Figuratively speaking, yes you do.
A non-standard aspect ratio is a bit of a give-away. And then grain size.
Of course I don't think your art is invalid and I didn't say that.
"working method adopted by photographers for diverse reasons" is practically synonymous with "principle". It's very weird that you and Vaughn argue against that - what's wrong with saying you don't crop as "a matter of principle"? I don't care if that's your working method. All I was saying was it has nothing to do with anyone else.
And you seemed to agree with that (you said "Crop or don't crop; do whatever you deem gives you the best results") but then went on to post:
"cropping (gerund or present participle):
1) a species of scavenger hunt conducted by some photographers in the darkroom to see if they can find anything remotely considered a good composition in a negative they previously made
2) origin of the phrase "fix it in post""
-- which is derisive and self-congratulatory.
Not cropping photos doesn't make anyone a hero. There's no reason anyone else should 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?