Cropping is lame and serves to fit an agenda.
Even Henri "I never crop" Cartier-Bresson did it:
https://greg-neville.com/2012/01/07/negative-secrets/
Always adressed in photo-101 classes, rarely beyond.
as an artist, one should aim for in-canera crop
I agree. The composition comes first. But that created a problem for me and maybe others if they want to standardize a group of pictures for consistency……
None of us are perfect. Believe me, I've tried. Cropping makes up for that.Cropping is lame and serves to fit an agenda.
Also, I’m not sure what the Eliott Erwitt crop aims to prove. To me, it only proves 2 things: his camera couldn’t focus closer, and that he missed the shot. Besides, I fail to see what’s so great about it that it always has to come up as an example.
We all know that the media, documentaries and publications crop all the time, what’s so new about this? But you, as an artist, the more you crop the more you are showing to yourself your own lack of skills. I certainly wouldn’t be proud of myself to constantly need to improve my shots after the fact. But again, for publication or to fit an agenda, I totally not care what an editor does with my pics, his agenda has to be met.
Where’s the skill in composing after the fact?? LOL
Vince, When my wife and I did a car tour of the Southwest visiting all the natural parks, we stayed a couple of nights in Monument Valley on the Utah-Arizona border in the Navajo Nation. I caught this artist who was painting one of the Mittens and other monuments. What struck me is how he condensed the distance from reality between the various structures, something of course I could not do with my camera. Artists really have an advantage that we poor photographers lack. After cleaning it up and cropping it when I got home, I emailed him the picture. He asked me if I'd mind as he wanted to use it on his business card.Yes, that is a challenge and decisions are made in the process that can favor format vs. subject.
On a related note to all of this, for the past few years I have been volunteering as an “installer” at two local galleries, one at my university and one at our regional art museum. The majority of the works are paintings and they are in every conceivable size and aspect ratio. It makes me wonder, did the artists “crop” what was in their imaginations when they created these pieces? Would someone suggest they were wrong in doing so by not showing everything they could?
And, as I have learned in my volunteer capacity and in a “gallery practices” class I took last year, there are “guidelines” when it comes to displaying art, particularly flat work that is hung on a wall. It’s not simply a matter of pounding in a nail and hanging the piece on it. There is much consideration given to how the pieces work together taking in their content, the media, their size, etc. Once those decisions are made (usually not by me) the installers get out their tape measures and start doing the arithmetic that determines where those nails are placed.
Cartier-Bresson is a lot like Glenn Gould: a genius and virtuoso whose brain was wired in a very particular way, but who couldn't quite understand why the rest of the world wasn't wired the same way. They are unique, immensely original, but their method is rigid to the extreme - same piano and bench for Gould for his entire recording career, and, if you listened to Cartier-Bresson, you would only use a Leica, a 50mm lens, never crop, and only shoot "The Decisive Moment", the way he defined it, i.e., "the simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event as well as of a precise organization of forms which give that event its proper expression," that last part, he explained elsewhere, meaning things being organized in order to ressemble a letter of the alphabet (most people forget that part when talking about "the decisive moment").
I believe that is why painters think photographers have it so easy...... That's what makes photography challenging over painting. We don't have the luxury of a blank canvas.
None of us are perfect. Believe me, I've tried. Cropping makes up for that.
What struck me is how he condensed the distance from reality between the various structures, something of course I could not do with my camera. Artists really have an advantage that we poor photographers lack.
My friend Mel who passed last year was a commercial artist. he would paint from photos he or others shot. He even used some of mine. It gave him ideas. He wouldn't work in the field but from the photos in his home studio which is certainly more convenient in the bitter winter.I believe that is why painters think photographers have it so easy...
If they'd only standstill, not move and do what we say. It must be nice to be Steven Spielberg.We're all perfect, Alan. It's the world that's imperfect for not fitting nicely in our viewfinders.
That's great. Good luck. Post some pictures of your work so we can see.And this is exactly why I took up drawing a couple decades ago and what led me to the BFA degree I will complete this May. I would see something that attracted me and the resulting photograph never produced the same feeling or reaction in me. I would render the same scene in pencil or pastels and, many times, be much happier with the result. In fact, I’ve started working on a series of drawings based on past photographs.
Cool...exactly -- he knew the photographs were the easy part.My friend Mel who passed last year was a commercial artist. he would paint from photos he or others shot. He even used some of mine. It gave him ideas. He wouldn't work in the field but from the photos in his home studio which is certainly more convenient in the bitter winter.
And a mediocre craftsman.True enough. But HCB gave good picture.
Most painters start with sketches or studies. That allows them to determine the composition they will use for the final painting. Even then, painters will change or move elements in the process of producing the final work. de Kooning would use sketched elements on pieces of cut-out tracing paper that he would move around the canvas while working on a painting until he was satisfied they were the right elements in the right place..I don't know much about how painters go about making their art. I guess I assumed a painter would chose a canvas for the size of painting he had in mind. Do painters frequently make a painting and afterwards cut some canvas off if they change their mind about what they want the painting to look like?
Hire models.If they'd only standstill, not move and do what we say. It must be nice to be Steven Spielberg.
That's great. Good luck. Post some pictures of your work so we can see.
Your complaint reminds me of the saying how a painter starts with a blank canvas and paints in his vision. It's harder for the photographer. He starts with a full canvas and has to figure out how to remove those things that impede his vision.
as an artist, obe should aim for in-canera crop. As a pro, one should not care.
Sounds good. I'll have to check with my wife.Hire models.
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?