Do you crop your photos?

[snusmumriken]

My Dad knew someone who was taken to see the opera Parsifal. He wasn't really into Wagner, and as it seemed to drag on quite a bit and he had no idea what the plot was, he fell asleep. Whenever he woke up, the fellows on stage were still sitting round a table, bathed in green light, singing about something or other. I get that feeling about this thread.

 

[radiant]

For most assignments, an art director is present to approve of the shot anyway and will let the photographer know to allow for bleed or where copy might be placed.

And again, same thing. You shoot for the crop. I think the interesting part of this discussion is not that are you allowed crop but more, do you shoot for the aspect ratio or for the wanted layout. That is basically the same; you compose so that there isn't need for extra crop. You take account the bleed, the logo or anything when composing.

 

[Pieter12]

And again, same thing. You shoot for the crop. I think the interesting part of this discussion is not that are you allowed crop but more, do you shoot for the aspect ratio or for the wanted layout. That is basically the same; you compose so that there isn't need for extra crop. You take account the bleed, the logo or anything when composing.

Depending on the use and layout, a vertical and a horizontal may be needed. And I forgot to add that in today's world if you are shooting celebrities, they or their management/agent/PR rep will have final say over which photo to use, maybe even how to crop it. I am so glad I am out of that business now.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Hard to fathom 16 pages about crop or no crop. All kinds of theories. There is only one sure thing: one gets in the darkroom (or to monitor) checks out the whole frame and if original idea is clearly not the one anymore, here comes a crop. Trying to stick with "no crop at any cost" is not creating anything, there is a different word for it (take a pick), but it can be argued that that is the actual taboo.

I can't imagine a vast majority taking all kinds of aspect ratios/cameras into a field and think of which one to use before a scene is shot. Composing for aspect? Yes, all the time, in a sense that whatever appears important is fit into the aspect camera is set up for, and ... see you later as to what stays afterwards. It's not about being careless with framing, but it isn't about splitting an already split hair ether. It's like trying to see if there is a rounder circle.

Typically, whatever camera is out there, it shows what it does, a scene is framed within those confines and gets later re-examined and if needed, cropped into a new shape.

But I am curious, given some responses, how much some appear to mull over the theory behind crop/no-crop, how many go out and take NO photograph in the end, due to whatever did not seem to fit whichever? Perhaps go back home, pick up another piece of gear and go back to try again?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Depending on the use and layout, a vertical and a horizontal may be needed. And I forgot to add that in today's world if you are shooting celebrities, they or their management/agent/PR rep will have final say over which photo to use, maybe even how to crop it. I am so glad I am out of that business now.

My understanding is that photographers would often submlt two pictures, one horizontal and the other in portrait format just in case it gets selected for the mag cover.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Hard to fathom 16 pages about crop or no crop. All kinds of theories. There is only one sure thing: one gets in the darkroom (or to monitor) checks out the whole frame and if original idea is clearly not the one anymore, here comes a crop. Trying to stick with "no crop at any cost" is not creating anything, there is a different word for it (take a pick), but it can be argued that that is the actual taboo.

With 35mm you are automatically screwed because either you print the whole frame and cut away paper or you have to crop because non of the standard size papers are the shape of the negative.

 

[Vaughn]

...
But I am curious, given some responses, how much some appear to mull over the theory behind crop/no-crop, how many go out and take NO photograph in the end, due to whatever did not seem to fit whichever? ...?

Happens all the time -- suppose to happen.

What am I suppose to do? Take a bunch of random images and check out the proof sheets to see if there are any images there that I can crop down to? Not the way I work, tho some do.

 

[snusmumriken]

With 35mm you are automatically screwed because either you print the whole frame and cut away paper or you have to crop because non of the standard size papers are the shape of the negative.

Ah, but the wide paper margin is useful for handling the print, plus it gives you somewhere to test what you have on your retouching brush.

 

[faberryman]

With 35mm you are automatically screwed because either you print the whole frame and cut away paper or you have to crop because non of the standard size papers are the shape of the negative.

I don't feel screwed cutting off some paper when printing 35mm full fame. If you cut the paper before you print, you can use the excess for initial test strips. Anyway, depending on print size, it could be as little as an inch or so. Of course, I understand others may have different priorities, and make different decisions with respect to financial matters. Do you crop your Hasselblad negatives to fit standard paper sizes? Maybe Hasselblad has frames you can insert in the viewfinder to facilitate that. I am not really that up on Hasselblad accessories.

 

[hoffy]

But, but, how do you include the film rebate in your final image to show your other cool friends that you are edgy and shoot film?

I suppose you can add it back in with Photoshop..... [/Sarcasm].

I shot loose and generally crop later, whether it's in the dark or digitally.

16 pages folks, I'm impressed!

 

[faberryman]

But, but, how do you include the film rebate in your final image to show your other cool friends that you are edgy and shoot film?

Showing the rebate is not really edgy. Photographers have been doing it for at least fifty or sixty years. It may even be old fashioned now. Anyway, you should be able to tell the difference between a print from film and a print from a digital camera. If you can't, I am not sure why you shoot film. If your friends can't tell the difference, maybe you need some new friends. They don't seem all that cool to me.

 

[faberryman]

My Dad knew someone who was taken to see the opera Parsifal. He wasn't really into Wagner, and as it seemed to drag on quite a bit and he had no idea what the plot was, he fell asleep. Whenever he woke up, the fellows on stage were still sitting round a table, bathed in green light, singing about something or other. I get that feeling about this thread.

My feeling is that if you want to watch a grail story, you are better off watching Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It is a lot more fun and more closely resembles this thread.

 

[faberryman]

What am I suppose to do? Take a bunch of random images and check out the proof sheets to see if there are any images there that I can crop down to?

Just think about all those opportunities for creativity you are passing up. I think that is the argument for cropping, but I may have missed something.

 

[radiant]

Just think about all those opportunities for creativity you are passing up. I think that is the argument for cropping, but I may have missed something.

I've done crazy cropping on my negatives, with approximately 6x. That is like finding new photograph inside photograph. For example: http://kuvau.tuu.fi/by-the-fence/

 

[faberryman]

I've done crazy cropping on my negatives, with approximately 6x. That is like finding new photograph inside photograph. For example: http://kuvau.tuu.fi/by-the-fence/

I don't think anyone is disputing that you sometimes win a prize when you go on a scavenger hunt. By the way, is that really the amount of grain you get when you enlarge 6x?

 

[snusmumriken]

My feeling is that if you want to watch a grail story, you are better off watching Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It is a lot more fun and more closely resembles this thread.

Very good point.

 

[warden]

I'm showing my teenager the film photography ropes with his grandfather's Pentax K1000. He's making his own images, developing film, and making prints in my darkroom. It's just the best fun to walk and shoot with him, and explore the city.

He made a good photo and print a few weeks ago, and I asked him to examine the print and dream up an alternative crop for us to try. He ended up changing his full frame landscape orientation to a portrait orientation, and I like the two versions equally. He does too.

 

[Vaughn]

Just think about all those opportunities for creativity you are passing up. I think that is the argument for cropping, but I may have missed something.

That would have been fine during the first decade of my photographing as I was developing the way I see and work in photography. Now I use my creatively to see.
Looking at work of others will do as much for developing the ability to see as practicing cropping -- and if cropping turns one on, one can even start cropping the work of others for practice.

 

[Vaughn]

I've done crazy cropping on my negatives, with approximately 6x. That is like finding new photograph inside photograph. For example: http://kuvau.tuu.fi/by-the-fence/

Technically cropping, but I would call that more like an exploration.

 

[MattKing]

And again, same thing. You shoot for the crop. I think the interesting part of this discussion is not that are you allowed crop but more, do you shoot for the aspect ratio or for the wanted layout. That is basically the same; you compose so that there isn't need for extra crop. You take account the bleed, the logo or anything when composing.

There probably are publications where the photographer will know ahead of time what the crop will be - LP record album covers come to mind - but in most cases you are at the mercy of the art director or other person who actually makes the decision.
When I used to photograph for publication, I got to know the tendencies, but while that might have informed some of my decisions, I never felt particularly constrained by them.
And by the way, most of that was shot on 35mm, and I would hazard a guess that less than 5% of the images actually published were published in a 3:2 aspect ratio - everything ended up being cropped - sometimes by me, sometimes by my editors, sometimes by both.

 

[Pieter12]

I shoot a fair amount of candid photography (I really dislike the term "street") and most of the time, there is not the opportunity to get into the optimal position or change lenses to have everything as you would prefer it to be in the viewfinder. There's no going back with a different camera, the action may never repeat, the subjects may never be there again. So I crop as needed to get the best image from the negative.

 

[markjwyatt]

My feeling is that if you want to watch a grail story, you are better off watching Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It is a lot more fun and more closely resembles this thread.

What is your favorite color?

 

[faberryman]

When I used to photograph for publication, I got to know the tendencies, but while that might have informed some of my decisions, I never felt particularly constrained by them.
And by the way, most of that was shot on 35mm, and I would hazard a guess that less than 5% of the images actually published were published in a 3:2 aspect ratio - everything ended up being cropped - sometimes by me, sometimes by my editors, sometimes by both.

It is certainly reasonable to leave room for cropping when you know someone else will be doing the cropping. I sometimes think about Penn and Avedon. I have seen their work in shows at galleries and in museums, and in books, but I don't think I have seen their work as it appeared in Vogue, other than for a few covers. It might make for an interesting comparison, to learn if the marketing guys were cropping their photographs. Their photographs look pretty perfect to me. I certainly wouldn't want to be the one second guessing their compositions. But of course they had so much more creative control than the guys doing product shots for make-up and shampoo.

 

[faberryman]

What is your favorite color?

So many great lines.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Happens all the time -- suppose to happen.

What am I suppose to do? Take a bunch of random images and check out the proof sheets to see if there are any images there that I can crop down to? Not the way I work, tho some do.