Image cropping, Yes or No?

[Roger Cole]

I'm still "fully responsible" for what's in the image. What the heck difference does it make if I make include/exclude decisions in the camera or in the darkroom? The distinction seems pretty silly and artificial to me.

 

[cliveh]

I'm still "fully responsible" for what's in the image. What the heck difference does it make if I make include/exclude decisions in the camera or in the darkroom? The distinction seems pretty silly and artificial to me.

When you are in the darkroom you can't print what you excluded from the image in the camera.

 

[erikg]

Does it really matter?

I'm sure most of us try to get it right in the camera. I'm sure most of us crop when we print.

I guess there's no point for anyone else to answer, thanks.

 

[Roger Cole]

When you are in the darkroom you can't print what you excluded from the image in the camera.

That's true, and that argues for including more than you think you want, at least with medium or large format, because you can always exclude more later.

But my point is just that whether it's composed in the camera or additional composing (including changing the shape - I often print rectangular from my 6x6 negs, in various ratios) *I* am still responsible for it. Refining composition in the darkroom is just another tool.

 

[cliveh]

That's true, and that argues for including more than you think you want, at least with medium or large format, because you can always exclude more later.

But my point is just that whether it's composed in the camera or additional composing (including changing the shape - I often print rectangular from my 6x6 negs, in various ratios) *I* am still responsible for it. Refining composition in the darkroom is just another tool.

I agree, but by including more than you think you want, is that not saying you are not really uncertain about what you wish to capture? And if so, surely the darkroom work is a repair job.

 

[Roger Cole]

Depends. Note that I seldom intentionally "include more than I want" unless I know I'll print horizontal or vertical and I'm shooting with a square camera, or in the case where I can't get close enough or use a long enough but not too long lens.

But one could be working quickly and know that you can look at it more closely later too.

We make other creative decisions in the darkroom that almost no one blinks about - dodging, burning, overall print density, contrast range, bleaching, pre-flashing, toning the image and so on. Why on earth is cropping not treated as just as respectable as all the others?

 

[cliveh]

Depends. Note that I seldom intentionally "include more than I want" unless I know I'll print horizontal or vertical and I'm shooting with a square camera, or in the case where I can't get close enough or use a long enough but not too long lens.

But one could be working quickly and know that you can look at it more closely later too.

We make other creative decisions in the darkroom that almost no one blinks about - dodging, burning, overall print density, contrast range, bleaching, pre-flashing, toning the image and so on. Why on earth is cropping not treated as just as respectable as all the others?

Because it effects the entire integrity of the original image?

 

[Bill Burk]

Apart from SLRs with 100% viewing (Nikon F etc) cameras with viewfinders do not afford precise framing so the presentation of full frame pictures with a black "verification border" is a technical affectation. That doesn't negate the right of the photographer to claim responsibility for the content. It does however undo fantasy claims that the photographer composed right to the edges.

Both my examples were rangefinder, and I'll own up to the inaccurate centering of Aidan in Bubblegum Alley due to possible Parallax error. I live with some goofs. As cliveh pointed out, it's a weak composition horizontally. I must have difficulty composing when the subject matter is simple. Ava in Mendocino though, is a brilliant example of fantasy composition. A Bessa II rangefinder does not give accurate composition, so plenty of allowance for slop (bleed) in arrangement is necessary to get a successful shot to the edges with a camera that doesn't give accurate framing.

 

[Roger Cole]

Because it effects the entire integrity of the original image?

It does? I don't see that, no more than, say, dodging.

 

[cliveh]

It does? I don't see that, no more than, say, dodging.

I rest my case.

 

[Roger Cole]

What case? Or is that your point?

 

[Bill Burk]

Cropping is a viable, valid and powerful means of creativity. I would ask nobody to change if they use cropping to eke the n'th degree of perfection from an image. Because that is what cropping does very well.

cliveh, I think you are saying the same... but that you would discourage your students from using that as a crutch for sloppy composition while shooting.

 

[BrianShaw]

At times like this I become increasingly convinced that Clive is Roger Hicks in disquise.

 

[Alan Klein]

Why would it matter if different formats pop up? I do this too, but happily crop to suit, some vertical some horizontal etc.

I use fades where one shot fades into another. It has a nicer and more consistant flow when everything is the same size. Verticles do present a problem though. So do movie clips when they're different. Sometimes I'll deliberately shoot 4:3 movies rather than 16:9 so that when I fade stills into movies and back again in the same "slide show".

 

[Roger Cole]

Ah ok. I've had a friend do that with my shots - with permission, I sent him scans of the slides I shot at group functions and he put together a slide show on his TV - but it was sort of an aside to the "real" slide show which I projected old fashion style.

 

[Alan Klein]

This whole thread reminded me when I use to shoot chromes and project slide shows. The only modifiation you were allowed was to not include the bad slides in the show, a related form of cropping I suppose. Other than that, no crops, no lighting or color adjustments, no nothing. It forced you to try to get the best shot in the camera; a good practice. It was also a lot of fun because you didn't have to worry about editing an individual slide other than burning it. Of course most of my shots were from vacations. So there was a lot of allowances for bad aesthetics since the content had to do with a record of the vacation to talk about. However, even then, I shot for good and interesting content and composition. It's too late for cropping or Photoshop then.

 

[Bill Burk]

This whole thread reminded me when I use to shoot chromes and project slide shows.

And each slide was mercilessly cropped by the cardboard mount.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

"Fit the image to the view", essentially, in-camera cropping. I have never, ever cropped any print that has been framed, in 30 years of practice, I just have not done it, that's the way I learned three decades ago. Everything is watched in the viewfinder: only what is desired is there and no more than I wish.

 

[Alan Klein]

And each slide was mercilessly cropped by the cardboard mount.

I probably didn't notice. I was shooting with a camera that had less than 100% view in the finder so the part that was cropped by the cardboard I never saw!

Which of course raises the point. What do people do who don't see all of the image the film is capturing?

 

[Roger Cole]

They used to make slide mounts with smaller windows and, I think, even different frame shapes for SOME selection in cropping.

None the less, all my projected slides are shot on 35mm and the vast majority are shot with a zoom. That makes "in camera cropping" much easier.

I'll just happily continue to crop away any time I think it improves the final print and y'all that don't like or approve of that can continue insisting every print you make is full frame then, ok? So everybody is happy?

 

[erikg]

I probably didn't notice. I was shooting with a camera that had less than 100% view in the finder so the part that was cropped by the cardboard I never saw!

Which of course raises the point. What do people do who don't see all of the image the film is capturing?

You don't need to see it in the viewfinder to know. Composition happens in the eye, I know where the frame falls. I'm never surprised by anything at the edges unless it's a total grab shot, over the head kind of thing. If I can put my head where the camera is I'll know what I'll get.

 

[Maris]

As you state that most of your photographs are cropped, but your latest exhibition features full frame, does this mean you are changing your style and approach to photography?

Both approaches have powers, just different implications, and it's an advantage to knowingly use one or the other to optimise an artistic statement.

 

[BrianShaw]

... I'll just happily continue to crop away any time I think it improves the final print and y'all that don't like or approve of that can continue insisting every print you make is full frame then, ok? So everybody is happy?

Quite happy. That is "the right attitude" if you ask me.

 

[fotch]

The only Rule I follow is "There are no rules"!

 

[Soeren]

And each slide was mercilessly cropped by the cardboard mount.

Nitpicker
I used to shoot slides for projection exclusively and that tought me to frame, compose, include and exclude in the finder. Somehow I also find it makes me apreciate the different formats more but thats propably just me, YMMV.

Composing to the viewfinder is a silly and artificial constraint. It is in the same class of declasse affectations as rough borders produced by filed carrier edges. The eye does not see that way. I crop or not depending upon what is required by the subject. I eliminate what is not germane to the image.

Making the most of your format can never be a silly and artificial constraint. Moving up format to allow for cropping seem to be a heavy and expensive way of doing photography
Finetuning is ok if unavoidable but the making of a strong composition before exposure is what makes you do your best. Has "I can fix that later in....." mentality infected the analoque world. I like to try and visualize the final image when I look in the finder or at the groundglass and if I fail I mostly also fail in resurecting the image through cropping but again thats just me, YMV
Best regards