Some thoughts along what Matt said. Loren has indicated shooter: medium format so it is possible that the original negative was square format giving him option for various cropping situations. Also being a predominately square medium format shooter myself, I will purposely include extra information that I can crop when printing as well as not noticing something when making the original exposure often to a pleasant surprise. As an example, until I cropped and printed this image I didn't notice how many stripes on all the peoples clothing there was since I was concerned about catching the right moment.
Opinions please, "Couples", crop this image or not?
-
A
- Thread starter Loren Sattler
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale NIKON D800 (read)
- Started by Acere
-
Want to Buy WTB Konica Hexar RF
- Started by axestrata
-
For Sale Multiple Signed Photographic Books
- Started by tallenpatterson
-
Want to Buy Color by Beseler Print Processing Drums
- Started by logan2z
Forum statistics
I lean toward keeping it as is, but there surely are (as we see here!) a number of subjective possible ideas about what the picture is. I like the overview which conveys a sense of a huge 3-D space with the people indicating it's an inhabited space but fleshed out as an environment. The well-defined major elements form a composition not all that complex, yet one can keep drilling deeper and finding more details holding one's attention.
(But that's me -- and in general I like trees!
)
(But that's me -- and in general I like trees!
)
While the first one is interesting, I like the second one better. It is a matter of taste, so there is no wrong answer.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2009
- Messages
- 1,235
- Format
- Multi Format
This option draws the eye through the image, seeing both couples. It would be my choice.
I have to say, I like Helge's option the best. The couple with the dog has more character, I am drawn right to them, then up the tree to discover the couple on the terrace. The couple on the right is ordinary and just a distraction.
Of course there's no right answer. FWIW, if I encountered this image in a gallery, I would think the tree is the subject, not the couples. The tree dominates the frame and the couples are at the periphery. But that's me.
You are not the only one.
The tree is the most interesting part of the photograph.
I can't tell, the file sizes are too large to view either one w/o scrolling up or down on my laptop. I'd probably want to crop out the people at the top if I could see it all at once though. If there are people in a composition, no matter what else is going on our eyes tend to go to them first.
In this case, w/ them being so high up, it takes our attention away from the folks lower down and leads our eyes right out of the image. Nailing down the 4 corners and to a lesser extent the 4 sides is crucial to a strong composition (in most cases).
In this case, w/ them being so high up, it takes our attention away from the folks lower down and leads our eyes right out of the image. Nailing down the 4 corners and to a lesser extent the 4 sides is crucial to a strong composition (in most cases).
Last edited:
I like Helge's version as well. The couple on the right are way too close to the edge for my liking and with all three couples it's way too busy.
The tree, to me, is the subject and the couples at left and top are nice supporting subjects.
The tree, to me, is the subject and the couples at left and top are nice supporting subjects.
MattKing
Moderator
I take so many photographs of trees, that I find the trio of couples the most interesting part of the photograph.
Which is just to say that we all bring our own interests and preferences and experiences to the question.
Print both and hang them in different rooms.
I don't think it's for us to judge the merits of the photograph. Matt likes the couples. The OP had his reasons for framing this image as he did. But for the OP's invitation to reconsider it, I would find it presumptuous to offer an opinion. But since we are all now in a discussion, in effect, of what we would do if it were our photograph: I would look for a way to put the strong lines of the image to work, while not dwarfing the human (and canine) element. My crop, attached. (Which might be better titled, Trio.)
Attachments
MattKing
Moderator
I'm guessing that the members here that believe that one should never crop are being driven crazy by this thread.
I never think it a bad idea to tell people how I see things, when people express interest in how things are seen by others. Constructively, of course. It is a privilege to be invited to contribute.
I never think it a good idea to tell people what they should do with their photos, because that is indeed presumption.
I really enjoy it when people want to talk about my photos.
I never think it a bad idea to tell people how I see things, when people express interest in how things are seen by others. Constructively, of course. It is a privilege to be invited to contribute.
I never think it a good idea to tell people what they should do with their photos, because that is indeed presumption.
I really enjoy it when people want to talk about my photos.
Use ctrl - to shrink the image
OP
OP
Thank you for all of the interesting comments and suggestions for this image. It has been fun digesting everyone’s thoughts. One thing confirmed here is that human nature has everyone seeing images differently.
My thoughts:
1) I never noticed the couple overhead in the image until they were mentioned here in the forum. Same for the dog for that matter. Isn’t that wild and ironic! Several comments relate to the importance of the overhead couple and the dog. They were never important to me.
2) The image initially was not about couples at all. I chose that title spontaneously when I uploaded the scan to the Gallery (you feel obligated to name your image when uploading).
3) At the time of shooting two things drew me to the image. First, the contrast of the tree against the brightly lit stone behind. The quality of the light created a beautiful mood that I wanted to capture. . Secondly, I saw the symmetry of the two couples sitting on either side of the tree, but the tree was the focus of my efforts. I thought the symmetrical pair of couples would enhance the composition of the tree. (Maybe I should have named the photo “Dark Tree”.)
4) After printing initially a couple of years went by and I reprinted the negative again recently. After posting on the gallery I found myself distracted with the upper dark area pulling my attention away from the tree. That is what prompted me to pose the question here about cropping.
After considering everyone’s input I am still undecided. No big deal, I am happy full framed or cropped. If cropping, I like Matt King’s approach best, but all of the suggestions have merit. Matt's suggestion: crop some of the top, but not all and crop a little on the LH side. This moves the tree a little more left of center which I feel is an improvement. It also moves the LH couple closer to the edge, more symmetrical with the RH couple. When shooting I wish I had left a little more border on the RH side of the negative. The couple needs a little more space.
So here is Matt’s crop along with a color iPhone image that will represent what I saw when composing the photo. This cropped image is a scan of a 5 x 7 work print. It should display smaller (easier to view) on the screen than my other scans which were of 8 x 10 prints.
Incidentally the photos was taken in Barcelona in November 2019, Nikon F2, 35mm lens, T-max 100 film.
Thanks again to everyone that offered their insight. Great range of opinions.
My thoughts:
1) I never noticed the couple overhead in the image until they were mentioned here in the forum. Same for the dog for that matter. Isn’t that wild and ironic! Several comments relate to the importance of the overhead couple and the dog. They were never important to me.
2) The image initially was not about couples at all. I chose that title spontaneously when I uploaded the scan to the Gallery (you feel obligated to name your image when uploading).
3) At the time of shooting two things drew me to the image. First, the contrast of the tree against the brightly lit stone behind. The quality of the light created a beautiful mood that I wanted to capture. . Secondly, I saw the symmetry of the two couples sitting on either side of the tree, but the tree was the focus of my efforts. I thought the symmetrical pair of couples would enhance the composition of the tree. (Maybe I should have named the photo “Dark Tree”.)
4) After printing initially a couple of years went by and I reprinted the negative again recently. After posting on the gallery I found myself distracted with the upper dark area pulling my attention away from the tree. That is what prompted me to pose the question here about cropping.
After considering everyone’s input I am still undecided. No big deal, I am happy full framed or cropped. If cropping, I like Matt King’s approach best, but all of the suggestions have merit. Matt's suggestion: crop some of the top, but not all and crop a little on the LH side. This moves the tree a little more left of center which I feel is an improvement. It also moves the LH couple closer to the edge, more symmetrical with the RH couple. When shooting I wish I had left a little more border on the RH side of the negative. The couple needs a little more space.
So here is Matt’s crop along with a color iPhone image that will represent what I saw when composing the photo. This cropped image is a scan of a 5 x 7 work print. It should display smaller (easier to view) on the screen than my other scans which were of 8 x 10 prints.
Incidentally the photos was taken in Barcelona in November 2019, Nikon F2, 35mm lens, T-max 100 film.
Thanks again to everyone that offered their insight. Great range of opinions.
OP
OP
Here are the photos as "thumbnails", maybe more viewable?
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 625
- Format
- Multi Format
There are lots of powerful images (photographs and otherwise) with strong visual elements bisecting the picture. In fact, @logan2z has shared one in the "Show your framed pictures on the wall" thread recently, and Lee Friedlander, among others, has made many, many successful photographs with such occurrences.
Referring to foc's response to a post of mine in another thread, I don't think that this observation will be too well-received, because it breaks one of the sacred "rules of composition."
Funny. There was a time when I took great pains to avoid splitting a photo into two equal halves with the horizon, a tree or anything else. I also jumped through hoops to avoid telephone poles, power lines, road signs, etc, in my photos. I was shooting slides, so no cropping.
A few years ago I enrolled in a medium format photography class at my local university. As part of that class, I was assigned the task of discussing the photography of Lee Friedlander -- perhaps because the instructor noticed I was interested in similar subject matter. At first, his telephone poles - sometimes right down the middle of the composition - made me crazy. I am pretty sure that's why he did it -- a middle finger for the rule makers. Now you will often see powerlines and telephone poles in my photos, too, though almost never on a midline.
As for the composition under discussion, I prefer @Rolleiflexible's version in post #43. In every version which includes the couple on the right (ground level) I am bothered by how close to the edge of the frame they are. Like, fingernails-on-chalkboard bothered. I am sure they are very nice people, but I am happy to be rid of them.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 625
- Format
- Multi Format
Several years ago I set up a 6x17 on a tripod at an intersection with a utility pole right in front of the camera (maybe 10 feet away). I moved the camera around a bit to find the final composition, but the pole was still right there. I asked my son to stand in a particular location within the frame. He was about 12 at the time, and he said "But what are you going to do about the telephone pole?" My response was "I'm going to take the #@&$! picture, that's what I'm going to do!"
No children's brains were harmed in the making of that picture.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |