Do you crop?

Do you crop?

  • I will crop without hesitation

    Votes: 99 50.3%

  • I don't crop or try my best not to

    Votes: 55 27.9%

  • It depends / other (there always seems to be a need for this option)

    Votes: 43 21.8%
  • Total voters
    197
  • Poll closed .
I can understand both sides.

The desire to execute brilliance in the moment of performance.

The desire to interact with a creative work over a longer period of time, and allow for things to emerge that you didn't imagine when you first set out.
 
Hi,

I agree with this. This sounds reasonable. Although I personally do not enjoy Photoshop or the idea of doing a lot of post-processing. Not so much because I want it perfect in-camera but more because I don't want to sit at the computer for hours figuring out Photoshop. :bang:

Reprinting and cropping old work? The idea of going back to revisit work long done is silly to me. I'd have no time to do any work today if I was forever going back to past work and trying to get it better. You can only improve in the future, not in the past. There has to be a time when you accept it as your best at-the-time, learn your lesson and then kiss it good-bye and move on.
rohankent said:
I can understand both sides.

The desire to execute brilliance in the moment of performance.

The desire to interact with a creative work over a longer period of time, and allow for things to emerge that you didn't imagine when you first set out.
Click to expand...


As I read this thread it seems that a lot of what I like and do is considered strange or macho? However I came to my own conclusions largely in a vacuum, simply addressing my needs for the work I was trying to do at the time.
Originally Posted by thegman
. . .
1) Cropping - not keen, but I'll do it.
2) Zoom lenses - fine.
3) Autofocus - fine.
4) Digital - Not really
5) Photoshop - Not really.
. . .
Click to expand...
Cropping - Don't want to need to do it. I enjoy the challenge of getting it right at the moment of exposure. I also hate Photoshop and want to only do the bare minimum if necessary.
Zoom lenses - I don't have any so I don't use them. If I found one fast enough for my available-light photography I might consider getting one. If I have other needs in the future and a zoom is a good tool for that, then sure, why not.
Auto-focus - I've heard it's unreliable in low light (although that was at least a decade ago and I simply haven't bothered to check into it again). I don't see how it can be faster than pre-focusing.
Digital - Can't say I'm that famillar, just another type of image recorder. Vastly more convenient than film within it's range. Film is vastly superior where only it can go; perhaps large format or ISO above 3200? You guys probably know better.
Photoshop - Hate it, but it's necessary at times. No doubt a very good tool that I simply don't know how to use very well.
 
Crop away , but usually because there is something in the edge of the frame . Rarely to I change the aspect ratio.
 
Doug said:
Well, traditionally, slides are displayed by projection onto a screen, as shot. So getting it right in-camera was important.

Though if one were to print a slide, which was a rather sad proposition (IMHO of course) with internegatives until Cibachrome came along, then of course straightening & cropping was as easy as with any other printing.

Pro photographers shot transparencies, easy for the editorial staff to spread out the take on light tables, and easy to adjust a bit for magazine use. Serious amateurs mostly projected them, and on a lower status color negative film was for snapshots.
Click to expand...

Got it.
Appreciate the education, Doug!

I thought there is something inherently different in printing slides (with an enlarger) a slide that makes it impossible to crop.
 
Souljer said:
. . . Reprinting and cropping old work? The idea of going back to revisit work long done is silly to me. I'd have no time to do any work today if I was forever going back to past work and trying to get it better. You can only improve in the future, not in the past. There has to be a time when you accept it as your best at-the-time, learn your lesson and then kiss it good-bye and move on.
...
Click to expand...
Sometimes the lesson I learn is that I've taken quite a lot of good pictures over the last 46 years and that from time to time they are useful. When they are, I dig them out and use them. Sometimes, too, Frances can reprint one of my old negatives much better than I did (say) 30 years ago. If I want it for an exhibition, or if I'd just like to have a better print, then NOT reprinting would be even sillier.

Anyone who regards their old work as being fit only to 'kiss goodbye' must never have taken any good pictures in the past.

Cheers,

R.
 
Hi,
Roger Hicks said:
Sometimes the lesson I learn is that I've taken quite a lot of good pictures over the last 46 years and that from time to time they are useful. When they are, I dig them out and use them. Sometimes, too, Frances can reprint one of my old negatives much better than I did (say) 30 years ago. If I want it for an exhibition, or if I'd just like to have a better print, then NOT reprinting would be even sillier.
Click to expand...
I did not say never ever print again no matter what. If you have an exhibition and you want new prints obviously that's a current project. I'm happy for your, by all means, make the best of it you can. I've had experience with artists before where they can't let something go. They are always going back and reworking things that are finished, even months or years later. There comes a point where that is not constructive and the thing will not get better than it already is. That's why I said you can't improve in the past, only in the future. :)
 
We are in complete agreement about the pointlessness of infinite reworking. There's an old saying: "Every work of art needs two people. The artist to create it, and someone to kill him when it's finished." There is however a difference between infinite reworking and seeing how to improve past work. It's not a desperate hunt to redeem the irredeemable, as you imply. Rather, it's seeing from a more mature viewpoint, and with greater knowledge and skill, how it could be better..

As for "must have learned a lot from it and is ready to apply that to new, future work", no, that's at best a half truth. Note, at best. Some things you get right at the time, be it 10, 20, 30 years ago, and whether you get it right by accident or design. "Kissing it goodbye" means you learned NOTHING: you no longer value good work. Anyone who says that they kiss all their older work goodbye is seeking only novelty, and is unable to recognize quality when it exists. Or, as I said, they've never produced anything of quality.

Cheers,

R.
 
Souljer said:
Hi,

In Your Opinion.

I have a different outlook and definition of what I wrote.
Click to expand...
Would you care to make your definitions clearer?

Also, of course all opinions are not equal. The only way to lend an opinion validity is to defend it. Merely stating it (or worse still, restating it) will not do.

Cheers,

R.
 
Ahhh, cropping. I don't remember ever reading any compositional rules either for or against cropping. To be brutally truthful, this usually isn't what I spend most of my time thinking about when I am taking pictures. Of course I try to frame the picture and eliminate unnecessary things but what I consider necessary at the time, and what seems necessary later on can be radically different.

Once in a while I like what I see right off the bat and it seems a waste of time to clip anything at all. My time is better spent improving what I have in the darkroom or on the computer.

But...I have also been known to get three or four prints from one negative.

Maybe in the future I'll be more worried about this but right now cropping is just one of the editing tools I have at my disposal...and I still need all the tools I can get my hands on! :)
 
Sometimes I do (a little), because I have a 97% coverage viewfinder and sometimes things creep up on the edge of the frames I didn't see in my viewfinder. I try to not crop further than that because it totally changes the perspective of the picture. Rather take multiple shots or re-try again at a later time to get the picture right.
 
I cropped w/o hesitation if the shot calls for it. I would rather have the shot w/ the wrong lens or wrong initial composition (w/ intent to fix later) then no shot at all because I spent time fumbling around due to the fluidity of the situation.

Gary
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
Sometimes the lesson I learn is that I've taken quite a lot of good pictures over the last 46 years and that from time to time they are useful. When they are, I dig them out and use them. Sometimes, too, Frances can reprint one of my old negatives much better than I did (say) 30 years ago. If I want it for an exhibition, or if I'd just like to have a better print, then NOT reprinting would be even sillier.

Anyone who regards their old work as being fit only to 'kiss goodbye' must never have taken any good pictures in the past.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Plus 1

What one initially thinks is good or bad.. Over time and changes in personal taste for example, revisiting some of these pictures you may change your mind in terms of composition and framing or you may even dece that you no longer like it.

When I have looked back at some shots I took in the 70s for example tere are ones I initially did not like and now I have found I like them much better. I could be something u did recently may ave given u a perspective change that can be applied to your older work.

Gary
 
I crop almost everything to some extent. For one thing, I really like the 8x10 aspect ratio and use that as my default crop...but I won't hesitate a bit to change to any ratio if I feel the image warrants it.

If I could never crop, I think I would want a square frame camera !
 
Never crop film negatives. Doesn't seem right for some reason. Yet, oddly, I have no such strong opinion about cropping digital shots. Maybe because I think of my digital camera as having all the warmth and sentiment of a xerox machine. Might as well do what looks best, I think. After all, it's only digital crap.
 
well said.

also, i love your tumblr site -- following now.

sdotkling said:
Never crop film negatives. Doesn't seem right for some reason. Yet, oddly, I have no such strong opinion about cropping digital shots. Maybe because I think of my digital camera as having all the warmth and sentiment of a xerox machine. Might as well do what looks best, I think. After all, it's only digital crap.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom