Some of the most iconic photographs of the century are actually cropped versions

[Rayt]

I have nothing against cropping but I try not to do it. It is just a discipline I impose on myself. I noticed in the beginning when I started printing that I crop because I wasn't close enough. Instead of cropping the final image I tried to improve my photography during exposure. This is just between me and my craft, and I have nothing against it in general. When I see a photo I like very much I do not ask the photographer to show me the negative?!?

 

[codester80]

One of those limitations being that the camera format doesn't suit the picture. Have you ever used a square-format camera? Did you feel obliged to compose only square pictures? Have you never shot a photograph where you deliberately composed the picture to be longer and thinner than the format of the camera in your hands? Or shorter and squarer?

The "no crop, ever" fantasy is normally based on the (long, thin) 35mm format, and is most often embraced by mindless Cartier-Bresson fanboys.

Cheers,

R.

Thank you for illustrating my point of using a crop to overcome the limitation at the time a photograph is made. If all you have at hand is a square format camera but see a photograph requiring a longer, thinner format, you shoot with the intent of cropping later.
Incidentally, I can't recall a time when I deliberately composed for a format other than for the camera in my hand, outside of the aforementioned limitation situation. A big part of photography is selecting the right tool for the job. I don't think I'm unique in approaching image making by adhering to the native format of the camera in my hands. If that happens to be a square, I seek out images in a square format or if an image I have in mind requires a square format I will use a square format camera. Same for 35mm, panorama, 6x9, 8x10, etc.
If you had continued to read my post, you would have discovered I have indeed cropped and have cropped a lot of photos over the years. I'm not opposed to cropping. I just happen to fall on the side of avoiding it whenever possible.

An interesting tidbit about the no-crop club is that it's not all centred around Bresson. In fact it could be argued Bresson has nothing to do with the no-crop fanboy club. How often were his images printed with the rebate showing? He may well have printed his images full frame but not with the black border we have come to associate with the no-crop crowed.
The printing of full-frame with the black border became increasingly popular during the 60s and 70s among photojournalists, specifically conflict photographers, to show off their bravado. It was proof to other PJs they had gotten "close enough" in the words of Capa. The black borders proclaimed the tightly framed images of war and death were not done at a distance with a telephoto but with wide angle lenses, up close. It was a form of bragging you had the skill to frame a great photo amidst the chaos. This idea of framing an image under pressure (whether simply on the street or under fire) carried over to other photographic genres.
Printing the rebate border is also a way of proving a photograph of a scene has not been altered or censored through cropping, as a way of trying to establish a truth to the image presented (with the caveat always being the photographer can alter and censor through what he chooses to photography or how he frames a scene in the viewfinder.) It was an attempt to live up to the "a photograph doesn't lie" idea.
The no-crop, black border club was created by PJs as a sort-of secret handshake of sorts and as an attempt to illustrate the objectiveness of the images created. Today we've been left with the simple aesthetic and a vague notion of "pure" photography.

 

[photomoof]

The thread did make me think about why I don't crop artwork, when in fact I crop "junk" photos, like vacation stuff, and commercial web-shots all the time.

Almost all my artwork, has been on reversal color stock, so it really just never occurred to me to crop. All of my work was studied, not meant to be a material for a different "created" image.

I view photography purely as a document.

My prints usually ended up with a minimal rebate when framed, not really a hugely conscious thought, and I doubt I would do it that way now (see attached Cibachrome, framed by a museum in 1985).

I picked images on a light table, talked to my printer, who took notes, and they were printed. It would simply never have occurred to me to say "take a little off that edge."

Photoshop and digital has of course made cropping so easy than I don't even consciously think about it. And I admit, until I finally bought a full frame DSLR, I never recognized the shapes which were being offered to me, the whole non-35mm frame issue made me uncomfortable. I don't like a lot of choices.

So for me personally, it's not really about cropping, as much as it is about not messing about too much with images. I don't really care about the images, only about what they document, what is in them, is what is in them.

And yet I like highly manipulated images, so go figure.

All I can say for sure is none of this has anything whatsoever to do with black and white prints made by photographers from Europe, for me personally. Gezz...

 

[FrankS]

Photomoof, you understand that the type of photography you do (I presume it is miniature models in a custom built set) is very different from say, street photography where there is relatively little control of what's happening.

 

[photomoof]

Photomoof, you understand that the type of photography you do (I presume it is miniature models in a custom built set) is very different from say, street photography where there is relatively little control of what's happening.

I plan photos, and I change things, but I guess I don't "repair" images, I leave that to editors. Almost all of my photos in print and TV have been cropped.

I just do photos again the way I want them. Even "street" I do over, of course if one is taking a photo of LHO being shot by Ruby, one only gets the single opportunity. But nothing I shoot truly happens only once.