• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Cropping Conundrum

Kyle Nagel

New member
I recently shot an image down in Florida that to me seems to have some potential, When I took it I originally imagined the shot somewhat similar to what you will see here, I have only cropped a very small portion around the outside. As I considered different versions (Square with the excess removed from the top, or Landscape with even more image removed from the top and some more from the bottom), I decided I like my original vision, it gave a greater sense of isolation to the bird and the contrasting color (green) at the top added another element. Since deciding on this I have had a couple people suggest there is too much at the top and coming in tighter on the bird and eliminating most of the top would be better, my problem being if I spend too much time on an image I start losing the "freshness" needed to assess it properly, I keep thinking I need to do more to it for some reason and more often than not I don't. So I throw it out to the masses here, any input as to the current crop or suggestions to improve it are welcome.

http://nagkyl.tripod.com/samples/Bird1-01.jpg

(I don't understand but creating a link or posting the image as a link does not work, but if I copy and paste it into my browser it will work fine, I guess I'll have to sort it out later but in the mean time you can just copy the link above into a new window to view it, sorry I will try figure out the problem this weekend)

Kyle
 
Last edited:

Diane Fields

New member
Asher Kelman said:
With Safari, at least, no picture shows either way so far!

Asher

I right clicked over the image logo, copied URL in the properties and opened in another window. That gets me to the image---bu now I'll reread what Kyle said.
 
Hi Kyle,

I did the same thing as Diane, and was able to view the image. Just in case there is a problem where the image is located, I took the liberty of relocating it to facilitate everyone seeing it easily here:

Original.jpg


As you indicate, I think there is some potential in the image, but it is challenging to bring it out. I took it into Photoshop, and played around some with cropping, as well as adjusting curves/levels/saturation. This is the result:

OPF3.jpg


I found the incompelte reflection of legs and body/feathers to be distracting, along with the other elements at the very bottom of the image, and I wasn't convinced the material on the top was adding anything either, so I cropped it all away. The PS adjustments intent was to emphasize the glow in the water and contrast with the rest of the scene.

I do have to say, though, that to my eye, I find too many distracting elements remaining, so that even though I can see what you're going for here, I'm not convinced this particular scene and setting will allow you to realize it.

Your thoughts?
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Encouraged by Diane, I pasted the URL to Safari and see the picture. O.K., now it is here, anyway. Great! A fine bird!

There is a starkness about the picture that is used up by the time one's eye travels to the top.

Just the hint of the edge of green, after removing to top inch, anchors the top end of this picture's "universe" in my opinion.

If you chop more, the starkness is lost.

The top, IMHO does not add, only detracts from the esthetic I receive when pulled in to the bird's territory for the first time.

"It says, this view, you see, around me, may be part of a larger cut up picture and an artice"

The work that I might consider, would be the detail on the bird and the shading in the ground arounf the bird. That's about it! But is that your vision?:

Asher
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
I do have to say, though, that to my eye, I find too many distracting elements remaining, so that even though I can see what you're going for here, I'm not convinced this particular scene and setting will allow you to realize it.

Your thoughts?

Don,

Thanks for the help and opinion, I had tried a similar crop by removing the partial reflection of the bird at the bottom (I also wasn't overly fond of it), however I left the top and side that you removed and the aspect ratio just didn't seem right when I tried it, but by removing the rest as you have it does look much better, I think because I liked the vastness and vertical aspect of the image so much I was resisting too much cropping. I may try to do some more manipulating in PS to get it closer to my "vision". Thanks for the input,
Kyle
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Asher Kelman said:
Encouraged by Diane, I pasted the URL to Safari and see the picture. O.K., now it is here, anyway. Great! A fine bird!

There is a starkness about the picture that is used up by the time one's eye travels to the top.

Just the hint of the edge of green, after removing to top inch, anchors the top end of this picture's "universe" in my opinion.

If you chop more, the starkness is lost.

The top, IMHO does not add, only detracts from the esthetic I receive when pulled in to the bird's territory for the first time.

"It says, this view, you see, around me, may be part of a larger cut up picture and an artice"

The work that I might consider, would be the detail on the bird and the shading in the ground arounf the bird. That's about it! But is that your vision?:

Asher

Asher,

I think my "vision" is in here somewhere, between your's and Don's input I have a better idea how to arrive at where I want to be (if it works after I'm done), In some situations it helps to get an outside perspective and viewpoint, and thanks for your perspective. I'll try and post it again once I've "tweaked" it some.

Kyle
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
OK, I have spent some time with it, and with Don and Asher's input I have revisited my previous effort, attached is the image in it's new version, hopefully it is getting closer to it's potential (and my vision).

If you right-click the attachment and open in a new window you can shrink the window place it alongside the images in Don's post for a better comparison.

Kyle
 

Attachments

  • Bird_02a.jpg
    Bird_02a.jpg
    25 KB · Views: 160

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I still prefer your original width!

Have you tried printing it with the width unaltered. I bet you it holds the feeling of the image better!

Asher
 
Hi Kyle,

Looks like you've been busy with the clone tool!! Overall I think it's a big improvement, and has much more visual appeal.

Now I'm just 'quibbling' but I might want just a little more showing on the right side of the frame, and just a tad on the bottom, so the GBH isn't too close to the lower right corner, with possibly taking a little away on the left, giving a slightly "taller" appearance to the image. I'm not sure why, but I think a "taller" frame might better match the tall body shape of the GBH. But then for some reason, my personal bias seems to be towards higher aspect ratios, and away from more squarish ones.

But in any case, this is now a very pleasing image. Good work!
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Don Cohen said:
Hi Kyle,

Looks like you've been busy with the clone tool!! Overall I think it's a big improvement, and has much more visual appeal.

Now I'm just 'quibbling' but I might want just a little more showing on the right side of the frame, and just a tad on the bottom, so the GBH isn't too close to the lower right corner, with possibly taking a little away on the left, giving a slightly "taller" appearance to the image. I'm not sure why, but I think a "taller" frame might better match the tall body shape of the GBH. But then for some reason, my personal bias seems to be towards higher aspect ratios, and away from more squarish ones.

But in any case, this is now a very pleasing image. Good work!


Asher Kelman said:
I still prefer your original width!

Have you tried printing it with the width unaltered. I bet you it holds the feeling of the image better!

Asher



Thought I would work on the "quibble", so as Rod Serling would say: "Submitted for your approval"


attachment.php



Kyle
 

Attachments

  • Bird_03.jpg
    Bird_03.jpg
    30 KB · Views: 199

Ray West

New member
Hi Kyle,

It seems to be a case of 2/3 good, 3/4 bad. I preferred a bit more debris around, in particular the central stick with reflection, and other stick towards bottom left. If you're removing as much as you have done, then the flotsam behind the bird becomes more intrusive. This could be your 'mona lisa', forty years poking around at it, and then probably still not being too pleased. (where is there a smiley when you want one? ;-) or is it ;) or {;-)] )

Best wishes,

Ray
 
Hi Kyle,
Kyle Nagel said:
Thought I would work on the "quibble", so as Rod Serling would say: "Submitted for your approval"


http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=22&stc=1&d=1149650920


Kyle

This looks pretty darn good to me. It seems to capture the glow of the early moring light in the water, shows enough of the environment to put the GBH in a good perspective/context, and I think the hint of green at the top adds something to the image as well. Should look quite good as a print.

Ray:
(where is there a smiley when you want one? ;-) or is it ;) or {;-)] )

Agreed! I definitely think we need the option to add a variety of emoticons to these messages.

Best,
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
I rather like it in it's current permeation, however I've spent quite a bit of time with it and I am now playing with another image, I think my main epiphany occurred when I saw Don's crop, with the "boost" in the saturation of the reflected light. That's when I realized there was way too much "stuff" in the image, and I must agree with everyone here, the 2:3 ratio is the only ratio for this image.

Ray, I know you liked the reflected sticks, as I removed "stuff" I left those until last and removed them one at a time, thinking they may add elements, but in the end I did not like them, the beak on the bird and the small "islands" all had a flow and direction that created a wonderful mood, and though I thought they may add something to the image once I removed them I knew they needed to stay gone.

Thanks to all, Kyle
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Don Cohen said:
Agreed! I definitely think we need the option to add a variety of emoticons to these messages.

Yes, when writing the tone of ones voice and facial expressions are lost, conveying things like sarcasm, confusion, or admiration can easily be misinterpreted, the "smileys" can sometimes better help portray those inflections.

Kyle
 
Top