Cropping Where to do it!

A friend of mine, who is a highly paid Graphic person in the movie industry, and a photographer as well was looking at some of the images in my online gallery ( www.pbase.com/chatkat/galleries ) - He gently told me that he did not like some of my cropping.

This image, I love as it is. But I did crop it. There was someone the Nun was talking to and he just did not add to the image. What would you do differently? How do you decide where to crop?

Where do I crop?

I too have been criticized for not cropping aggressively enough. I try to crop away everything that does not add to the picture.

That sounds like the old sculptor's advice "remove all the stone that doesn't look like the subject" but my philosophy of photography is "Everything in the frame must contribute to the picture"

This picture contained a 2nd person as originally shot. He looked as if he were picking his nose and didn't add to the picture.



I have received criticism that even this crop is not tight enough, but have not re-cropped it.

My only criticism of your picture is that the nun is facing out of the picture, and therefore draws the viewer's eye out of the frame, instead of into it.

Kathy, in this particular case it's the top cropping that bothers me more than missing the nun's object of attention, although that is a bit bothersome also.

Cropping is really just a composition tool, and composition isn't easy to reduce to a set of rules although these exist out there (rule of thirds etc.). The most important considerations I've found are:

- Don't allow edge features to draw attention too much, particularly at the corners.

- If you have diagonal lines it's best if the lead toward the center and/or primary subject. Also best if they lead (outwardly) toward vicinity of the corners although this is often not possible.

- It's best to be aware of compositional issues when you frame the shot. I usually frame in the camera and rarely crop, but you should at least be aware of the issues at capture time.

The issue I have with your image is the first point. The corbel (in particular) and "incomplete" door draw too much attention to the top, and don't lead back. In this case I would either include more, or crop down further - the exact point is debatable but cropping down near to the bottom of the corbel or even deeper to about the top of the larger diamond pattern on the door would be superior to what you have now. Another crop that works for me is to turn it into a portrait by cropping the left off almost all the way through the bench (leaving the top alone). This approach also lessens the impact of the subjects attention being out of the frame (by moving the subject closer to the center).

If I had been there at the time (always easy to second guess), I might have stepped a few steps to the right. This would have done several things: better (side) profile on the subject, shifted the door from being the direct background to the subject, introduced more perspective and depth to the bg wall.

AFA learning this, it's a gestalt thing. I'd suggest taking a few images that need help, dup a half dozen of each and crop each differently, then lay them all out in PS for comparision. The better ones should grab you - it sometimes helps to squint or turn them upside down so that the compositional issues are separated from the content.

- DL

Kathy Rappaport said:

A friend of mine, who is a highly paid Graphic person in the movie industry, and a photographer as well was looking at some of the images in my online gallery ( www.pbase.com/chatkat/galleries ) - He gently told me that he did not like some of my cropping.

This image, I love as it is. But I did crop it. There was someone the Nun was talking to and he just did not add to the image. What would you do differently? How do you decide where to crop?

Click to expand...

I could argue otherwise!

Don't listen to them Kathy!

Let me come down from my mountain and say this! The graphic arts person is obviously well versed in great composition, balance completeness and harmony. What has that to do with "the price of tea" or your picture?

The important and more interesting things in life are not to be found there, in the ordered and expected balanced and acceptable perspectives. They are the outliers, the things that don't seem to fit in, the contradictions and unease that leads to puzzles, questions and consternation.

Here, in your picture I saw the nun looking away from the building (the church, establishment, structure, what is the "given", what is expected of her and others, and looking for answers elsewhere.

The picture hanging on the wall enhances that idea. It shows a building with perspective coming from the left and exploding forward and to the right, in the same direction, outside the frame to where the nun's attention is obviously directed.

To add to the idea of incompleteness, the top of the door is left out. This is worrisome and that's perfect. It so happens that the empty bench adequately balances the nun’s figure. That itself is a question of who sits there: anyone, when, waiting for what?

If this image was straightened and made utterly clear it would be of course prettier and more comfortable. I prefer it as it is since it contains the thought-provoking nun superbly placed. It's the precious disorder that interrogates us.

In fact this picture asks more questions than can be answered. So revisiting gives endless rewards. That means this piece is worthy and if the graphics experts don't like, who cares?

Asher

Charles, that handle on the left definitely draws the eye to the wrong place.

> I try to crop away everything that does not add to the picture.

Ah, but that is not always that easy to determine. The handle obviously doesn't add to the picture, but sometimes it's not so clear as there are issues like balance (dark/light, colors) or elements that may help draw the eye, contributing to the compostion, that from an objective point don't contribute.

One thing that helps is to go do something else for a while then come back and view again paying particular attention to where your eye goes - where does it start, where does it end, what is the path in-between, does it settle or waffle between multiple spots? Then try to analyze why your eye behaved the way it did.

- DL

Don,

Your words on composition are well-taken. My admonition is to detractors of Kathy's picture! To me, the picture, as tordu as it is, works!! Please don't imagine for one Hollywood moment that my comments there might have referred to your guidance above on how photography can be made more eye-worthy! I myself enjoy what you write and admit gleaning something valuable each time!

Asher

Asher, I agree that the picture as-is works well - it's not screaming "crop me". The subject was cropping, but if this were my own image I might resolve it in another way by simply lightening the shadow side of the corbel a bit so it doesn't fight for your attention (so much).

- DL

Don Lashier said:

Asher, I agree that the picture as-is works well - it's not screaming "crop me". The subject was cropping, but if this were my own image I might resolve it in another way by simply lightening the shadow side of the corbel a bit so it doesn't fight for your attention (so much).

- DL

Click to expand...

Ye, Don, that's an interesting idea! It might calm and do no harm! Feel like doing it?

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Ye, Don, that's an interesting idea! It might calm and do no harm! Feel like doing it?

Click to expand...

Sure:



What I did: added a curve adjustment layer and masked out everything but the corbel, then adjusted to taste where it provided a nice counter-balance but didn't fight for attention. I then decided to unmask the shadowed doorjamb some to balance a bit closer to the corbel shadows and bring out detail, and this helps also by not drawing so much away from the subject by tonal separation. Also couldn't resist and added a slight overall tonality/contrast boost (nun excluded). I excluded the nun because the curve I used would have darkened/flattened in this tonal range.

With these slight adjustments I feel that further/re cropping is not necessary although certainly still an option.

- DL

Why is our view of the subject bounded by a hard edge, a rectangular shape? Is it not possible to think out of the box? The purpose, and destination of the final image has to be considered. It is a bit like asking 'how long would you cut this piece of string' (or how short ;-)

So, Kathy, what is your intention for the photo? Your highly paid friend is completely wrong, outside of the destination he has in mind. You are absolutely correct for what you have in mind. For me, my mind is a blank, wrt what I would want to do with the final image (well not a blank, but full of ideas, but not much detailed thought in progressing them further, I guess....)

Best wishes,

Ray

Well, interesting viewpoirts. I love that there is really no right or wrong. A number of my friends who saw this one loved it. Thank you Don for the work on it.

Asher, BTW, this was with the 50 1.2 and taken in Cavtat, Dubrovnik, Croatia.

On the original PP, I did do several crops to see which one I liked best. And I did some curves adjusting as well. I thought compositionally, the leading line was where the floor met the wall. To me the nun in her dark habit drew my eye immediately.

My intention for this photo? I have a gallery of photos at home. I am painting my office and I am also setting up a portrait studio. I will print and frame it and see where I decide to put it.

Don Lashier said:

Asher, I agree that the picture as-is works well - it's not screaming "crop me". The subject was cropping, but if this were my own image I might resolve it in another way by simply lightening the shadow side of the corbel a bit so it doesn't fight for your attention (so much).

- DL

Click to expand...

I agree with Don but went a little bit farther than what he did in his sample. For me, my eye kept going away from the nun, and falling off the left of the photo - partially because of the composition, but also because the left side of the photo is brighter. As my eye traveled to the right, it would hit the dark area and go back to the left where it was brighter.

This is where cropping, composition, lighting, etc. can get tricky as it really comes down to the original photographer's goals and intent. Here is what my version would look like - a little more agressive than Don's. Having the brightest area just to the right of the nun, while at the same time having the left side darker, helps to bring back the eye to the nun.

Learning things

BTW, I had to look up what a corbel was....I learned something new today.

Matt, I like your version too. I am really new at using CS3 and as I learn each lesson, I find that I can spend the rest of my life enhancing the 1000's of images that I used to think were wonderful, only to find that I can make them all so much better eventually creating art from art. For an old film person whose only options felt like they could crop or not, well, that can be a subject of a whole new thread for lots of discussion.

Kathy Rappaport said:

BTW, I had to look up what a corbel was....I learned something new today....

Click to expand...

I too was wondering what it is. Would you please teach me something new today? )

Cheers,

Hi Cem,

a jutting out stone support (usually) at the top of Kath's image -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbel (one of my chimneys is corbelled)

Anyway, here's a rough idea, reflecting the waste of a life.

Wow!

Yes, new art from old art. Love it Ray!