Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk 
Thread started 27 Jan 2012 (Friday) 17:10
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

cropping bird photos

 
DCINSC
Member
97 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: SC. USA
     
Feb 13, 2012 16:35 |  #16

I am one of the lucky ones since most of my shooting is with 600mm Canon with 1.4 extender with a 7D . That puts it at 840mm, most of my back yard birds are use to me and comfortable at about 25 feet. At that range they fill the frame pretty good. But for posting I usually re-size my photos to 6inch by..and up the dpi to 300. I only do this as a hobby and still learning and having a fun. BIF is my big challenge,but still learning and studying many books and on line stuff. I don't mind cropping as long as the quality of the image is not comprised.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Feb 13, 2012 16:59 |  #17

DCINSC wrote in post #13891531 (external link)
I am one of the lucky ones since most of my shooting is with 600mm Canon with 1.4 extender with a 7D . That puts it at 840mm, most of my back yard birds are use to me and comfortable at about 25 feet. At that range they fill the frame pretty good. But for posting I usually re-size my photos to 6inch by..and up the dpi to 300.

You do realise that dpi is totally meaningless for images posted to the web?


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DCINSC
Member
97 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: SC. USA
     
Feb 13, 2012 17:24 |  #18

hollis_f wrote in post #13891664 (external link)
You do realise that dpi is totally meaningless for images posted to the web?

No but it still prints nice when I hand out post card size pics to keep people aware of the eastern painted buntings here in South Carolina. I am internet lacking as far as posting. Thanks for the info. old dogs can learn new things..:D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,452 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1494
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Feb 13, 2012 17:38 |  #19

Count me in to the "crop most of my shots' camp; as the others, primarily for compositional reasons. Sometimes it's a pretty heavy-handed crop, if the image will stand up to it and wasn't able to get close enough. Primarily shooting at 400mm, myself.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 542
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Feb 14, 2012 00:14 |  #20

hollis_f wrote in post #13891664 (external link)
You do realise that dpi is totally meaningless for images posted to the web?

DCINSC wrote in post #13891802 (external link)
No but it still prints nice when I hand out post card size pics to keep people aware of the eastern painted buntings here in South Carolina. I am internet lacking as far as posting. Thanks for the info. old dogs can learn new things..:D

I don't know how much time you've spent checking out the RAW, Post Processing and Printing section:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=18

This is something that comes up regularly there!

In the meantime, the section FAQ has a lot of useful info, including a thread dedicated to discussing the dpi/ppi subject as well as some helpful info on Printing and Enlargement.

I hope it's useful info!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DCINSC
Member
97 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2009
Location: SC. USA
     
Feb 14, 2012 18:59 |  #21

tonylong wrote in post #13894028 (external link)
I don't know how much time you've spent checking out the RAW, Post Processing and Printing section:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdis​play.php?f=18

This is something that comes up regularly there!

In the meantime, the section FAQ has a lot of useful info, including a thread dedicated to discussing the dpi/ppi subject as well as some helpful info on Printing and Enlargement.



I hope it's useful info!

Thanks for the links. I don't get over to this forum regular enough, as we all know life can get pretty busy. But I have always found great information and folks willing to point me in the right direction.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neilrohrbacker
Member
104 posts
Joined Aug 2009
     
Feb 15, 2012 19:19 |  #22

Someone better then me, told me that you should not go below 3,000 pixels on the long end. Lower than that and the picture is not worth keeping (7D camera). For what it's worth. I find it's a pretty accurate statement.


Gear: A whole bunch a stuff...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,452 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1494
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Feb 15, 2012 19:23 |  #23

neilrohrbacker wrote in post #13904983 (external link)
Someone better then me, told me that you should not go below 3,000 pixels on the long end. Lower than that and the picture is not worth keeping (7D camera). For what it's worth. I find it's a pretty accurate statement.

An ok rule of thumb; but, really only true based on intended usage of the image. I've got several that I wouldn't print large, but could happily use for cards or small prints for folks if desired.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 542
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Feb 15, 2012 19:32 |  #24

neilrohrbacker wrote in post #13904983 (external link)
Someone better then me, told me that you should not go below 3,000 pixels on the long end. Lower than that and the picture is not worth keeping (7D camera). For what it's worth. I find it's a pretty accurate statement.

Well, that's relative to the original quality of the photo (sharpness) and the output that you hope for.

I have excellent 12x18 prints from my trusty ol' 8MP 30D, prints which vave great fine detail. Those prints figure out to about 200ppi (pixels per (printed) inch.

A 2000x3000 image, 6 MP, can get a similar 200ppi printing out at 10x15 -- not a bad size. Of course you can print larger if you intend to display for a "normal" viewing distance.

And, of course, if you print anything smaller, such as an 8x10/8x12, you can get great quality from those 6MP. This goes double if you just use the pic for Web/computer viewing where you are compressing the image to something similar to a 4x6 or 5x7 print.

Of course, this also assumes that you use techniques (and lenses) to ensure optimal sharpness.


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jim ­ Neiger
Senior Member
608 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Kissimmee, Florida
     
Feb 16, 2012 08:22 |  #25

I shoot a lot of birds in flight. For BIF, cropping for composition is the norm. For still subjects I often crop slightly for composition as well. I have 8 mp images that have been cropped by 50%, printed at 36x24, and are hanging in the American Museum of Natural History in Central Park, NY. As long as the end result meets the requirements and expectations of the audience and the photographer, cropping is just fine, IMO.


Jim Neiger - Kissimmee, Florida
Get the Book: Flight Plan - How to Photograph Birds in Flight (external link)
Please visit my website: www.flightschoolphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CamFan01
Goldmember
Avatar
4,623 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Lilburn, GA
     
Feb 16, 2012 09:19 as a reply to  @ Jim Neiger's post |  #26

OK, now I have a question; and I apologize for this being somewhat late in the evolution of this thread but it's been troubling me.
I get a little confused by how some people report their "percent crop". Jim's usage above makes perfect sense to me that in his 50% crop he is utilizing half the available digital information from the original capture. I have seen others, however, who report a 100% crop on a speck of sand shot w/a telephoto lens.....huh? To my way of thinking, and in line with Jim's comments, a 100% crop utilizes the entire frame of digital information and in reality then is not a true crop. And to further complicate things, I seem to remember people reporting crop % higher than 100%! That makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Am I too soon old and too late smart, or am I thinking the correct way? Basically, a crop % has to be 100% or less and represents the percentage of the original frame represented in the final image.


Steve
1DMk4, 5DMk3, D4s, D800
300 f2.8L IS II, 400 f2.8G ED VR, 500 f4L IS, 600 f4L IS II, 600 f4G ED VR....and a few others.

www.pixallphoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lauderdalems
Senior Member
759 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2006
     
Feb 16, 2012 09:29 |  #27

I may also be wrong, but I thought a 100% crop means you are enlarging the image or that part of the image 100 percent.


http://gamedayphotos.u​wa.edu/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jim ­ Neiger
Senior Member
608 posts
Gallery: 32 photos
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Kissimmee, Florida
     
Feb 16, 2012 09:40 |  #28

100% crop means a resolution of 72ppi which is the resolution displayed on the web. You can also see things at 100% crop when using the actual pixels button in PS.


Jim Neiger - Kissimmee, Florida
Get the Book: Flight Plan - How to Photograph Birds in Flight (external link)
Please visit my website: www.flightschoolphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,452 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Likes: 1494
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Feb 16, 2012 10:20 as a reply to  @ Jim Neiger's post |  #29

It just means that the crop is taken at 100% view or in the case of lightroom at 1:1 magnification


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Feb 16, 2012 10:23 |  #30

Jim Neiger wrote in post #13908078 (external link)
100% crop means a resolution of 72ppi which is the resolution displayed on the web.

Nope. 'The Web' doesn't have a resolution. Devices used to display images on the web do have resolutions, but I doubt anybody's used a device with a resolution of 72 ppi for many years. My monitor is around 120dpi, an iPad 2 has a resolution of 260 ppi and an iPhone 4 has 326 ppi.

A 100% crop is an image cropped so that the image is displayed with one image pixel mapping to one display pixel. If I take a 3000x2000 pixel image and shrink it down to 600x400 pixels (so the image is 20% of the original linear dimensions) it will fit neatly on a web site, which is great for showing the whole image. But not so great if I want to show what the actual pixels look like. I could show that by posting the whole image at 3000x2000 pixels (so the image is 100% of the original dimension) but that would make for a huge ungainly image. Instead I crop a 600x400 pixel area from the image and post that on the web - it's a crop of the 100% sized image.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

12,043 views & 0 likes for this thread
cropping bird photos
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is bushpilot
916 guests, 233 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.