Habitual Cropping - your worst enemy?

skygod44 wrote in post #12797751
3) Complaining that a bird-in-flight shot looks too fuzzy is pointless if it's a 75% cropped image, shot with a 250mm lens when in fact you needed a 600mm lens.

I had forgot all about that 600mm lens I had! Maybe I should have moved my feet (rapidly) to get closer to the bird-in-flight:p

andyman82 wrote in post #12827772
I had forgot all about that 600mm lens I had! Maybe I should have moved my feet (rapidly) to get closer to the bird-in-flight:p

Hahahahahahahahahahaha​!

But for the thousandth time, there are some fields which are bleedin' difficult.
Birds in flight is one of 'em!!!!!!

And again, for the benefit of POTNers who want to make full use of their gear habitually cropping heavily WON'T HELP YOU!

Cheers for now,

Simon

Picture North Carolina wrote in post #12799003
Cropping is not an enemy. Neither is it good or bad, right or wrong. It is simply another tool - a method - for achieving an effective composition.

Best post I read in a while. Kudos! To you my bro.

I crop a lot of my wedding shots as I still like and use a square format from the old days, I compose the image knowing that it is going to be cropped square.

neil_r wrote in post #12830450
I crop a lot of my wedding shots as I still like and use a square format from the old days, I compose the image knowing that it is going to be cropped square.

Hey Neil,
Thanks for adding, and making a valid point.
Though it's already been covered, I think that square shots can be really effective.

But if you're pre-planning the shots to be cropped square, you're already waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of the posters who don't get the point I'm trying to make, because in pre-planning, you're thinking about the framing, key components in each shot, and therein getting the best possible from your gear.

The only thing you could do "better" would be to go medium-format....but that second mortgage could be hard to get the wife to approve!!!!!
Cheers mate for adding!

So, once more if anyone has missed the crux:
If you habitually assume that cropping heavily in PP will make your shots shine, you might be "pre-discarding" some of the very parts of your images which are why we buy dSLRs and expensive lenses in the first place!

Oh, and I wasn't going to bother to respond, because hitting my head against his "brick wall" of thinking was giving me a headache, but "altrus" asked how I'd have taken his wonderful "giraffe against green grass" shot any better.
Well, I assume he's been to the zoo before?
If so, why not "think" to take the 150-500mm lens before leaving the house?

Below is one of my zoo shots.
I straightened it a little, and cropped in order to create a more "cell-like" feeling...but other than that, all I had to do was wait for about 15 minutes to capture an interesting moment in time.
Maybe this is also a problem?
Perhaps some people think that photography should happen according to their schedule?

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

skygod44 wrote in post #12830568
...Oh, and I wasn't going to bother to respond, because hitting my head against his "brick wall" of thinking was giving me a headache, but "altrus" asked how I'd have taken his wonderful "giraffe against green grass" shot any better.
Well, I assume he's been to the zoo before?
If so, why not "think" to take the 150-500mm lens before leaving the house?

Below is one of my zoo shots.
I straightened it a little, and cropped in order to create a more "cell-like" feeling...but other than that, all I had to do was wait for about 15 minutes to capture an interesting moment in time.
Maybe this is also a problem?
Perhaps some people think that photography should happen according to their schedule?

See, this is why I don't get your reasoning for starting this thread - it appears you want to give some sort of advice about cropping, but it's far from clear.
Why not take the 150-500? Because:

a.) I was taking my daughter to this zoo, first time there. I had no idea there is a free-roaming giraffe/zebra sanctuary, so I ony took the 24-105.
b.) the 150-500 is big and heavy, not the best lens for a day at the zoo

c.) and this is where your advice gets murky. I hope you realize that even if I had the 150-500 the composition would have been exactly the same. The lens could not help me go lower, go higher or move left or right. So in essence I would've had the exact same shot, cropping or not. The only difference between using the 24-105 and 150-500 would be the zoom, which I achieved through cropping.

And as far as talking about "unnecessary" cropping - unnecessary is arbitrary, what you think may be unnecessary, some may find perfectly acceptable. Photography is not math - there are no right or wrong answers for every situation. Maybe that's why you feel like you are hitting a brick wall with me? I have no problem accepting technical advice, but cropping imho is on the creative side, where, again, there is no right or wrong. Did you notice how I never commented on any of your cropped photos?

atlrus wrote in post #12831371
See, this is why I don't get your reasoning for starting this thread - it appears you want to give some sort of advice about cropping, but it's far from clear.

Thanks for coming back in the game!
And I think the "advice" isn't clear, because I've only just noticed it myself and am not so sure how to expand on it.
That's the "why", of me starting the thread.
And I think Sue (out of everyone so far) has best seen through my quagmire of explanation.

I think we're homing in on some important stuff here...
You'd not been to the zoo before....but you do know what a zoo is, yes?
This nugget of knowledge should tell you that a 24-105 lens will only be good for limited shots. The best you can do with that FL range on a 5D2 is to take city/landscapes, portraits, etc. That's where the lens shines on a full-frame camera. And I'm sure you know this.
At a zoo/safari park etc., if I want to take proper photos, and not snapshots I take my 100-400 (1.4kg v 1.91kg for your Siggy 150~500mm).
Which leads on to "c)."

WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!
Have you no idea about depth of field?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!
OK, so the "framing" might be the same, but the image would be DIFFERENT!
105mm @ f/4 is NOT going to produce the same image except for what you "achieved through cropping", had you used the 500mm end of your 150-500 @ f/6.3.
As an example, if your giraffe is 100' away, using the 105mm@f/4 gives sharp(ish) focus from 75' away, through the subject, and begins to blur around 149' away.
BUT, using the 500mm@f/6.3 gives a range from 98', through the subject, and going soft at 103', or thereabouts.
Using the 500mm would have created some bokeh, changing your "might as well have used a $100 P&S camera" shot, into something vaguely interesting.
AND THAT'S THE POINT!
If you don't understand that, don't bother buying a digital SLR camera and expensive lenses.
Give the money to charity instead, and use your cellphone camera!

I don't CARE about cropping as such (for the millionth time).
What I'm advising against is "HABITUALLY CROPPING HEAVILY".
Why?
Because, mathematically speaking, you are subtracting a statistically significant (and artistically relevant) section of the image where the 'circle of confusion' (look it up) created by the unique refractive qualities of the lens elements, combined with the maximum aperture used, no longer exceeds the resolution of our eyes.
Thus, you might as well use a P&S camera.

(Attached: correct lens, correct framing to create a story - part of a series about caged animals; specifically primates - correct aperture to blur out an uninteresting background, minimal cropping).

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I hate to do this, but since user names are anonymous, I don't think this is immoral, and I don't think I'm bullying either:

In this thread, I wanted to air an idea that dSLR users can-and-do fall into the habit of using post-processing too much when framing the subject.
- Creating square prints (or any special ratio) from the Canon EOS range is not an issue.
- Sorting out horizons is not an issue.
- Shifting a subject a little to achieve perfect composition is not an issue, either.
- And in highly specialised areas such as sports and wildlife, we take what we can get.

But one POTNer has repeatedly jumped in, with some hefty insults and - as it turns out - some highly ignorant/arrogant opinions.

Please note, I've been a photographer for around 30 years, and now run a digital photography business here in southern Japan. I really do want to discuss the idea that habitually cropping heavily, negates a lot of why we use dSLRs and gorgeous lenses.

Yes, cropping is a tool...and a very useful one.
But I maintain it can lead YOU to underachieve all too easily.
If you understand my thinking, and want to improve, let's discuss it more.
If you don't care, or agree with the individual who posted the following elsewhere, please explain clearly why, without resorting to sweeping statements based on thin air. Or, simply move onto another thread.

Regards,
A slightly pissed-off Skygod.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

LOL, you are a funny guy. When did I ever claimed to be a professional?!? I can PM you links to a thousand Flikr accounts of amateur photographers taking amazing photos. Just because you have done something for a long time - it doesn't automatically make you good - I can also send you links to some professional studios so you can see proof of this I find this funny, though, because this is a quote from you:

To give you a real world example - I know a guy who has worked in an auto shop his whole life, changing brakes, mufflers, tires, etc. But he has personally admited he will not even consider working on a late model luxury vehicle because of how complicated their electrical system is. Now here is the real kicker - I can change the brakes of my car without having to work my whole life in an auto shop...Oh, it gets better. Once we got into argument, beacuse he was claiming that underinflated tires would help you get more grip on wet roads than a properly inflated ones. As you can see, his years of experience were totaly wasted on him...

Maybe it's time for you to embrace some of the new technology? Talking about changing the DOF between the 24-105 and the 150-500, maybe you should really check out this: http://www.alienskin.c​om/ Certainly is not something one would use for every photo, but it's there and available should you need it.

P.S. As far as those posts of mine you have taken the time to find - perfectly in line with what I already said:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

skygod44 wrote in post #12836648
...But one POTNer has repeatedly jumped in, with some hefty insults and - as it turns out - some highly ignorant/arrogant opinions...

Hmmm, maybe I should quote parts of your posts so you can take a look at how other people see your comments:

Meanwhile the only thing I said about you personally was that you are riding a high horse. And it's clear you are.

My personal suggestion is - if you want to make a clear point, you should check out the "photo sharing" section, where your advice on framing will relate to a particular photo(s) and where opinions on creativity are solicited.

Okay guys, play nice, or don't play.

atlrus wrote in post #12837408
LOL, you are a funny guy..../snipped all the irrelevant gibberish/....

Yes, I am a funny guy.
Thanks for the compliment.
And as René suggests (and as a prime mod, I suggest that for once in your life, you listen to him!):

René Damkot wrote in post #12838178
Okay guys, play nice, or don't play.

Great Thread Simon. Thanks.

I'd like to think I get it.
Learn good composition.
Do your best to take a great shot to begin with.
Trim/adjust to perfection
When available use the correct lens for the situation.

Rely on your eye not your mouse for composition

lastly........all of the above is when we can. Don't miss the shot because we are not in the right position and lack the correct lens. Unless of course it's an eagle soaring near a plane and you have your kit 18-55.

I think too for me...sometimes I know ahead of time I may be cropping....and it's almost always because I'm unable to get both composition and focal point and choose the latter over the former. And that is probably because I have incredible 7 points!!!

Thanks again....makes me want to continue to develop. Too makes me smile to read comments and think..."did they even read the thread?"

Lou857 wrote in post #12951717
Great Thread Simon. Thanks.

I'd like to think I get it.
Learn good composition.
Do your best to take a great shot to begin with.
Trim/adjust to perfection
When available use the correct lens for the situation.

Rely on your eye not your mouse for composition

lastly........all of the above is when we can. Don't miss the shot because we are not in the right position and lack the correct lens.
Unless of course it's an eagle soaring near a plane and you have your kit 18-55.

I think too for me...sometimes I know ahead of time I may be cropping....and it's almost always because I'm unable to get both composition and focal point and choose the latter over the former. And that is probably because I have incredible 7 points!!!

Thanks again....makes me want to continue to develop. Too makes me smile to read comments and think..."did they even read the thread?"

THANK YOU!
THANK YOU!!
THANK YOU!!!!

You have revived my faith in the ability of POTNers to read a thread in which the OP is airing an idea, not yet fully formed.

Furthermore, you've summarised beautifully what I was thinking about.

After giving up on the thread, I've thought more and more about this - though not bothering to share - and I'm convinced that simply "trying harder" to get the camera set up appropriately (probably the right lens, the right shooting mode/AF/AE/ISO etc, etc.) , and then shooting with composition nearer the front of our thinking, must inevitably result in more smiles when we get home and upload to the computer....

Also, "seeing" the image we're aiming for, before lifting the camera to our eye, noting in our imagination things such as DoF, bokeh, highlights, shadows, key components in-frame, colours, must inevitably result in less snapshots and more photos which reflect what we wanted to photograph in the first place.

And thanks again for repeating the obvious caveats:

Finally, this is not idealistic, SOOC hogwash.
It's an idea I had, due to so many arguments about such-and-such a lens having much better DoF control than other lenses....and I thought, "wait a mo'. It's all meaningless if people crop heavily on the computer to put the subject in the right place.....because in doing so, they're likely cropping out lots of the blurred parts of the image!"

So my idea (and my advice) stands.
***************
Try your hardest - IF AT ALL POSSIBLE - to pre-think your shots (so as to prep' your camera/lens correctly), and then, at the very least, try your hardest to frame the subject where you want them to be in the finished photo.
***************
Regards for now,

Simon

"must inevitably"

Absolutely.

just makes you feel like....OK I got what I set out to get.
I'd like to say I wish it were easier. I don't think I really mean that though.
I think I mean I wish I were better already.

to the original point ... or reason for point...I really do feel a sense of satisfaction when my photo is composed with intent. I'm realizing, (maybe why I liked this post so much) that as I'm learning I'm cropping less and less and often not alt all.