Does anyone have a resource to "correct amputation"?

Where is it "ok" to cut off a limb?

(yes I've heard rules are made to be broken, try it and see, etc.)

Kind of subjective. I think it is just best to use your own judgement based upon the image itself. Personally I dislike a lot of amputations I see in beauty/fashion/glamour​/family portraits but I find them pretty much par for the course in street shots. It really depends on what the image says overall.

http://petapixel.com …for-portrait-photography/

DGStinner wrote in post #17417008
http://petapixel.com …for-portrait-photography/

Oddly, the diagram has no green line across the shoulders, a little below the collarbone. That's a classic lower bound for sculptural busts and portraits, such as the presidents on U.S. currency.

For sports I like to do it at major joints. (knees, elbows, hips, maybe shoulders)

EchoShotz wrote in post #17417651
For sports I like to do it at major joints. (knees, elbows, hips, maybe shoulders)

That's very interesting, as it goes exactly contrary to the normal guidelines.

Have any favorite examples that you can share?

It is very subjective as to what crop works. Sometime you have a subject on the move and a hand or foot is out of frame, then you probably have to crop creatively to avoid the arm or leg(s) being a distraction.
In my gallery there are a number of portraiture crops, one being a very awkward crop of a child because one arm went way out of frame. Later I posted a tighter crop of the same image that worked much better. Generally speaking if you can crop below and above the knee--well, as in the referenced crop guide, except he did not show that you can do a bust to include the shoulders and down to below the breast.
https://photography-on-the.net …/membergallery.​php?m=9885

Is there an established reason for not cropping at a joint? I can think of two possibilities that might make it creepy. It looks too much like a real amputation, or the angle of the part not shown isn't visible (e.g., a forearm might be bent in an unnatural way). But the real reason might be something else.

I'm not sure, other than convention. I've seen crops to the knee when the subject was seated and the image looked OK.

OhLook wrote in post #17418368
Is there an established reason for not cropping at a joint? I can think of two possibilities that might make it creepy. It looks too much like a real amputation, or the angle of the part not shown isn't visible (e.g., a forearm might be bent in an unnatural way). But the real reason might be something else.

This (IMO). I have a feeling it's a deeply-rooted, psychological thing in most of us. Our brains process the image very quickly, and if the crop is at the joint, where an actual amputation may be more likely to occur, we do a double-take and it's a little jarring.

Another "amputation" that gets criticized is when the elbow bends outside the frame so that the upper and lower arms in view appear disjointed.

DGStinner wrote in post #17417008
http://petapixel.com …for-portrait-photography/

Thank you. I'll be doing 3/4 length portraits and mostly wanted to know where best around the calf should I crop.

TustinMike wrote in post #17418434
This (IMO) [namely, too much like a real amputation]. I have a feeling it's a deeply-rooted, psychological thing in most of us. Our brains process the image very quickly, and if the crop is at the joint, where an actual amputation may be more likely to occur, we do a double-take and it's a little jarring.

Brain scans of people looking at pictures would be interesting. It wouldn't surprise me if images of cropped figures caused at least momentary reactions in brain areas that process pain and fear.

G&N often has photos that cut mid-thigh or at the calf. They're common when a swimsuit model is standing. These are supposedly nonthreatening, but I'm not wholly comfortable with them.

To me, cropping at a joint just makes the upper arm / upper leg seem way too long (my mind thinks that the limb just goes on, rather than ending at a joint. That makes the person look wrong.

I tend to think as limbs as leading lines. Ideally, they lead you to somewhere; an arm generally leads to a hand and a leg leads to a foot. It's OK to crop them if they are obstructed (then the leading lines lead to the obstruction). I'd also be OK if there was a clear feature at the boundary at the crop; such as cropping below the breasts or below a belly button.

The other day I was looking at some portraits by Sue Bryce. Crops at the elbows, knees wrists, ect. I thought to myself that if I did the same thing and posted it on POTN, I would hear all about the "rules". Sue Bryce says she breaks the rules. Lol