Cropping

chuckmiller wrote in post #19474296
I suppose in my brain I see cropping as merely removing a portion of the image as if you were using scissors on a printed photo, resulting [In] a reduction of dimensions.

Cropping does mean that. It always did. I usually crop photos before posting here. For starters, the G15's native aspect ratio is 4:3, which is too wide for most images.

AntonLargiader wrote in post #19474307
It's really all the same. It's just this one new pixel-peeping aspect of "a sample cropped from a 100% view" that's new. Before we had pixels it wasn't an issue but maybe there was a print equivalent using magnifying glasses.

All the same? I see two distinct meanings. There's regular cropping––taking off a slice at one or more edges––and there's this 100% thing. They differ in what "100%" means.

Magnifiers could be used to see detail, of course. For printing, photos (or drawings or typeset text) could be enlarged. The direction might be "Shoot at 150%." Shooting at 100% meant leaving the size as is; it didn't need to be specified.

By "all the same" what I meant was that everything you consider cropping is all the same... there's just this one new way in which the term is used (and it actually has little to do with cropping).

Make of it what you will.

AntonLargiader wrote in post #19474362
By "all the same" what I meant was that everything you consider cropping is all the same... there's just this one new way in which the term is used (and it actually has little to do with cropping).

Make of it what you will.

And given that this is discussed on a "Digital Photography Forums", the initial context of 'a 100% crop' is " 'view at 100%'...one pixel in photo = one pixel on monitor...and then crop to that view"
even when the classic definition of crop is in a different context (I have a background in photojournalism and offset press images, too)

So, in the POTN context, what do expressions like "25% crop" mean?

OhLook wrote in post #19474380
So, in the POTN context, what do expressions like "25% crop" mean?

view at 25%, or 1/4 of the pixels in the photo displayed (the rest suppressed by viewing software), and store that...or take 4000 x 3000 pixels in original image (which is too large to post on POTN), and store 1000 x 750 pixel replica of the entire image (which is small enough to post on POTN)

Wilt wrote in post #19474379
And given that this is discussed on a "Digital Photography Forums", the initial context of 'a 100% crop' is " 'view at 100%'...one pixel in photo = one pixel on monitor...and then crop to that view"
even when the classic definition of crop is in a different context (I have a background in photojournalism and offset press images, too)

This!

When I want to show a true 100% crop I first create a new, empty document in Photoshop that is 1600 pixels on the long end (as it is the maximum size allowed on POTN), then copy the full resolution size of the image I want to crop as a second layer to said document and move the image layer around until the part I want to show is within the 1600px frame. And that’s it, a perfect 100% crop.

chuckmiller wrote in post #19474296
I suppose in my brain I see cropping as merely removing a portion of the image as if you were using scissors on a printed photo, resulting is a reduction of dimensions. My brain doesn't add in considerations of monitor resolution, photo resolution, megapixels, percentage of view on your computer vs my computer, etc etc. This is why I said cropping, or its definition, has become complicated as it has evolved over time to be adapted to digital photography.

I think you're on the money for many
Often we'll see comments "if it was mine I'd crop out the tree on the right...." or similar.
I think the average Joe Blow in the street would see it that way

avondale87 wrote in post #19474422
I think you're on the money for many
Often we'll see comments "if it was mine I'd crop out the tree on the right...." or similar.
I think the average Joe Blow in the street would see it that way

Here's a related use, and not from plain old Joe. I just now ran across it in Bird Portraits:

gaabnz wrote in post #19474386
Thank you, it is a heavy crop, but I really like it too

100% or heavy cropping and all those terms really only matter depending on what the viewer is doing with the results.

You can enlarge or shrink any image you view on your display, regardless if you have a low res or high res. It is only good though when you view the image such that one pixel of data in the file takes up one pixel of display. Then you are looking at a "100% crop" at truly 100%.

Just think about browsers and how you can use CTRL +/- (for windows anyways), and the browser resize the content, images included, up or down.

I could post an image that is 1000px X 1000px and some might see that image taking up 2000 X 2000 on their screen, others might see it at 500x500, depending on what they are using to view the images. It really is an exercise in futility I feel.

Two different browsers, each set to a different viewing ratio, neither is showing the image at 100%, but I cropped my image 100%. So regardless of what I might post to show a 100% crop into a high res file, I am NEVER in control of the other end, the viewers of the image and what they are doing with it. Thus why I get one comment that "the image looks blocky and compressed" and another "that seems like it is pretty detailed".

It would probably depend on the context. I don’t have any single unalterable concept in my head for the term “25% crop.” Could mean 25% of the width, height, both, or overall area depending on how it’s used. To me.

chuckmiller wrote in post #19474296
I suppose in my brain I see cropping as merely removing a portion of the image as if you were using scissors on a printed photo,

This is why I said cropping, or its definition, has become complicated as it has evolved over time to be adapted to digital photography.

It really hasn't. Cropping is exactly what you always thought it was. It hasn't changed.

"Cropping to 100%" is a specific term unrelated to creative cropping. A better term is "cropping to 1:1" or "zooming to 1:1".

When you view a 3000 pixel wide image on a screen that is 1080 pixels wide you are clearly not viewing all the pixels in the image. The viewer software is discarding pixels to show you a version of the image that is 1080 wide. When editing an image or trying to trouble shoot a post processing issue you may want to be able to see all the pixels in the actual image and the only way to do that is to zoom in to 1:1... where 1 screen pixel equals 1 image pixel. If you then want to post that image to a site like this for others to offer advice you crop to 1:1... or as some say... crop to 100%

As time goes on, often terms or acronyms acquire different (new) meanings to suit new contexts, not rendering any of the existing meanings irrelevant or obsolete.
For example, 'PC'...

• Starting in the 1940's it was 'printed circuit' in electronics,
  
• In the 1970s the 'politically correct' was revived (originally 1917 by Karl Marx!)
  
• In the 1980's along came 'personal computer'
  
• In US law, 'professional corporation'
  

100% Crop is a reliable term.

IMHO 25% crop (or other amount) is not.

That's why if I want to communicate how much of a crop a posted image is, I will say somethig like:
3360 pixel wide crop, resized to 1600 pixels.

As long as camera is obvious, reader can understand easily with, at most, an easy Google.
If it was in a Canon 20D thread, most would know, or easily discover that full pixel dimensions are 3504 on the long side.
So this would be a minor crop.
For a 5D4 image, it would be, in some peoples terminology, a 50% crop, and in others a 25% crop.
The 5D4 has 6720 pixels on the long side only half the pixels remain on the long side, but as the short side has also been cropped, result is 25% of total pixels. (assuming 3:2 aspect has been maintained).

So is it a 25% crop or 50% crop. As I don't believe it's a useful way to describe crop amount, I don't care.

By stating crop details as in my example, if you undertand the dimensions of a rectangle, which is about 8 year old? school level, you understand me.