Crop, how tight and why?

[Hair Bear]

Original

1


2 first crop


3 seconed crop

 

[Hair Bear]

Tighter?

 

[D-50]

Number three works best for me. I like the tight crop, gives it more feeling, I am also a proponent of not having a person completely in the frame, it gives the picture more feeling IMO.Number one seems a bit boring just a guy on the street playing a guitar with a lot of dead space on either side. number three has a great composition and I like how the picture is heavily weighted to the left side which I feel creates a nice use of the open space on the right.

 

[Alex_B]

tilt a bit counter-clockwise, crop like in no.2.

no.3 is too tight, and you cut off the upper half of the pedestrians on the right

the crop in no.1 to me is too profane, mr guitarman is neither in the centre, nor at the side on that one.

just my humble opinion

Anyway, he looks like someone I knew/know ...

 

[Hair Bear]

Yes he is sort of singing in to the space in the pavement in 2 and 3 they are def better then 1.

The more I look at them the more I like 3, the focus is on his face more then the background

 

[Pigeonfeet]

3 is best.

 

[Alex_B]

was that picture taken in hungary by any chance?

 

[Hair Bear]

was that picture taken in hungary by any chance?

no, its Peterborough UK

 

[Alex_B]

no, its Peterborough UK

lol, ok, got that wrong then

 

[markc]

Personally, with this position, I'd go vertical or square. I find the floor on the right to be dead space.

If you had crouched lower, it would have place the crowd in the background right in front of him. He'd be playing for tiny people, and they would have added more to the space.

 

[fmw]

#2 is the "right" one because it places the subject on the golden mean and because it keeps the subject whole. #3 takes out parts of the subject's body without adding anything positive to the composition. #1 includes details that add nothing to the composition.

Of course if you like it some other way then that way is "right" for you.

 

[mysteryscribe]

I agree with the above but for totally different reasons.

You have eliminated all the un necessary stuff but left in what you chopped up in number three.. Take a look at the people walking by. If he is a street musician, you need people. I try to never chop people in half. So to me two is the only right one.

Please note: I did not say go verticle lol... This is the classic man with cigar exception to the cropping a verticle subject verticle. You do have a verticle subject, but the subject is incomplete without the street scene.

And Mark I am reminded of the girl in the serving window that you shot. If you consider the whole shot they are both the same premise

Or so they used to say...

 

[markc]

Heh. That shot of mine bothers me in the same way. I wish that order on the right was a little more in focus to give some more detail over there. Here, the sidewalk is just too empty for me, which is emphasized by his posture and where his head is facing. It leads my eye right into the dead space. If the people were there, then I'd be really happy with it. The pillar position also bothers me, and feels like it throws the balance off.

I can try and explain what I think of a photo using logic, but most of it is just paying attention to why my eyes go and if that is a pleasing experience. The rest is trying to explain why my eyes go where they do.

 

[mysteryscribe]

If the shot was just about the musician I would agree with you 110 percent on the verticle or square and only the photographer knows why he shot it so of the three crops offered I have to go with two. I assumed he was trying to show a street musician not just a musician.

I certainly think that crop three is way off either mark. And one has no anchor on the left side like it does in two. And Im so full of it I might melt in the rain lol

 

[ladyphotog]

I light the tight crop in #3 but not with the people cut in half, recrop so that you get all the people walking and that will be a stunning image.