Crop = Crap.

[cptkid]

My two cents.

You talking sh*t.

End of discussion.

 

[raventepes]

Hi! I'm new here, but here's my opinion.

Get the image right "In Body" when you can. If you've maxed out your long end, crop and resize at 110% bi-cubit smoother until you have the image size you want/need. That'll help keep the IQ in tact without much loss of detail.

 

[Devinhullphoto]

My uncle is old school "always get it on the film."


I try. Sometimes a crop is needed.

 

[gsgary]

My two cents.

You talking sh*t.

End of discussion.

Who is

 

[kundalini]

Don't crop in PP. Crop in camera. Otherwise, you produce crap.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing most folks on this forum are visually oriented. Because of that opinion and since there have not been any examples up to this point, please allow me.

I'll post an uncropped (to the best of my knowledge) of the DGN file from Bridge. I shot these last month. Let me back up slightly. My files are imported into LR3. There I will do a few certain tasks, not much and all edits are global in nature, but no cropping or tilt adjustments usually. I save the tilt adjustments unitl I open Bridge, since it is just as easy there. I save the crop tool for CS5. I'm by no means a PS guru and am pretty lazy for post work anyway, so most of the images I post haven't had a lot of time spent on them. Bridge gets the tilt corrected, WB treatment and the top few sliders tweaked. CS5 gets the curves adjustment, sharpening (USM or High Pass), CROPPED and resized. I'll stop here and admit that any prints to be made, which are not that many, gets a finer toothed comb ran through it.


Here's the DGN file resized for the web.

And here was my final result.

Did you notice how I turned a portrait oriented image into a landscape? Why would I do something as silly as that? Would you believe me if I told you the opposite method has also been done? Which image do you prefer? Oh behave, I'm not about to profess either is a great image, only for an example of why your above statement is filled with holes. If I bothered to run NR on it, perhaps it could be improved slightly. BTW, my cameras are only 12MP.

YMMV. Just my 2¢.

 

[DGMPhotography]

It's a thing because not everyone agrees with it, actually. Saying "don't crop" is actually pretty much the same thing as "nail the exposure in camera", it's just a different dimension, and nobody gets all testy when someone says "You should try to get the exposure correct in the camera".

Interesting, then whoever said it earlier, this thread could use a different name I think.

 

[cptkid]

My two cents.

You talking sh*t.

End of discussion.

Who is

The OP.

 

[pgriz]

My two cents.

You talking sh*t.

End of discussion.

Who is

The OP.

That's kinda harsh. He was trying to get a discussion going. When I was shooting slide film, there was no cropping, no post processing, no after-the-fact correction. You either nailed it (exposure, WB, framing, focus) or you didn't. No chimping. No histogram to allow you to adjust.

You had some more leeway with negative film. And going to digital opened up a world of possibilities.

Cropping becomes just another tool in the toolbox.

 

[Ilovemycam]

Don't crop in PP. Crop in camera. Otherwise, you produce crap.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing most folks on this forum are visually oriented. Because of that opinion and since there have not been any examples up to this point, please allow me.

I'll post an uncropped (to the best of my knowledge) of the DGN file from Bridge. I shot these last month. Let me back up slightly. My files are imported into LR3. There I will do a few certain tasks, not much and all edits are global in nature, but no cropping or tilt adjustments usually. I save the tilt adjustments unitl I open Bridge, since it is just as easy there. I save the crop tool for CS5. I'm by no means a PS guru and am pretty lazy for post work anyway, so most of the images I post haven't had a lot of time spent on them. Bridge gets the tilt corrected, WB treatment and the top few sliders tweaked. CS5 gets the curves adjustment, sharpening (USM or High Pass), CROPPED and resized. I'll stop here and admit that any prints to be made, which are not that many, gets a finer toothed comb ran through it.


Here's the DGN file resized for the web.

And here was my final result.

Did you notice how I turned a portrait oriented image into a landscape? Why would I do something as silly as that? Would you believe me if I told you the opposite method has also been done? Which image do you prefer? Oh behave, I'm not about to profess either is a great image, only for an example of why your above statement is filled with holes. If I bothered to run NR on it, perhaps it could be improved slightly. BTW, my cameras are only 12MP.

YMMV. Just my 2¢.

You turned nothing into Nice!

I can't ever remember anyone ever asking me if I cropped!

 

[Ilovemycam]

That is OK. We all have our likes and dislikes. HCB was the godfather of street work. Maybe you are a wizard as well as HCB, I don't know?

For me, I am on a much lower level. So, I crop 80% of my work or more. Not heavy crops, but yes sometimes heavy. If a crop has to be too much and the photo is bad quality from the crop, then it was not meant to be and trashed. That is my guideline for cropping...is it doable?

Ruining a photo due to dogmatic ego based determination is against my religion. I put image first, ego last. I try to be flexible. If people don't like my work becasue of cropping, no big deal. They will most likely not like the HDR as well. in the end we only have to please ourselves with our work. (Unless we are paid, then we must please the client.)

Using a rangefinder helps no end shooting on the street because you see more than just the frame

Yes! I wish there more some affordable rangefinder options. You shoot film, so M6 is a great bargain compared to the N240 or the M9. I love the Leica style. I use Fuji X, but it is only half ass. The AF is very poor for street. If Fuji had some real lenses that focused manual it would be nice. The Fuji focus by wire if just terrible. I can't believe how bad it is and how they approved it.

 

[Derrel]

The old "Interview" magazine was expressly formatted for full-frame 35mm images, so the mag was very tall, and very "skinny", having a 3:2 aspect ratio on each facing page. Interview used to pride itself on running top-quality work, with a lot of celebrity/musician/actor/newsmaker/icon portraiture, run un-cropped. It was an interesting concept, and back when photography meant basically "film pictures", and the majority of the above kinda' work was shot with 35mm SLRs, Interview made a lot of sense. It gave photographers a special place to see work printed UN-cropped, and AS-shot.

The knock-out borders, made by filing out negative carriers, so a nice, thick, BLACK line would show around enlargements, held a certain snob appeal/esoteric appeal for a long time. The idea of showing exactly what was captured, no more, no less, was so,so revered that many people insisted that shooting and not cropping was some type of near religious experience, some kind of goal worthy of devoting one's self to. And, I think a lot of the people who subscribed to Interview magazine really felt that way, that un-cropped, 35mm and its 3:2 aspect ratio was somehow a very worthwhile cause/goal/way of thinking.

 

[DarkShadow]

Don't crop in PP. Crop in camera. Otherwise, you produce crap.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing most folks on this forum are visually oriented. Because of that opinion and since there have not been any examples up to this point, please allow me.

I'll post an uncropped (to the best of my knowledge) of the DGN file from Bridge. I shot these last month. Let me back up slightly. My files are imported into LR3. There I will do a few certain tasks, not much and all edits are global in nature, but no cropping or tilt adjustments usually. I save the tilt adjustments unitl I open Bridge, since it is just as easy there. I save the crop tool for CS5. I'm by no means a PS guru and am pretty lazy for post work anyway, so most of the images I post haven't had a lot of time spent on them. Bridge gets the tilt corrected, WB treatment and the top few sliders tweaked. CS5 gets the curves adjustment, sharpening (USM or High Pass), CROPPED and resized. I'll stop here and admit that any prints to be made, which are not that many, gets a finer toothed comb ran through it.


Here's the DGN file resized for the web.

And here was my final result.

Did you notice how I turned a portrait oriented image into a landscape? Why would I do something as silly as that? Would you believe me if I told you the opposite method has also been done? Which image do you prefer? Oh behave, I'm not about to profess either is a great image, only for an example of why your above statement is filled with holes. If I bothered to run NR on it, perhaps it could be improved slightly. BTW, my cameras are only 12MP.

YMMV. Just my 2¢.

Yep You turned a nice shot into a very nice shot and close up to see all the detail.

 

[480sparky]

I'll let you decide which you prefer:


SOOC:

Or cropped:

 

[amolitor]

It's like deciding to write sonnets. By placing the sonnet restriction on yourself, various things happen, many beneficial.

There's simply no denying that it's a great exercise to shoot uncropped. Some people find it creatively empowering.

What's irritating is the people on both sides who sneer at the other side. You people can eff-off, 'k?

 

[Compaq]

Whatever, I do what I want.

(fake-rebell Cartman reference)