general cropping questiion

ewick · Apr 16, 2012

I have tried to search for cropping questions but no luck. So here goes my questions...what is the general rule for cropping? I crop about 80% of my photos, is that too much cropping? and also on adobe camera raw (thats where i do most of my post editing) what does the ratios mean? like 1 to 1 or 2 to 3 and so on. if anybody can point me in the right direction on where to look this information up I would higly appreciate it. I have heard that the majority of your photos should be cropped. is that true? I have heard that cropping means you have allowed your self some giggle room. and whats too much cropping considered? thank you for your time and hope to get some good info from this question.

mikeduk · Apr 17, 2012

I wouldn't worry too much about how you crop or how much. The amount you crop will depend a lot on how you are shooting.

For example I often shoot at events where I don't have too much time to spend on the exact composition of the shot, so I fire away a few options in the hope that I should be able to make one of them work later on. I then look through the set and choose the best one for my needs and crop it down to remove any distracting elements and to clean up the composition. In that sort of setup I probably crop at least 80% of my photos to some degree.

On the other hand if I'm spending a day on the mountain where time is not an issue and I have a tripod with me I can spend a long as I want getting the composition as close as possible to what I want before taking the photo. In this situation the amount of photos I crop goes way down. Even then I might see a different composition in Lightroom that I hadn't considered in the field.

One thing I would recommend though is that if you are going to be cropping your photos don't crop them down too much as your quality goes right out the window.

KenC · Apr 17, 2012

It depends on the composition you have. Every situation will look best at a different ratio. I find I crop at least 95% of what I shoot because most compositions don't work best exactly at the format the camera captures. Some images will look best square, others in a long format like 3:1. I recommend you look at as many photos, and also paintings, as you can and read a basic book on composition, whether it is directed at painting or photography - the principles are at least very similar.

Big Mike · Apr 17, 2012

Don't over think it. Crop if you want to, don't if you don't.

And don't feel that you have to be locked into a crop. When working on an image (especially an art/landscape type shot), you might crop it at the start, but then change that crop several times as you go though the editing process. That is a great feature of software like Lightroom (and I'd assume ACR)...it allows you to change the crop.

The ratios are the 'aspect ratio'...the ratio of the width vs the height. 1:1 is a square. 2:3 is the ratio of 35mm film and most DSLR cameras (makes for a 4x6 print). But other 'standard' print sizes don't have the same ratio, so you must crop. 5x7, 8x10 etc.

For art pieces, many will crop for what looks best with the specific image, without sticking to a preset ratio. Then when they print it, they will leave space around it on the page (for printing on standard sized paper).

ewick · Apr 20, 2012

Thank you guys for shedding a little bit of light on this.

480sparky · Apr 20, 2012

I typically 'shoot wide' regardless. It allows me two things..... 1. to be able to skew/rotate/twist/stretch/tweak as much as necessary in post , taking this:

in post to correct the perspective of shooting in a small space using a 10mm lens:

And resulting in:

and 2. crop to the aspect ratio of a print that's been ordered. Making my composition fit perfectly in my 1.5:1 aspect ratio viewfinder may cause problems when a customer orders an 8x10 (1.25:1 ratio) print.

The_Traveler · Apr 20, 2012

It is my opinion that the typical ratio of a digital camera 2:3 does not work as well as 4 x 5 in portrait mode for pictures of people.
I always tend to crop as closely as I can to a standard ratio so that 1) it looks good in frames without custom matting and framing and
2) people are 'used to' standard sizes and non-standard pulls attention from the image.

KmH · Apr 20, 2012

Aspect ratio defines the shape of the print. A square has a 1:1 aspect ratio, meaning the sides are the same length as the top/bottom.

The standard DSLR aspect ratio is 3:2. That means the shape of the image is a rectangle, and the long side is 3 units long while the short side is only 2 units long.
If the unit is 2", a 3:2 aspect print is a 6" wide by 4" tall landscape/horizontal oriented print. If the aspect ratio is stated as 2:3, it's a portrait/vertical oriented print that is 4" wide by 6" tall

An 8x10 (10x8) print has a 4:5 (5:4) aspect ratio, and the unit is 2". If the unit is 4", a 5:4 aspect ratio print is 20" wide by 16 tall".

imagemaker46 · Apr 20, 2012

There are no rules in photography. Crop the image the way you want. Sometimes photos look great as squares, sometimes long and thin, doesn't matter, as long as you like how it looks.

MReid · Apr 20, 2012

Depending on the subject and how much time I have to think about it I try to take the full frame photo to begin with.

Having said that I often see crops I like better while processing, I pay no attention to aspect ratios. 99.9 percent of my photos are never printed.
I draw out the crop to where it looks best to me and crop it.

If you know the customer is planning to make actual prints...then ratios become important.

KmH · Apr 20, 2012

imagemaker46 said:
There are no rules in photography. Crop the image the way you want. Sometimes photos look great as squares, sometimes long and thin, doesn't matter, as long as you like how it looks.

Or stated another way, crop for content.

The goal is to get it as close to right in the camera, because cropping requires throwing out pixels. Pixles are resolution.

However, because standard print sized have different aspect ratios, to allow cropping the same photo to those diffeent aspect ratios you have to leave room in the camea's viewfinder when you compose the original shot. It's called 'shooting fat'.