No.

[burnws6]

I've lurked the living hell out of some of these threads. And finally, I've found something that has made me want to take my precious time and speak out about it because I feel that it borderline impacts some of the users on here and how they will go along photographing1.

The issue extends out farther unto different areas, but I will focus on one.

I'll be blunt. I disagree with the general fascist rule of "don't cut joints, limbs, body parts off"

[At this point the reader should take a deep breath and reason that there must be some logic behind Burnws6's statement2.]

I feel that photography is a completely relative art. And that is an understatement. I do however, agree with something else I've seen on here, which is: Learn the rules, learn the guidelines, learn the Hitler3 ways of your manual, and learn things the textbook way BEFORE you break out of the box and do your own thing.

I spend hours of research following up on fashion trends, talking with designers and their photographers, looking through magazines, spending time at brand name mixers and all the bs that you have to sift through to get somewhere in fashion photography. I've seen tons.....and I mean tons, of print ads, published work with heads chopped off, arms cut off, a foot missing here and a ear missing there. And the picture looks fine.

Now if you're taking a snapshot of the family of course you want to follow the guidelines, but if you're doing a model shoot, and here comes the important part....PURPOSELY clip or crop a shot to your liking SOOTC....my hat off to you. There is nothing wrong with that. And I would say to ignore those who think it's a big no no.

This falls along with a lot of other things, just like this thread:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ub-shoot-b-w-semi-nsfw-critiques-welcome.html

And I think christie photo nailed it on the head. You don't need the standard black and white conversion every time. If you know the rules, break them. That's what photography is all about.


That's it4.









FOOTNOTES

1. Not really, 1 out of 100 people on here will never make photography their main source of income nor will they have any chance of success that matters1a.
1a. A completely made up statistic, that although probably true,
has no logic or study behind it. But it adds weight to my argument
so be it.
2. The immense irony was not meant.

3. The Hitler remark was solely used as a penetrating analogy. We did not mean to offend any big nosers out there.

4. This thread is merely a rant, and should not be taken as any serious advice, if you disagree with any of the above, by all means let us know. But a big **** YOU in advance.

 

[Garbz]

If this makes you angry, I get the feeling that you're taking the rule too literally. No one ever has said that a body needs to be photographed in it's entirety.

The "rule" has always been not to cut off the subject of a photo in a way that looks awkward. In fashion photography the model is not the subject. Who cares if she's missing a head. In a wedding portrait it's a different story. Again there shouldn't have been a misconception that you're not allowed to cut off limbs, but make sure you don't cut them in a way that just looks like you're useless at framing. i.e.
- for full length shots don't cut off people's toes
- for up close shots like the couple dancing, don't cut off the tips of the fingers.

In any case where the eye follows the subject and comes to an abrupt end when it shouldn't the result is nearly always an image that feels somehow wrong. Cutting off a person pointing at something halfway through their hand would be wrong, but zooming in on the face, chest, and cutting off at the upper arm would dramatically change the way the image is looked at.

With that said I fully agree with you.

 

[burnws6]

If this makes you angry, I get the feeling that you're taking the rule too literally. No one ever has said that a body needs to be photographed in it's entirety.

The "rule" has always been not to cut off the subject of a photo in a way that looks awkward. In fashion photography the model is not the subject. Who cares if she's missing a head. In a wedding portrait it's a different story. Again there shouldn't have been a misconception that you're not allowed to cut off limbs, but make sure you don't cut them in a way that just looks like you're useless at framing. i.e.
- for full length shots don't cut off people's toes
- for up close shots like the couple dancing, don't cut off the tips of the fingers.

In any case where the eye follows the subject and comes to an abrupt end when it shouldn't the result is nearly always an image that feels somehow wrong. Cutting off a person pointing at something halfway through their hand would be wrong, but zooming in on the face, chest, and cutting off at the upper arm would dramatically change the way the image is looked at.

With that said I fully agree with you.

I don't take the rule to literally, other members do. I also agree with everything you have said. But look around some model shoot threads and you'll see what I mean.

In any case where the eye follows the subject and comes to an abrupt end when it shouldn't the result is nearly always an image that feels somehow wrong.

^^ I feel that the above statement you mentioned is sometimes forced by the viewer.

 

[Dominantly]

What if I cut the limbs off before I shoot? You know, for better framing and emotion...

 

[Big Mike]

Many of these types of things get called 'rules'...when they would be more aptly titled 'guidelines'.

Lots of body parts get cropped in many successful photos...but there are a few guidelines that 'most people' will tend to agree, make an image look 'better' or 'more natural'.

For example, if you are shooting a shot of a standing model, but don't want to (or can't) include their whole body...it will usually look weird if you crop the bottom right at their knees. I think that most people will find that it looks better if you crop it either above or below the knee. That's not to say that you can't or shouldn't crop at the knee, if it works for the image.

 

[Village Idiot]

My roommates dog pooping in the house makes me angry!

 

[Village Idiot]

What if I cut the limbs off before I shoot? You know, for better framing and emotion...

What if your subject has only one leg? Is it better to crop the photo under the stump to show her realistically, or is it better to crop above the stump so you can't tell.

Further more, would the subject be angry with the false representation or would they be happy that they could get a date on Match.com finally?

 

[burnws6]

What if I cut the limbs off before I shoot? You know, for better framing and emotion...

Then you get the whole "don't cut his nubs off" complaints. Its never ending.

 

[Garbz]

In any case where the eye follows the subject and comes to an abrupt end when it shouldn't the result is nearly always an image that feels somehow wrong.

^^ I feel that the above statement you mentioned is sometimes forced by the viewer.

Isn't that kind of the point? Any viewer who forces their views not to like something doesn't deserve to enjoy what you produce. Take pictures for yourself and take into account some people just have strange tastes.

I posted this image http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a241/Garbz01/austria/DSC_6774.jpg on this forum a few years ago. Half the people seemed to think that the railing was an annoying distraction, the other half seemed to like the idea that it catches the eye and drags it straight back through the centre of the frame via the bridge.

Personally having 2 crops of this image I would agree with the latter.