Do you see what I see - even if I don't?

[jesse1dog]

Away from home and in a new location I ‘saw’ this picture. What appealed was the texture of the post, the chain – its shadow on the post and the wear marks as the chain had swung. I thought the colouring was well subdued, subtle though.




On the computer, and using Picasa, I enlarged the image to check for focus. Doing this process I ‘found’ this picture:



and posted it in the Gallery - not that anybody seemed very interested! I did get some private feedback from RFF member ‘Shirley Creazzo’ and as a result looked again at the original and came up with,








both of which seem interesting pictures – both slightly different crops from the same original.

I didn’t see the possibility of the ‘crops’ when I took the original photo but I certainly do when I examine my photos on the screen. I might just crop the main part of an original to produce a ‘better’ picture but as in this case I might find several hidden.
I’m a great cropper now, and you might have noticed that by my comments to Gallery submissions.

How about some more examples?

jesse

[Spavinaw]

Thanks for sharing your pictures with us. I like all of them very much. Of course you realize that by sharing your crops with us you have become a "share cropper". Moan.

[victoriapio]

Cropping did help. I like the last image the best. More repetitive patterns, nice light transition in it. If you frequent the location, check in and reshoot under different light. Might become an even better image.

[Chris Bail]

I agree with victoriapio. The last one is my favorite. The composition is more pleasing, and you still get the great textures and wear marks on the post.

[brainwood]

I think the third one works best for me. I like the focus on the single link and the geometry of your crop. It would be good to see it at higher resolution - I think its the kind of shot that would benefit from it and maybe try softer lighting, it feels a touch unbalanced at the moment.

Nice set of shots though... or rather shot. Actually maybe you have something here 3 shots in one. Maybe we should have an RFF challenge - how many shots (crops) can you get out of one shot ??

Chris

[zuikologist]

The first or third work best for me, but either might work also as a b&w conversion, with a little more contrast to bring out the texture: for me the shots are about the texture rather than the colour.

[Jamie123]

I'll be perfectly honest since this is a critique thread. It's a pretty generic shot. No amount of creative cropping will turn it into an interesting photo. And I'm not trying to be rude at all. I'm not saying it's terrible, I just think your time would be better spent taking other pictures instead of obsessing over this one.

[brainwood]

I think what's interesting here is the way the various crops change the balance and focus of the image.

They may not make it into something it is not but they do have the power to change the way you see it and make it more interesting

On the theme of cropping here's an example of mine



the figure lying down is intriguing... or so I thought at the time but completely distracts from the focus of the image..

so I did this...



Do you crop or believe the camera frame is only frame you need ?

Chris

[brainwood]

Actually as there is something going on with the angle of the heads I quite like this crop too...

[jesse1dog]

Chris
Thanks.
Just the sort of reaction and posting I hoped for when I started the thread.
Let's have some more contributions.

jesse

[Shirley Creazzo]

Originally Posted by Jamie123

I'll be perfectly honest since this is a critique thread. It's a pretty generic shot. No amount of creative cropping will turn it into an interesting photo. And I'm not trying to be rude at all. I'm not saying it's terrible, I just think your time would be better spent taking other pictures instead of obsessing over this one.

Hi Jamie - and I'll be blunt. I think you are referring to your subjective view of the subject matter, and not to the photography, and its presentation, which is the issue. To say this/these photos of a chain are 'generic' is like saying a painting by Mondrian is generic because it is just rectangles and lines.

[Jamie123]

Originally Posted by Shirley Creazzo

Hi Jamie - and I'll be blunt. I think you are referring to your subjective view of the subject matter, and not to the photography, and its presentation, which is the issue. To say this/these photos of a chain are 'generic' is like saying a painting by Mondrian is generic because it is just rectangles and lines.

Hi Shirley,

yes and no. Yes, I did give my opinion which is, of course, subjective. It was, however, an opinion on the photograph. I have no problem with chains in general. I did not give my opinion on chains, I gave an opinion on the photo of a chain. I cannot seperate the subject matter from the photograph as then there would be no photograph left to look at.

I'm not saying that there can be no interesting photographs of chains, I'm just saying that this one didn't really do anything for me. It was not meant as an insult and I know Jesse didn't take it that way.

[Shirley Creazzo]

Originally Posted by Jamie123

Hi Shirley,

yes and no. Yes, I did give my opinion which is, of course, subjective. It was, however, an opinion on the photograph. I have no problem with chains in general. I did not give my opinion on chains, I gave an opinion on the photo of a chain. I cannot seperate the subject matter from the photograph as then there would be no photograph left to look at.

I'm not saying that there can be no interesting photographs of chains, I'm just saying that this one didn't really do anything for me. It was not meant as an insult and I know Jesse didn't take it that way.

Jamie - First, excuse me for shooting and running. I did not find your reply to me until this morning. [I am new here and inclined to not navigate well.] And please, also excuse me for not wording my original reply to you more carefully. I simply had a different slant on the subject - perhaps, I admit, an incorrect one. I thought the intent was to choose which of the three approaches was the best one for this particular piece of photography. I never thought you were being insulting to Jesse1dog. And I certainly hope you don't think I was aiming to be insulting to you. Sorry if I gave that impression.

[rbiemer]

John,
I like the un-cropped version best. I find its composition more pleasing, to me, than the cropped versions.
I am by no means anti-cropping, I have and will crop my photos if I think they will look better or better convey what I saw.
For example:


intense by rbiemer, on Flickr

What caught my attention was the dog. I heavily cropped the original because I think the original didn't quite show what I wanted:


uncropped "intense" by rbiemer, on Flickr

Rob

[kbg32]

I have always found cropping to be somewhat "dishonest", except in terms of beginning photographers who are learning to experiment and "see". I believe one should learn by continuously shooting and crop in camera. Yes, I know that this is not always possible. I guess I follow HC-B in this regard.

While the OP did post somewhat of a mundane image, I do applaud his openness to share his visual lesson.

[FrankS]

HC-B also cropped his images.

[Kev]

My first post - here goes,
I do think the original photo was a bit bland, however the second crop of the single link has the potential to be special in my eyes. I would go monochrome, darken it down, and up the contrast in the way of the old 'lith' prints and make it all about texture. I do like detail shots .

[bobbyrab]

Originally Posted by FrankS

HC-B also cropped his images.

Why is everyone so pedantic about this, when backed in to a corner he cropped, although I only know of the puddle jumper I'm sure there were others, but as a generalisation he had his prints made up to show he didn't crop and liked to get everything composed in camera.

[FrankS]

Originally Posted by bobbyrab

Why is everyone so pedantic about this, when backed in to a corner he cropped, although I only know of the puddle jumper I'm sure there were others, but as a generalisation he had his prints made up to show he didn't crop and liked to get everything composed in camera.

Simply responding to the inference that he never/didn't crop.

Unless the goal is to enlarge the grain for a grainy look, I imagine any photographer would prefer to get the composition and cropping done with the camera frame rather than after the fact.

[paulfish4570]

i like the bottom most crop. and i think this subject was screaming for BW. rust, to me, is beautiful in monochrome. side-lighting would have made it a very interesting photo. then there would have been the links, the rubbing marks and a third set of lines in the shadows ...

[dbarnes]

If you have pixels to spare, crop in whatever part of the process makes sense. If you're dealing with film grain, it pays to crop earlier in the process rather than later. It's a fun challenge, trying to crop in camera as much as possible.

Back in the day, I filed out the edges of my enlarger's film holder so I could print black borders around the 35mm frame when I had a good full-frame image.

[ibcrewin]

I see donuts. I'm not even kidding. Or maybe pretzels.

[ColSebastianMoran]

Originally Posted by brainwood

the figure lying down is intriguing... or so I thought at the time but completely distracts from the focus of the image..

so I did this...

This is an excellent example. I agree completely with your crop. The cropped image is wonderful and a great improvement over the full frame.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by bobbyrab

Why is everyone so pedantic about this, when backed in to a corner he cropped, although I only know of the puddle jumper I'm sure there were others, but as a generalisation he had his prints made up to show he didn't crop and liked to get everything composed in camera.

... none the photos in the "Scrapbook" exhibition looked to be in the un-cropped full frame 2:3 ratio ... perhaps it was later that he started never cropping?

[jesse1dog]

Part of the cropping issue concerns the format in which you are shooting. Not all subjects will 'fit' into a 3x2 format, or any other that you chose to name. What do you do? Not take the photo, or subsequently crop? Or do you try to arrange the subject to fit the format? The choice is yours, but, you don't have to make the same decision every time.
One of the points I am making is that you do have a choice - so use the choice.

jesse