Should I crop this photo?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by M-M, Mar 15, 2009.

  1. M-M

    M-M Guest

    M-M, Mar 15, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. M-M wrote:
    > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >
    > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >
    > Opinions welcome.
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg


    It all seems a little "central" to me, both the tree and the birds, both
    horizontally and vertically. Perhaps cropping a little on the left to
    give the impression of the birds entering the photo might help?

    See what pleases /you/.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 15, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. M-M

    ray Guest

    On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 10:30:20 -0400, M-M wrote:

    > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >
    > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >
    > Opinions welcome.
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg


    I don't think it would help much - the composition is simply not as good
    as it could be. All the points of interest are centered.
     
    ray, Mar 15, 2009
    #3
  4. M-M

    Guest

    On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 10:30:20 -0400, in rec.photo.digital M-M
    <> wrote:

    >Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >
    >This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >
    >Opinions welcome.
    >
    >http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg


    As posed this is a totally unrestricted question. As probably with any
    photo, especially wildlife, who is your intended audience when you ask this
    question and how do you intend to present it? Birders will probably prefer
    a crop which maximizes bird detail in some context which adds to the total
    scene. If the scene dosn;t really add then a close crop of the birds might
    be preferred. I looked at a close 4hix3wide crop such as the tree is not
    centered, nor were the birds, going a bit along with David's suggestion.
    The horizontal center of the crop was near the middle bird's beak. Hard to
    say it really was better.
     
    , Mar 15, 2009
    #4
  5. M-M

    MaryL Guest

    "M-M" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >
    > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >
    > Opinions welcome.
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > m-m
    > http://www.mhmyers.com


    I would like to see some cropping on the left, to show movement of the birds
    to the right (and to avoid too much centering). Then play around with top
    and bottom margins to get the desired proportions. It's too bad the tree is
    so precisely centered behind the birds, but that's something you can't
    really control--birds don't pause in flight to give you an opportunity to
    change the setup!! I do like the "moody" atmosphere.

    MaryL
     
    MaryL, Mar 17, 2009
    #5
  6. M-M

    D-Mac Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >
    > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >
    > Opinions welcome.
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg
    >
    >
    >


    There are many "rules" relating to art (Photography too) that whilst may
    be often broken for an effect are generally offered to help novices make
    better pictures.

    Probably the most significant is "the rule of thirds" although there are
    many more Da-Vinci and others devised for their students.

    Unfortunately this photo defies most of them and not to good effect
    either. If you can't afford a book on Da-Vinci's development of them,
    you find it a rewarding few hours browsing through the local libraries
    books on art.

    Sorry about the bluntness but if it were mine it would be in the trash
    bin, even though it has an excellent subject and brilliant lighting display.

    D-Mac.info
     
    D-Mac, Mar 17, 2009
    #6
  7. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <gpnk9n$c9b$>,
    D-Mac <> wrote:

    > M-M wrote:
    > > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    > >
    > > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    > >
    > > Opinions welcome.
    > >
    > > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > There are many "rules" relating to art (Photography too) that whilst may
    > be often broken for an effect are generally offered to help novices make
    > better pictures.
    >
    > Probably the most significant is "the rule of thirds" although there are
    > many more Da-Vinci and others devised for their students.
    >
    > Unfortunately this photo defies most of them and not to good effect
    > either. If you can't afford a book on Da-Vinci's development of them,
    > you find it a rewarding few hours browsing through the local libraries
    > books on art.
    >
    > Sorry about the bluntness but if it were mine it would be in the trash
    > bin, even though it has an excellent subject and brilliant lighting display.
    >
    > D-Mac.info



    Perhaps, but it is a photo that cannot be reproduced. I think the sheer
    coincidence of it all makes it art.

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
     
    M-M, Mar 17, 2009
    #7
  8. M-M

    D-Mac Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > In article <gpnk9n$c9b$>,
    > D-Mac <> wrote:
    >
    >> M-M wrote:
    >>> Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >>>
    >>> This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >>>
    >>> Opinions welcome.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >> There are many "rules" relating to art (Photography too) that whilst may
    >> be often broken for an effect are generally offered to help novices make
    >> better pictures.
    >>
    >> Probably the most significant is "the rule of thirds" although there are
    >> many more Da-Vinci and others devised for their students.
    >>
    >> Unfortunately this photo defies most of them and not to good effect
    >> either. If you can't afford a book on Da-Vinci's development of them,
    >> you find it a rewarding few hours browsing through the local libraries
    >> books on art.
    >>
    >> Sorry about the bluntness but if it were mine it would be in the trash
    >> bin, even though it has an excellent subject and brilliant lighting display.
    >>
    >> D-Mac.info

    >
    >
    > Perhaps, but it is a photo that cannot be reproduced. I think the sheer
    > coincidence of it all makes it art.
    >


    I don't dispute that. What I tried to say was I have plenty of similar
    photos (Australian wildlife) that are just as attractive as yours but I
    can't sell them because they look as "plain Jane" as yours does.

    I use a Nikon D3 for these sort of shots now and even at it's fastest
    shutter rate, only rarely get the shots I want. I think it's true to say
    that the right equipment will produce regular (not necessarily all the
    time) exceptional results. Lesser gear can get the same results but more
    of a fluke happening.

    Another idea you might consider is that composed differently, your photo
    had the potential to make you a few grand over it's life. More than
    enough to make it worth while owning the gear and spending the time
    studying art for photographic composure.

    D-Mac.info
     
    D-Mac, Mar 17, 2009
    #8
  9. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <gposov$809$>,
    D-Mac <> wrote:

    > I don't dispute that. What I tried to say was I have plenty of similar
    > photos (Australian wildlife) that are just as attractive as yours but I
    > can't sell them because they look as "plain Jane" as yours does.



    I once read that a great photo needs 3 things. One is the background,
    another the foreground. The third was called the "grace note".

    This photo only has 2 out of 3. A grace note would be a sun setting on
    the horizon, or a rainbow, or some horses somewhere.

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
     
    M-M, Mar 17, 2009
    #9
  10. M-M wrote:
    > In article <gposov$809$>,
    > D-Mac <> wrote:
    >
    >> I don't dispute that. What I tried to say was I have plenty of similar
    >> photos (Australian wildlife) that are just as attractive as yours but I
    >> can't sell them because they look as "plain Jane" as yours does.

    >
    >
    > I once read that a great photo needs 3 things. One is the background,
    > another the foreground. The third was called the "grace note".
    >
    > This photo only has 2 out of 3. A grace note would be a sun setting on
    > the horizon, or a rainbow, or some horses somewhere.


    Or cheerleaders.
     
    John McWilliams, Mar 17, 2009
    #10
  11. M-M

    mike Guest

    In article <gpnk9n$c9b$>,
    says...
    > M-M wrote:
    > > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    > >
    > > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    > >
    > > Opinions welcome.
    > >
    > > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > There are many "rules" relating to art (Photography too) that whilst may
    > be often broken for an effect are generally offered to help novices make
    > better pictures.
    >
    > Probably the most significant is "the rule of thirds" although there are
    > many more Da-Vinci and others devised for their students.
    >
    > Unfortunately this photo defies most of them and not to good effect
    > either. If you can't afford a book on Da-Vinci's development of them,
    > you find it a rewarding few hours browsing through the local libraries
    > books on art.
    >

    Had a quick play around and I feel it benefits most from a square
    format, top to bottom included, with the birds centered right to left.
    The hill-top level more or less fits the rule of thirds vertically and
    the entire tree just fills the frame.

    Mike
     
    mike, Mar 18, 2009
    #11
  12. M-M

    D-Mac Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > In article <gposov$809$>,
    > D-Mac <> wrote:
    >
    >> I don't dispute that. What I tried to say was I have plenty of similar
    >> photos (Australian wildlife) that are just as attractive as yours but I
    >> can't sell them because they look as "plain Jane" as yours does.

    >
    >
    > I once read that a great photo needs 3 things. One is the background,
    > another the foreground. The third was called the "grace note".
    >
    > This photo only has 2 out of 3. A grace note would be a sun setting on
    > the horizon, or a rainbow, or some horses somewhere.
    >


    Here's a little Photoshop trick that might help you "play around" with
    your photo. The picture lacks the basic "rule of thirds" for composure.
    You can change this and find an ideal crop area like this:

    Duplicate the image.
    Using the crop tool, make the crop size 1/3rd of the width and 1/3rd of
    the height. Draw an area for cropping any size you like and move it
    around, making it larger and smaller until you like what you see and
    then crop it.

    Do this as many times as you like and alter the aspect ration too, until
    you reach a decision you are either happy with or not.

    D-Mac.info
     
    D-Mac, Mar 18, 2009
    #12
  13. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <gppkal$b1m$>,
    D-Mac <> wrote:

    >
    > Here's a little Photoshop trick that might help you "play around" with
    > your photo. The picture lacks the basic "rule of thirds" for composure.
    > You can change this and find an ideal crop area like this:
    >
    > Duplicate the image.
    > Using the crop tool, make the crop size 1/3rd of the width and 1/3rd of
    > the height. Draw an area for cropping any size you like and move it
    > around, making it larger and smaller until you like what you see and
    > then crop it.
    >
    > Do this as many times as you like and alter the aspect ration too, until
    > you reach a decision you are either happy with or not.



    Gee, how did you ever figure all that out??


    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
     
    M-M, Mar 18, 2009
    #13
  14. M-M

    D-Mac Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > In article <gppkal$b1m$>,
    > D-Mac <> wrote:
    >
    >> Here's a little Photoshop trick that might help you "play around" with
    >> your photo. The picture lacks the basic "rule of thirds" for composure.
    >> You can change this and find an ideal crop area like this:
    >>
    >> Duplicate the image.
    >> Using the crop tool, make the crop size 1/3rd of the width and 1/3rd of
    >> the height. Draw an area for cropping any size you like and move it
    >> around, making it larger and smaller until you like what you see and
    >> then crop it.
    >>
    >> Do this as many times as you like and alter the aspect ration too, until
    >> you reach a decision you are either happy with or not.

    >
    >
    > Gee, how did you ever figure all that out??
    >
    >


    Because you asked for advise. If you'd rather not take it or knew it
    anyway, you should had used it yourself and not become sarcastic when
    someone offered you what you asked for.

    D-Mac.info
     
    D-Mac, Mar 18, 2009
    #14
  15. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <gpq1ug$qqo$>,
    D-Mac <> wrote:

    > M-M wrote:
    > > In article <gppkal$b1m$>,
    > > D-Mac <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Here's a little Photoshop trick that might help you "play around" with
    > >> your photo. The picture lacks the basic "rule of thirds" for composure.
    > >> You can change this and find an ideal crop area like this:
    > >>
    > >> Duplicate the image.
    > >> Using the crop tool, make the crop size 1/3rd of the width and 1/3rd of
    > >> the height. Draw an area for cropping any size you like and move it
    > >> around, making it larger and smaller until you like what you see and
    > >> then crop it.
    > >>
    > >> Do this as many times as you like and alter the aspect ration too, until
    > >> you reach a decision you are either happy with or not.

    > >
    > >
    > > Gee, how did you ever figure all that out??
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Because you asked for advise. If you'd rather not take it or knew it
    > anyway, you should had used it yourself and not become sarcastic when
    > someone offered you what you asked for.
    >
    > D-Mac.info



    I asked, *should I* crop this photo- not *how do I* crop this photo.

    Besides, what's wrong with a little sarcasm?

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
     
    M-M, Mar 18, 2009
    #15
  16. M-M

    ray Guest

    On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:23:50 -0400, M-M wrote:

    > In article <gposov$809$>,
    > D-Mac <> wrote:
    >
    >> I don't dispute that. What I tried to say was I have plenty of similar
    >> photos (Australian wildlife) that are just as attractive as yours but I
    >> can't sell them because they look as "plain Jane" as yours does.

    >
    >
    > I once read that a great photo needs 3 things. One is the background,
    > another the foreground. The third was called the "grace note".
    >
    > This photo only has 2 out of 3. A grace note would be a sun setting on
    > the horizon, or a rainbow, or some horses somewhere.


    I've not studied the subject extensively, but it seems to me, rather
    intuitively, that the real problem is that there is basically just one
    point of focus. All you can really 'see' are the birds with the tree as
    background. So cropping, for example to exploit the 'rule of thirds'
    won't even help much because all the focus of interest shifts with the
    birds.

    So, I guess, we're maybe 'onto' about the same point - it would be much
    better if there were another point of interest.
     
    ray, Mar 18, 2009
    #16
  17. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <>,
    Passin'thru... <> wrote:

    > On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 10:30:20 -0400, M-M <> wrote:
    >
    > >Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    > >
    > >This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    > >
    > >Opinions welcome.
    > >
    > >http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg

    >
    > Unfortunately, for all the reasons already stated, this is about the only
    > crop that would work
    >
    > http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3545/3369693480_4cc9eda207_o.jpg
    >
    > depending on how far you were from them, that is.



    Good one! I like that best!

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com
     
    M-M, Mar 20, 2009
    #17
  18. Passin'thru... wrote:
    > On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 10:30:20 -0400, M-M <> wrote:
    >
    >> Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >>
    >> This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >>
    >> Opinions welcome.
    >>
    >> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg

    >
    > Unfortunately, for all the reasons already stated, this is about the
    > only crop that would work
    >
    > http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3545/3369693480_4cc9eda207_o.jpg
    >
    > depending on how far you were from them, that is.


    Neat idea!

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Mar 20, 2009
    #18
  19. M-M

    ray Guest

    On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:38:15 -0500, George Kerby wrote:

    > On 3/20/09 6:23 AM, in article
    > , "Caesar Romano"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:51:16 -0500, Passin'thru... <> wrote
    >> Re Re: Should I crop this photo?:
    >>
    >>
    >>> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3545/3369693480_4cc9eda207_o.jpg
    >>>
    >>> depending on how far you were from them, that is.

    >>
    >> Nice lead.

    > Hunting geese with a rifle? Doesn't leave much meat...


    Depends on the rifle and ammo.
     
    ray, Mar 20, 2009
    #19
  20. M-M

    Marty Fremen Guest

    M-M <> wrote:
    >> > Or otherwise enhance it? Or just leave it as is?
    >> >
    >> > This is full-frame but reduced to 30% of original 10 MP size.
    >> >
    >> > Opinions welcome.
    >> >
    >> > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_6118dt.jpg


    I think putting the birds and horizon on the 1/3 and 2/3 lines improves it:
    http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/6818/dsc6118dta.jpg
    I don't feel trimming the sides helps, the birds need the flying space.

    --
    ____________________________________________________

    Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
    ____________________________________________________
     
    Marty Fremen, Mar 23, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Belinda Bertrand

    Photo Editing S/W for zoom and crop

    Belinda Bertrand, Jun 1, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    810
    nixjunk
    Jun 1, 2004
  2. Jon Danniken

    Crop Happy Photo Lab

    Jon Danniken, Dec 24, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    439
  3. How to Crop Your Digital Photo for Printing

    , Mar 9, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    411
    DP_Pro
    Mar 13, 2006
  4. Clement

    How to crop for 4R photo dev?

    Clement, Mar 27, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    555
    Clement
    Mar 27, 2006
  5. Wally
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    985
    Wolfgang Weisselberg
    Feb 12, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page