Cropping Conundrums
Apologies if I come across as an idiot newbie in this post, but that’s exactly what I am, so I’m relying on you splendid chaps to put me straight.
It is one of photography’s fundamental truths that most photographs do not appear at their best straight out of a camera. To make your photos look better, they usually require some element of “fiddling” before they’re finished. Now fiddling fascinates me, the photographic type I mean.
Rich reckons I’ve developed a dangerous mental condition known as “cropping obsession.” Alas, no whipping involved, I’m talking about the compositional kind. I’ve been fascinated with composition for a while now, and have been analysing it in excruciating and torturous detail (torturous for Rich, not me, because he has to answer my endless questions) and my life is now lived so much according to The Rule Of Thirds that it’s creeping into everyday life. I’m even placing the focal point of my cakes off centre [birthday candles must never go in the centre of the cake, as this shows lack of imagination and a bland composition. As the primary focal point of the cake, the candles should appear off centre at one of the line intersections, but don’t forget to carefully crop your cake for maximum compositional effect. My kids were not impressed. Their cake was wonky.]
Anyway, in order to study how best to crop my photographs, I’ve been studying everyone else’s (i.e. yours), and asking Rich to explain why the photographs in question have been cropped in that way. It seems to me that cropping is of critical importance because it controls what the viewer sees. Cropping shifts the focal point of the photograph and thus changes the whole mood and subject of an image in order to convey to the viewer the message you are trying to achieve.
Now I thought good composition was simply a matter of cropping the subject to fill the frame, plus cropping out obvious distractions, and that was pretty much it. But alas it’s not as simple as that. Cropping is an art-form in itself, as important as the compositional rules you follow when you are actually taking the shot. Get the wrong crop, and the photograph is ruined, the message is lost, and what could have been an outstanding piece of art becomes something I look at and think “what exactly is the point?” I guess I simply don’t understand why some of you learned photographers out there decided to crop your photographs that particular way. Although it is perfectly possible (in fact it’s highly likely) that some of the more “arty” of all your cropping techniques which I’ve been moaning about recently are, in fact, correctly cropped and I’m just so darn stupid that I’ve missed the entire message of the photograph.
As to the eternal question “why crop that way?” there appears to be major online debates as to whether you should follow the Rules of Cropping, and indeed, whether or not those very rules exist to start with. As with all aspects of photography, there are times to follow the rules, and times to break them. I just wish I knew what the bloody things were in the first place. I’ve got to learn to follow them first, before I can break them. When is it O.K. to amputate a leg, and why is it acceptable (even preferable sometimes) to chop the top of a model’s head off? Shouldn’t the viewer be able to see the whole head?
So it appears that it’s all subjective (quelle surprise!) You can crop any way you want to make the composition look its best, but what you classify as your “best” is not necessarily what I would have chosen. To put it in terms that a writer like me will understand, cropping is like writing a sentence that's too long. Do you want to edit out a few words without changing the meaning of the sentence? Or do you want to use the very editing process to change the original meaning because removal of certain words results in a completely different story?
Anyway, I’ve now become so lost in my own composition that I’ve become mightily confused by the whole thing, and I’m now getting very cranky. Rich is getting so fed up with me analysing his photographs and suddenly appearing over his shoulder when he’s post-processing pictures, that he now hides when he’s finishing off his work, and last week a model told me that he’d deleted some pictures on camera as “Lin will have a go at me if I’ve chopped part of your arm off.” Oh dear. Clearly I am a Cropping Monster, and my enthusiasm is bordering on scary.
So if anyone else wants to volunteer as guinea pigs (not gerbils) for me to…er...pump them for their secret cropping techniques…all willing victims/advice would be greatly appreciated (by Rich as well as me.)
To crop or not to crop? That is the question.
Images are of HoneyB. Rich was kind and patient enough to explain the reasons he cropped them this way, largely because I refused to give him any chocolate cake unless he complied. The new Photographic Learning Tool: Photography by Blackmail.
It is one of photography’s fundamental truths that most photographs do not appear at their best straight out of a camera. To make your photos look better, they usually require some element of “fiddling” before they’re finished. Now fiddling fascinates me, the photographic type I mean.
Rich reckons I’ve developed a dangerous mental condition known as “cropping obsession.” Alas, no whipping involved, I’m talking about the compositional kind. I’ve been fascinated with composition for a while now, and have been analysing it in excruciating and torturous detail (torturous for Rich, not me, because he has to answer my endless questions) and my life is now lived so much according to The Rule Of Thirds that it’s creeping into everyday life. I’m even placing the focal point of my cakes off centre [birthday candles must never go in the centre of the cake, as this shows lack of imagination and a bland composition. As the primary focal point of the cake, the candles should appear off centre at one of the line intersections, but don’t forget to carefully crop your cake for maximum compositional effect. My kids were not impressed. Their cake was wonky.]
Anyway, in order to study how best to crop my photographs, I’ve been studying everyone else’s (i.e. yours), and asking Rich to explain why the photographs in question have been cropped in that way. It seems to me that cropping is of critical importance because it controls what the viewer sees. Cropping shifts the focal point of the photograph and thus changes the whole mood and subject of an image in order to convey to the viewer the message you are trying to achieve.
Now I thought good composition was simply a matter of cropping the subject to fill the frame, plus cropping out obvious distractions, and that was pretty much it. But alas it’s not as simple as that. Cropping is an art-form in itself, as important as the compositional rules you follow when you are actually taking the shot. Get the wrong crop, and the photograph is ruined, the message is lost, and what could have been an outstanding piece of art becomes something I look at and think “what exactly is the point?” I guess I simply don’t understand why some of you learned photographers out there decided to crop your photographs that particular way. Although it is perfectly possible (in fact it’s highly likely) that some of the more “arty” of all your cropping techniques which I’ve been moaning about recently are, in fact, correctly cropped and I’m just so darn stupid that I’ve missed the entire message of the photograph.
As to the eternal question “why crop that way?” there appears to be major online debates as to whether you should follow the Rules of Cropping, and indeed, whether or not those very rules exist to start with. As with all aspects of photography, there are times to follow the rules, and times to break them. I just wish I knew what the bloody things were in the first place. I’ve got to learn to follow them first, before I can break them. When is it O.K. to amputate a leg, and why is it acceptable (even preferable sometimes) to chop the top of a model’s head off? Shouldn’t the viewer be able to see the whole head?
So it appears that it’s all subjective (quelle surprise!) You can crop any way you want to make the composition look its best, but what you classify as your “best” is not necessarily what I would have chosen. To put it in terms that a writer like me will understand, cropping is like writing a sentence that's too long. Do you want to edit out a few words without changing the meaning of the sentence? Or do you want to use the very editing process to change the original meaning because removal of certain words results in a completely different story?
Anyway, I’ve now become so lost in my own composition that I’ve become mightily confused by the whole thing, and I’m now getting very cranky. Rich is getting so fed up with me analysing his photographs and suddenly appearing over his shoulder when he’s post-processing pictures, that he now hides when he’s finishing off his work, and last week a model told me that he’d deleted some pictures on camera as “Lin will have a go at me if I’ve chopped part of your arm off.” Oh dear. Clearly I am a Cropping Monster, and my enthusiasm is bordering on scary.
So if anyone else wants to volunteer as guinea pigs (not gerbils) for me to…er...pump them for their secret cropping techniques…all willing victims/advice would be greatly appreciated (by Rich as well as me.)
To crop or not to crop? That is the question.
Images are of HoneyB. Rich was kind and patient enough to explain the reasons he cropped them this way, largely because I refused to give him any chocolate cake unless he complied. The new Photographic Learning Tool: Photography by Blackmail.
Labels: composition, HoneyB
posted by Lin at 11:45 AM
10 Comments:
Before everyone gets excited about the lack of detail in Honey's hair I would like to explain that these were actually from the first quick set of images I always take at the start of the shoot just get a feel of the model and her interaction with the light.
In these cases it was obvious that the models hair would be too dark so I had her tie her hair back for the rest of the shoot. These are actually out-takes. But they did serve to illustrate cropping for Lin so I agreed to post them.
And after Lin initially said "They would have been better with her hair down", she now knows why I had Honey tie her hair up!
P.S. The chocolate cake was good.
I teach photography, and have for years. Most are beginner classes in which I pound on the rules.
Rule of thirds.
Rule of lost appendages.
Rule of horizons.
My favorite, Rule of three. That being, no more than three objects of attention should be in an image.
Rule of diagonals.
Rule of triangles.
Rule of subjects looking into the frame and not out.
Rule of space in front of a subject.
Rule of balance.
Every so often I come across a student with an art functioning mind. One that sees different than the rest. A person who understands that this image would look better if some rules were broken. It is hard for me at that point because I want them to understand the rules and concentrate on using them. I don’t even mention breaking them after you understand them because they all would be breaking them in a couple of days thinking they are great artists now.
That said, I break the rules all the time. Quite often my subjects are facing out of the frame; centered dead in the middle; horizons smack dab in the middle; appendages hacked off.
Rare that I break the rule of three, rule of balance, rule of diagonals, or rule of triangles though.
My thought on lost feet is and always will be, if you cut off a foot, remove the leg as well.
Arms seem to sometimes survive a severed hand if it flows with the rest of the image.
Cropped portions of the head work for portraits where you are pushing the viewers eyes to the face by removing parts of the brain pan, or on a horizontal subject to balance the attention to an area other than the face. Never on a standing subject when the rest of the body is in the image.
We may find that we like an image better if we do not follow some rules, but pretty much all of the great artwork that has lasted as such for hundreds of years included these rules.
One could ask, Did it survive these hundreds of years because it followed the rules, or because it was actually good art?
Got off on a tangent of art rules.
Maybe there is something in this dribble you were asking about. I have long forgotten the question.
Thank you Dave, that’s tremendously helpful. You’ve certainly earned your chocolate cake :-)
After I’ve studied and memorised all these rules I will doubtless become insufferable to live with, so I guess Rich is in for a rocky ride. We’ve already had several arguments where I’ve said “yes but what about the rule of…?” And he replies “it’s O.K. to break that because…” At which point I tend to lose the plot.
As to whether following rules are necessary to create outstanding art that endures, surely art is successful because of the emotional message, rather than compliance with the rules? Is it possible to create emotionally meaningful and outstanding photographs where the rules aren’t followed?
(Just curious.)
“To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk. Such rules and laws are deduced from the accomplished fact; they are the products of reflection.”
Edward Weston
True Richard. But for a child learning to walk, the understanding of leaning over too far in one direction tends to land you on your face, the laws governing gravity are utmost important. It is not until we have these basic ideas implanted in our memory that we can go for a walk without thinking about gravity.
Don't forget the Golden Ratio. There is also the relatives of the Rule of Thirds: 3x5 grid and 5x5 grid. Painters use these with the 3x3 grid.
Ro3 is a Kodak simplification of the original 3/8th grid, which is based on the Golden Ratio.
This post and the comments.. have been extremely helpful to me, as I try to make sense of photography.
Shadowscape: I think what richard is saying, by way of Weston's quote, is that certain things seem intuitively correct (just feel right). And it's really after the fact that we say, "Oh, it's a great picture partially because it follows these rules."
I don't think a child needs to understand the rules of "gravity" (in the academic sense) to learn to walk. Just like someone doesn't need to know the rule of thirds to think, "I like it better when I frame the subject to the left."
I realized I was following certain "rules" of composition long before I'd ever heard of any. It was later that I realized I'd done so. So, yes, I believe Weston was correct.
These rules were developed "off of" good images and designs, not prior to. Which indicates a natural and common (shared) preference for certain compositional choices.
I'm also not sure about the notion that rules are able to be broken with success. If so, they are not really rules. Maybe we should call these "Suggestions for people who can't see a picture for themselves."?
Lin: Compose, crop, etc. as you like. Eventually, you'll find your own preferences. These "rules" don't define the right or wrong of images. My composition will be different from your composition -- it would be stupid for a rule to have us compose in exactly the same way.
"When ancient opinions and rules of life are taken away, the loss cannot possibly be estimated. From that moment, we have no compass to govern us, nor can we know distinctly to what port to steer."
Edmund Burke
1729-1797, British Political Writer, Statesman
In life and in photography - if you don't know the the opinions and rules - how do you plot your course? How do you decide to follow the rules or not. How would you plot a new course if you didn't have that starting point? How would you know if you've found a "new" rule because you charted and took a new course?
Then there is the point of who's right and who's wrong. Nobody. It's like the age old question. What's art? How and what to include or not comes from where your at at that time. I'm sure that if Rich looked at some images he did long ago, he would do some different then he would today. I bet if you read another book or opinion that stuck a cord with you, Lin. Your views will change also. As I see it you need that starting rule of thumb and then you can go down your own merry path with full confidence somebody isn't going to like it and someone will love it. I have some great shots of my thumb to prove it.
Lastly - SHAME on you for with holding a guys chocolate cake. He was probably in need of a chocolate fix after a hard day, but noooo, he has to jump through one more hoop to get his reward. Tsk Tsk
D.L. Wood
Thanks Ed, I must confess all these rules are scaring me a whole lot.
On the bright side, at least Mr Wood is back to keep me in line :-)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home