Do you crop?

[Christian Olivet]

I have many times walked away from a scene, even after spending a good half hour in the perceiving and the setting of camera and not seeing it come together on the ground glass. In the beginning (I am still a beginner), I felt that maybe there was an anxiety in me that would pump me up to get the image. This didn't work for me very well, and on top of that, it is no fun to go throught the process of developing the film and printing the negative to just be dissapointed. I feel now so much more relaxed in my way about getting the picture. I has to come to me. I only have to be open. "If you build it they will come" comes to my mind. I guess you guessed that I don't do any post cropping of my 8x10 negatives, even though I have felt that thought run in my mind more than once. I feel it is ok to save a negative by cropping it, but I don't do it. I would probably wouldn't hang that print on my wall. The print that hangs on my wall was a gift of mother nature as she gave herself to me. It is beautiful because it was given to me by something much much bigger than myself. The experience got imprinted in my soul forever. I wouldn't want to edit that.

[Kirk Gittings]

"There are damn few photographs which can't be improved with a little judicious cropping."

In addition to my b&w fine art work (with which I would rip anyone's lungs out if they cropped them in an article about my work or me). I do substantial amounts of color commercial architectural photography primarily for magazines. Magazine art directors often use the above quoted approach much to the deficite of the image. I submit my commercial work visually complete with the intention of it being used full frame and usually it is. I agree with Michael "there is a great joy and satisfaction (at least there is for me), when the picture comes together on the ground glass".

"Cropping" is best done before the exposure is made. It is called composition.

[Graeme Hird]

So I guess the question is now:



"Does a real photographer crop in the woods?"

[Edward (Halifax,NS)]

Thankyou for all the insight and opinion. I have really enjoyed reading these replies. I will continue to do my best at composing the image in the ground glass but I won't be afraid to print from part of the negative. I certainly shouldn't beat myself up for making a good image just because it wasn't exactly what I planned.

[Scott Walton]

I was weined on shooting chromes and try, when ever I can shoot full frame... but there are times when a different crop looks better in the darkroom. A little trick I was taught years ago, after you make a work print, turn it upside down. This forces you not to look at the content but the composition. It works on B/W and color nicely.

[Greg Miller]

I agree with Henry A. Does it make sense to strictly adhere to the aspect ration of the camera you happen to have at the moment? If there is a good shot available that demands a different aspect ration then why not take the shot with the camera you have and then crop later? What if you were out with a 4x5 camera but saw an image that is better with a 6x12 aspect ratio? Who cares which camera you happen to have at the time - just take the shot!

[Henry Ambrose]

Kirk wrote: "Cropping" is best done before the exposure is made. It is called composition." Absolutley! As for other people cropping my finished work - thats something that I wish would never happen.

Which leads me to start a new thread titled "Perversions of Process"

[Chad Jarvis]

How about Processions of the Pervers instead?

[Chuck Pratt]

I think cropping is fine. The only "straight" prints of my own that I ever see are rough contacts.

I started out many [say no more] years ago with film and chemicals, and photojournalism. Black and white, color slides. Eventually I stopped that and worked in cinema and video, which absolutely have an aspect ratio and are not "cropped". Working with slides, cinema, and video was good rigorous training in "seeing"; it made me work harder to compose in the frame I was given.

Now I've come back to still images, MF and starting LF. No more photo-j, more "Art" (put your finger on the tip of your nose and lift it up) and I don't make a living from it but I do make a living from design. I still prefer using film, but I now very much prefer scanning the film, working with it in Photoshop, then printing the digital image. HEY! I tweak colors (did that in film and video, too), crop, clone.... It's MY picture, y'know? There's very little of my life that doesn't get edited somehow. Every paper I write goes through revisions. Every design I work on has umpteen iterations.

"Do you crop?" Do you breathe? the answer to both questions is yes. Using the full image is a wonderful way to work. There are lots of great images and series based on that. But you're still only looking at a small part of the world around you, so big deal.

I thoroughly enjoy photography, making my own pictures or looking at others' pictures. I think that pretty much sums it up.

[Leonard Metcalf]

Vary rarely, as I do most of my cropping in the camera...

As a philosophy I try to crop in camera with lens selection and camera positioning and camera movements (isn't that one of the reasons we love laarge format - the shifts, drops and rises - well it is for me)..

But am occasionally forced to when I have included a footprint I didn't see, or the lens shade has turned up in the image, or the quickload wasn't fully removed...

Then again, sometimes I let my hair down and go wild and crop and crop and crop...

Does it really matter when you do it, the final photograph is the important thing... Mind you those of us who love contact prints have no choice...