To Crop or Not to Crop?

I've always considered myself a "purist" when it comes to my photography, sticking to the basics and relying as much as possible on skill and hard work to get good shots. But with the transfer to digital and with the improvements in lenses and resolution, the ability to make pictures better in post-processing (via cropping, sharpening, etc.) is getting easier and easier. Recently i've experimented with cropping and have had some really great results, but I somehow feel that it is a bit "unfair" and I worry that it may make me lazy, knowing that I can fix a shot later. I intend, in the future, to limit this practice as much as possible, but admittedly, it is a nice option to have. I'd be interested in hearing everyone's opinion or view on this subject.

Jason

Hi Jason:
My primary interest in photography is wildlife. Cropping is a way of life for me. There are few occasions when I can get close enough to my subjects to render an image in camera the way I'd like it to be presented. Even with the longest lenses, that is the case.

That said, I see absolutely nothing wrong with cropping no matter the subject. Unless you are using a camera with a viewfinder that shows you 100%, you are very likely going to capture images with stray things coming in from the sides that need to be cropped. I can't comprehend why you think it might be "unfair" to crop. There are very few images from great photographers that have not had some processing done to them... and yes, I'm including the greats like Ansel Adams.

Not every image works at a 3:2 ratio. Some images demand 1:1, others 3:1. My personal feeling is that the image comes first. If it works as is, great. If not, crop to what the images demands.

Hi Jason,

I think you'll find that in the digital age cropping is more or less a way of life. Ultimately there are limits anyway to how much cropping you can do as there are only so many pixels captured with a given camera (and thus a camera's resolution determines how much cropping you can do). The minute that you're at the point where you have to upsize an image in order to have enough pixels for your desired crop then your image's quality is going to start going down.

As Keith rightly pointed out, image processing has always been a part of the equation in photography. I tend to be bit of a purist myself, and if I do anything more than a slight crop I invariably mention it when I present the image (wherever appropriate - like in the NPN image galleries) - which, if nothing else, makes me feel better!

Cheers...

Brad

PS: I suppose you could argue that cropping levels the playing field a little - now it's not only those with super-telephotos that can produce close-up images of wildlife!

I don't know Jason,
I mean, at the times of film photography, you could overexpose a picture and then under-develope it in order to bring back details in the highlights and keeping details in shadows at once. Or you could enlarge a negative at, say, 18x24 on a 12x18 sheet, thus cropping away a large portion of the original shoot.
I do believe photography is a complex process in which the shoot in the field is only the first step. With film you had shoot, development and print. With digital you have shoot, development and print.
Each step is crucial for the final result, and we do need to rely on our skills and hard work in each of the three steps. Taking advantage of the technological innovations is not laziness, in my opinion. On the contrary, sticking to the basics could be it

Cheers,
Paolo

Jason, the ability to crop and sharpen in PP is just another tool to put in the toolbox.

Woodscraft is still my go-to skill when I need to get close to a wild subject, but when I can't get close enough for the comp I want, and I don't have enough lens to reach out, I just make sure my image is as well exposed as possible and that I'm using as low an iso and as sharp a lens as possible, and then I just shoot away, knowing I've positioned myself to make the best use of the image later when I sit down in front of the computer.

Not to mention this generally is a problem more for people who really want tight portraits rather then environmentals. Fact is, beautifully lit and composed environmentals usually have a much wider public appeal.

If you feel the ability to crop and sharpen is unfair, as you put it, don't use it. No one can decide what's right or wrong for you. And no technology or technique can make you lazy. Laziness (as well as discipline) comes from inside.

Jason - Here're a couple of other threads that deal with this a bit :

Thread1
Thread2

Hasn't cropping has always been part of photography? Cropping is as "unfair" as using a flash, a filter, or many other tools or techniques available to photographers. I see nothing wrong with using available technology to get the best result possible. Being a purist is tricky these days. At what point does one say technical progress to this point and no further?

I learned my photography back in the monkey days when you got to play with a real enlarger and could do things like zoom in and out to compose the image, dodge and burn with your fingers, etc. and sharpening back then was done through a magnifier that allowed you to see just how sharp your image was as you adjusted that enlarger. If you couldn't develop and print your own shots you weren't a real photographer. Now you can do all of that in Photoshop, etc. with the difference being you have a lot more creative control, but its all pretty much the same thing. So if you're not using all the tools available to you you're not seeing the forest for the trees--LJP

Some really great responses folks, thanks a million! It has helped alot.

When I think of cropping as being "unfair", I guess really thinking of a major crop, not just altering edges a bit or making slight adjustments.

For example, I recently took a picture of a sparrow at oen of my feeders. The picture was sharp and exposed well, but was oriented horizontally with plenty space to the left and right. Being shot at ISO 100, I was able to alter it, through cropping, into a vertical image with excellent results. Here is the final product:

http://jasontaylorphotography.zenfolio.com/p961902368/h2f5aacc4#h2f5aacc4

I love the picture, but felt a bit guilty removing so much of the photo. I guess it will take a while to overcome that "purist" mentality. But hopefully, I won't lose it fully.
Again, thanks to all for the input.

Jason

As the others have said, cropping is just one step in getting the image to look the way you want it to. You just need to keep in mind that image quality goes down as the amount of the crop increases, and find the limit on what is acceptable for your needs.

Since I work mostly with wild birds in natural habitat I tend to shoot "loose" compositions so I can deal with the subject's movements. I tighten up the composition in my post processing just before I resize and sharpen for output. I don't worry about cropping away 30% of a 10MP image; 50% is my practical limit; but I have one "found" composition that works at about only 20% of the 10MP image.

If you are routinely making large crops, then you probably don't have the proper lens or you don't have the patience or fieldcraft to get close enough to your subjects.

"My personal feeling is that the image comes first. If it works as is, great. If not, crop to what the image demands."

Well said, and I concur.

Why would you decidedly limit your decisions to crop properly? Cropping is the most powerful compositional tool in photography. There is absolutely nothing un-pure about it. In fact, it helps one achieve their purest visions.

And yes, digital manipulation is "easier" to perform than in the darkroom, but we all are doing the same things. Image processing is a necessary and hugely important part of creating a photograph, whether you use chemicals or electrons.

IMO, you're being way too hard on yourself. That's like a chef saying using seasonings on food makes him (her) less of a "Purist" In my view a photographer uses the tools that are available to them. Cropping is just one more tool, nothing more, nothing less.

Hi Jason;
Think of yourself as an artist, not just a photographer, and the camera is just a tool in the creation process, as is PS and any other mechanism that you may use to create your art. Be honest with yourself in the fact that you are creating the most pleasing art that came to you when you built up the shot. If that means cropping and recomposing, then that is OK - as with printing on paper we have the option to print what we want and to format the print in the most pleasing proportions. Again, size of print, type of media and the algorithm used to up-size the file will all limit the amount the image can be cropped. In the slide days we had to be bang on with composition and it took a while for us to learn the freedom of digital by shooting "looser" and recomposing in the computer. Have fun and enjoy the freedom, don't let old school misconceptions limit your artistic ability. Steve

Again, some great responses. This has really helped me out. Thanks everyone.

Steve, I think you've really hit the nail on the head with your comment about shooting slides. I learned photography by shooting slide film. After about 12 years of shooting, I found myself shooting less and less because of the money and effort that went into it, but when digital came around, I started shooting again, and now i'm shooting more than I ever have. So that is a good thing, but you're right about letting go of some of the old habits associated with old techniques.

Yet, there is still a part of me that will always, I think, try my best to compose the shot in the viewfinder, as opposed to on the computer. I hope that is a habit that never goes away.

Its always best to compose the shot the best you can in the viewfinder from the start. However due to limitations of the 3:2 aspect ratio or possibly the focal length of the lenses you have on hand you can't always get it right. Sometimes an image will look better compositionally as a square crop or sometimes as a horizontal or vertical panorama due to the positioning of everything in the frame. There may be something on the edge of the frame that distracts from the main theme of your image and ruins the composition but is easily cropped out making the image a real keeper. Even if it could have been done right with your set of lenses and the 3:2 aspect ratio sometimes we goof up and don't get it quite right. Many photos you just can't go back and retake them the right way because there was something unique about it that you can't replicate. That doesn't necessarily mean you have to trash the image, sometimes simply cropping the picture will work miracles for its composition and make it an extraordinary photo. My feeling is even if you have to do a heavy crop, if it makes it a better photo its alright. Its still good practice to get the composition right in the field and every photographer should still be taking this into consideration while they are out taking photos but if you have to do some cropping afterward due to limitations of your equipment or if you simply messed up the shot you shouldn't feel bad about it. After all, photographers have been cropping in the darkroom for decades.

There's just as much "skill and hard work" involved in post exposure cropping as there is in viewfinder composing. They are one and the same ... both designed to enhance the message you are creating as a photographer. Limiting your creative options to the time of exposure does not take full advantage of the art form. Even "purists" throughout history might agree with that statement.

When your final product is not a piece of film (like slides were) you are unfettered in how you might decide to create that thing that people see. Crop with reckless abandon and the giddy, playfulness of a child. Uncrop by combining multiple images. Go wild and show us something cool. Unless you're a crime scene photographer or something...

Pete D.

There's just as much "skill and hard work" involved in post exposure cropping as there is in viewfinder composing. They are one and the same...

Yes, I noticed that yesterday as I tried sneaking up on the image in Photoshop: if I didn't take my time, moving slowly and quietly while pushing my 20 pound rig in front of me inch by inch a couple feet above ground level the image would spook and fly off the monitor and I'd never get another chance to crop it!