Last year I published a series of different crops of a picture on the old site. A nice way to use the blog function here to maybe start a new discussion about it ;) (and it is better to view them all on one page).
OK, first the pictures:
|
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
The first one is the original crop. It was a little bit boring, esp. the RAW workflow was not perfect. The sqaured version emphasizes the beautiful sky but on the other hand the powerful river (it was a flood at this time) is lost and the city on the other side gets too much attention for me. The archer stands out less as well.
Sometimes I like golden rectangle compostitions as the bottom ones are. The left one is more or less a changed crop of the squared version. The archer is more pronounced and the city on the other side of the river is less important. Still missing is the power of the water (you have to know the place to see it) and the sky looses some of its power as well.
Because of that there is a forth crop. It's almost the original but in golden rectangle (approx. 3×5 instead of 2×3). The better RAW processing make the water look muddier (caused by the flood), the sky more magnificient and the cropping gives the balance I wanted to achieve on this shot: the archer is a little bit lost in all the water but still prominent, the city is just a hint in the far.
So what do you think? Yes, critique is welcome!
Send a message
Search for members




Manuel Diumenjó Photography says:
1. taking all water out
2. taking the city out.
A pity for the beautiful place where the archer is...
by the way: I love the name of this post.
melpomene says:
Thomas Stachepro replies:
Here you see how far away the river usually is:
manganite says:
By the way, this square picture was one that started to let me think about using also square cropping... Thanks, Carsten :)
Carstenpro replies:
Taking it again isn't so easy. Usually the river is much smaller and the to have a day with such great clouds... ;) You can't even trick it by choosing a good view point.
manganite replies:
Sally Gal says:
oefe says:
However, if you want to a "journalistic" photo, guide the viewer to the flood and the muddy river. I prefer the last one, I don't know why. Perhaps because it's more vertical than the first, so that the flood is more pronounced.