To crop or not to crop?

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 03 May 2007, 10:15

Ik heb zelf gisteren ook foto's gemaakt van de An-72 en de An-22 maar er staan er al zoveel op de site en het komt toch vaak op het zelfde neer,
maar wat me opvalt is dat er maar weinig foto's worden gemaakt van een HEEL vliegtuig. Vaak staan de vleugeltips er niet op of andere delen.
Volgens mij gaat het bij vliegtuigen voornamelijk om de details.
Hoe komt dit: Vinden jullie het mooi of is het een kwestie van de verkeerde lens keuze?

E-R-I-C · Post by **E-R-I-C** » 03 May 2007, 10:21

Most spotters have made a "full" picture, but this one is not a regular visitor and has a strange looking. So many spotters take detail pics. Most spotters are not so stupid to put the wrong lenses on there cameras.

Greetz,

Psst English here....

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 03 May 2007, 10:45

It's not only about this plane but I see it regular.
Details is OK but why allmost the whole plane whitout wingtips etc.

ehusmann · Post by **ehusmann** » 03 May 2007, 10:56

Apart from the detail shots (which are obviously not of the whole plane), it is all about the angle of the shot. If you look at the pictures, you´ll see that pictures taken from the side usually show all, but from another angle not. If, for example, you take a shot almost head on, you either have a lot of nothing on your picture if you include all of the wings. Or you cut of part of the wings and have a more filling object in your picture. This anyway, is how I crop the pictures usually and I think this holds for many people here.

Erwin

canberra · Post by **canberra** » 03 May 2007, 11:05

Janos wrote:It's not only about this plane but I see it regular.
Details is OK but why allmost the whole plane whitout wingtips etc.

It is all about the effect you want in a photo. Cropping of parts of an aircraft kind of drags you into the photo looking at details and not only the plane itself.

Besides that most people have billions of side on landing shots of KLM etc. so time to play around. To me a tight crop is often much more interesting than a normal side on shot.

Must be chocking for slide shooters but I think it’s a symptom of easier being able to try out new things with digital.

Here an example of the same pics with a different crop. Taste is personal but I like the first one the most

/Michael

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 03 May 2007, 12:44

Taste is personal but can you give me ONE reasen why the first picture is better than the second one.
The plane is NOT complete and this has nothing to do with detail.
I like the second ten times better.
But I think this discussion has nothing to do with this Topic, it's more for
Photography.

cHabu · Post by **cHabu** » 03 May 2007, 12:54

Janos wrote:But I think this discussion has nothing to do with this Topic, it's more for Photography.

I agree... Photo two is also my kind of photo.....

Chris.

canberra · Post by **canberra** » 03 May 2007, 13:09

Janos wrote:But I think this discussion has nothing to do with this Topic, it's more for Photography.

Could we maybe get a kind moderator to move the last couple of posts to Photography forum. I think the subject is interesting enough to continue a bit

Janos wrote:Taste is personal but can you give me ONE reasen why the first picture is better than the second one.
The plane is NOT complete and this has nothing to do with detail.
I like the second ten times better.

First of all I never knew the plane should be complete on a photo, who made that rule? I as a photographer want to decide how my shot should be. One of the reasons I totally stopped uploading to different sites. I got pictures rejected because of things I did on purpose by some know it all screener.

Anyway I like the first shot the most because your attention immediately is attracted by the nose and cockpit section (and the crew in the larger version). I also like the fact the blue sky is broken by the wings....

With the second one you just look at the whole plane filling out the center of the photo. The extra blue sky and wingtips doesn't add anything to the photo in my opinion.

Anyone else with a view on this

(in general, not necessarily the above photos)

All the best, Michael

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 03 May 2007, 15:10

THIS is what I mean:

Detail photo : O.K.

Complete plane : O.K.

Piece of the stabilo is missing : NOT O.K.

Maybe not my greatest pics but just for an example.

Redskin · Post by **Redskin** » 03 May 2007, 15:16

It's a very simple explanation:

Just a question of your preference, some people just like only "full" aircraft photo's, others like details. Why???????????

I personaly like the last an124 photo better than the second. The aircraft is better centered in that picture, while in the second it is more to the left.

but anyway, just as I said before, it's a matter of taste.

canberra · Post by **canberra** » 03 May 2007, 15:17

Janos wrote:Piece of the stabilo is missing : NOT O.K.

Call me stupid but again I like the cut photo the most. And this is not only to be difficult.

The only thing you get extra in the full pic is a lot cluttered background and another disturbing pole. So I will say as others have said to me, 'if it doesn't add to your photo get rid of it'. Exactly why is this piece of the stabilizer so important?

Anyway, funny to see the different opinions....

/Michael

SquAdmin · Post by **SquAdmin** » 03 May 2007, 15:33

I fully agree with Janos: I've never really understood why people cut of a small section of the tail/wings. For me it looks like the photographer wasn't paying attention when he took the picture. Therefore I like the first An-124 more than the second one.

The only reason for me to leave things out is to focus the attention to a certain part of the aircraft (e.g. the nose of the An-124 on the picture above).

Of course this is just my humble opinion and if you disagree I won't be bothered...

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 03 May 2007, 15:39

I think you still don't know what I mean.
Forget the background, forget the centering.
The second and the third photo are the same, I just cut a little piece of the left. And then the plane is not complete.
In my opinion is this more important than background rommel or excact centering.
By the way, in an other topic about background I placed this example:

cHabu · Post by **cHabu** » 03 May 2007, 15:41

Let me start with the folowing statement:

Cropping a photo isn't always positive for that photo....

canberra wrote:I as a photographer want to decide how my shot should be. One of the reasons I totally stopped
uploading to different sites. I got pictures rejected because of things I did on purpose by some know it all screener.

A very good rule, forgotten at sites like Airliner.net, where so called screeners decide if your photo is 'good'.

I recently transferred all A.Net pics to Myaviation for that same reason...

canberra wrote:Anyway I like the first shot the most because your attention immediately is attracted by the nose and cockpit section (and the crew
in the larger version). I also like the fact the blue sky is broken by the wings....

Thats your opinion....

IMHO it only shows an incorrect cropped photo....

If you want to direct attenton to the nose and cockpit, why not crop the photo to show only the nose/cockpit ?

Quick example:

canberra wrote:With the second one you just look at the whole plane filling out the center of the photo.
The extra blue sky and wingtips doesn't add anything to the photo in my opinion.

Yep, but is a very fine photo. And don't forget: Wingtips are also part of the aircraft...

"Mmm, don't like the tail, so i'll just crop off the tail of the aircraft..."

Although i do like discussions, lets not forget that we all have our own interpetation of what we like and how we prefer our photos.

(I usually take 'side-on' photo's.)

Bye, Chris.

Janos · Post by **Janos** » 03 May 2007, 15:45

cHabu, we are friends.
This is excactly what I mean.