CROP RATIO in news photography -How it is,What do you think,How you do it

[to-mas]

Hello,

I would like to open discussion about cropping in photojournalism. I was

studying the use of photography in newspapers recently(which i get to my hands)

and I found one interesting thing (at least to me)> use of many different aspect

rations of photographs.

Sometimes it is classic standard like 3:2,1:1 4:3, 16:9 but mostly times it is

just how it fits.

What really surprised me is, that this is not causes just by picture

desk/graphic department, but that many news photographers are cropping they

pictures to any ratios without any standards.

 

I would like to know, what do you think about it. It would be good of course

to introduce your background a little bit.

 

My opinion

 

Me as a photographer who learned most by the self education I try all the

time to compose to the standard ratios witch I like (full frame 3:2 without any

crop,3:2,16:9,1:1). I did this on college, I try to do it as a photo reporter, I

do it as an artist.If I made a picture that I found impossible to crop nicely to

this ratios,I think that it is MY mistake and MY fault.

 

thank for your time

[michaelging]

Thomas, I have been a working photographer for 35 yrs. I try and crop the photo as much in the camera as possible. At my paper we are very limited at to what we can do to our photos. We can Caption , Crop and Drop and that's it, no photoshop, no dodging and burning and no sharpening.It dates me, but in the "Olden Days" when we made prints we cropped first in the camera, then with the enlarger, and by the time the designer got the print it was a tightly cropped photo.

 

Now the designers want a little more space to work with, as they use computer programs to lay out the pages.The design of the newspaper its self has changed, it used to be more vertical as a broadsheet and many papers, and the one I shoot for, are going Tabloid shaped. You see more horizontal photos, getting better play than verticals.

 

With all the different design elements in papers now, like dropping in Type into the photo , they no longer go with the traditional shapes and sizes .Do I like it, most of the time no, but these decisions are made above my pay grade.

[pico]

It's the editor(s) who crop. There is no standard, and why should there be? There is no

divinely defined aspect ratio.

[kelly_flanigan1]

If one crops too much then the editor might crop you out of a job! :)

[to-mas]

interesting...

 

Can you please more explain that differences in cropping in ,,old days,, than now?

Do I understand it properly that in old days the photographer was the only person who did some cropping to photo?

When you are making some cropping do you use ratios or free crop?

Do you have a photoeditor in your paper?

 

I hope I am not asking for some nonpublic information.

 

I forgot to mention, that I have still just few months of pressphotography experience,so I am ,,new,, in all this. but I do photography for longer.

[to-mas]

that above was to michael

[to-mas]

PICO

Is the editor the only person who makes aftercrop in your papers?

 

As far as I know> Photographer is croping from the reality with his camera/lens before shooting and with enlarger/pc editor after to show his view of the situation. I also do some croping if, for example, I have 70mm lens and it will be better to have 80mm.

 

I think the (photo)editor's job is(should be?) to design/crop photography to give some visual impact to the design of the paper page. But please tell me how it is in your papers. To get better-global view.

 

,,There is no standard, and why should there be?"

As far as I know, there are some basic ratios which developed from the history of photography.

One thing wonders me> I cant imagine an exhibition of newspaper photography where will be 10 photos and every single will have a totally different kind of ratio (example 2:2.69, 4:2.15, 3:2.367 etc)

 

Kelly

Can be.

I noticed that many photoreporters doesn't leave any frame around subject.

[Spearhead]

<i>I think the (photo)editor's job is(should be?) to design/crop photography to give some visual impact to the design of the paper page.</i><P>

 

A newspaper is not Vogue. The editors' job is to provide information, whether pictures or words.

[to-mas]

jeff

yes, but it depend not just WHAT, but also HOW.

that is the visual communication.

[pico]

</i><i>Can you please more explain that differences in cropping in ,,old days,, than now?

</i><p>

What are <i>the old days</i> in your mind?<p>

<i> As far as I know, there are some basic ratios which developed from the history of

photography.</i><p>

Go back farther. Look at the motion pictures of, for example, Sergi Esenstien. You will see

full-frame, severely cropped (boxed) horizontals, and so forth in the same film. There is

no standard. Once upon a time, and for a little while there was a convenient factor where a

trimmed 4x5 contact print fit nicely inside the rules of a newpaper page - back in the hot-

lead Linotype days, but that was a passing thing.<p>

Any similarities one finds in aspect ratios merely reflect something passing, not a rule.<p>

And to go on how the photographer crops in camera... the chap who said that you might

just crop yourself out of a job has a point, although I've only a few occasions where an

editor told me I shot too-tight and he wasn't terribly irritated. They always find a way to

crop just about anything.

[pico]

<i>jeff yes, but it depend not just WHAT, but also HOW. that is the visual communication.

</i><p>

Take it up with the editor lest this become pedantic.

[michaelging]

Thomas, the old days to me are when we would make a print and turn it in to the photo editor who would crop the photo for impact if it needed it , but usually left it alone to be given to the News Desk. The people on the News Desk were not usually visual people, so they sized the photo and sent it to the composing and camera ready room to be half-toned. I would say in 95% of my photographs nothing was cropped. I think this was because I shoot tight, and most of the photographers at my paper were good at what they did, and we were left alone.

 

Today's Newspapers have a larger number of people who want to put their mark on the papers page. The integrity of the photo, as the photographer saw the image, is diminished , and at each step, the page designer, and the format designer all want to use their creativity to "improve" the photo, some by doing cut outs, running type in the photo, doing over lapping collages, whatever design option is the latest craze. Sometimes this works and sometimes is ruins a good photo. I will say that my photo editor was a photographer for many years, and he will stand by a photographer and their photo, but like anywhere he has to pick and choose his battles.

[Spearhead]

There is no "integrity of the image" in the same way there is not "integrity of the word." Articles get rewritten and photos get cropped, it's the way it is. If you don't like it, you can try starting your own newspaper.

[pico]

Imagine having to make pictures the same way a newswriter makes an article.

 

Thomas: Go back to a scene from the paste-up days where the editor places the printed

column on the page, and snips off the end so it fits. Today it's easier, that's all.

 

Feel better? :)

 

Pages and stories... everybody pees on it like dogs marking their territory.

[Ed_Ingold]

It is the editor's responsibility to crop pictures to fit the needs of the story and the layout as an whole. You are usually given instructions loosely describing the editorial intent and rather specifically "column inches" - the width and height to a layman. It is your job as a photographer to get inside the head of the editor and give him what he wants the first time. That's part of "editorial style". Having pictures sent back too many times is definitely career-limiting. Perhaps this reflects my training, from a time layouts were real, not virtural, pasteboards. Even in the electronic age, someone has to crop, and it should be you the photographer.

 

In general, there is no such thing as a group "too tight" in newswork. Ears of people at the sides of the group are optional, and usually cropped off. I would sometimes get the word that "so and so will be there. Put him on the outside [so we can crop him out of the shot]." Of course, the political hopefuls would show up with their arms around someone on each side ;-)

[to-mas]

pico digoliardi>

The term ,,old days,, have been used by Michael Ging.

ad RATIOS> I think there are ratio standards developed from the history of cameras, medium and paper size. Mostly used are 3:2, 1:1,4:

By this I mean the photography generally not just the photojournalism. At least I havent seen the photography exhibition where the ratios

 

like 3:2.369, 4:2.476 etc.were used.

You wrote ,,They always find a way to crop just about anything." I see this, but do you crop your own pictures with freecrop?Do you think it

 

is fine? that was one of the points of my question.Not just how it is, but if you like it like that.

 

JEFF:

,,There is no "integrity of the image" in the same way there is not "integrity of the word." Articles get rewritten and photos get cropped,

 

it's the way it is. If you don't like it, you can try starting your own newspaper."

I cant agree. Like the rewritting needs to be done by person who understands composition of the text, so the photos should be cropped and

 

edited by person who understands photography. definetely there are photos which are composed to some format, have some composition and logic

 

that cant be cropped without losing its power. I know there are not many and not so often.But there are.

 

Edward:

,,It is the editor's responsibility to crop pictures to fit the needs of the story and the layout as an whole."

This is the thing which I would like to know. In your papers its croping and layout responsibilty of the page editor (who also edits text and

 

manages writing journalist), the photo/picture editor who communicates with page editor and photographers or the graphic editor ?

Because so far I found that page editors mostly dont understand the photography/visual communication/composition and try to fit photo so they

 

dont need to edit the text.

And people from graphic department are thinking in terms of cullums, types and borders so they just make a box on the page in which they want

 

to put any photo.Dont mind too much the head cropout, composition rules,etc

And now the photoeditor ... as this position is new in my papers, I would like to know what is his job in your papers and what do you think it

 

should be.