Published: Saturday 26th of March 2005 12:06:27 AM
I agree John. I mean, I guess there are rules about those kinds of things, but if everone followed the "rules" it would be boring. I constantly see publications with the rules broken...but it works for the shot. Makes it very confusing for me...whatcha gonna do, huh?
interesting Try removing distracting elements from the image and see if it is improved or not. Try PS or using a faster F/stop could solve tht for you as well. As for cutting off feet and other elements in magazines, that is not so much the photographers choice but the art director and or editor's direction, and they follow some basic rules. If you examine where the body parts are cut off you can determine the rules for yourself. But better to get it all in and let them crop it, instead of cropping in camera and getting them ticked off over your choice.
Hi John: I think it depends on what is being sold as to what is included. If the advertiser doesn't sell shoes, they may not want the feet included. In the case of this image, I'd say the photographer works for an agency that sells smiles.
I should definitely have removed those, but it wasn't my place which did not make it easy ..!
I find the left side with the ?CD's? a little distracting, but the cropping of the feet looks fine to me.
That's a very interesting comment Don, thank you and I certainly get the point about the "editors" and the independent choices that they make.I guess one should follow some basic rules. That said however, I have ben looking recently at photos by Patrick Demarchelier and Helmut Newton, neither of them care a hoot about hands and feet being cut off. I guess that someone of that class makes his own rules and does not need to follow those of the said "experts", in which case it is the editors that comply with his wishes and not the other way around.
Well, this is also the point that I was trying to make.
It seems to me that sometimes leaving hands or feet in the picture can RUIN an otherwise beautiful model. There are many beautiful people who don't have beautiful hands/feet and, on the viewer side, majority of us care a bunch about hands and feet a lot. Humans are especially sensitive to deviations in the digits since they are the first to betray possible genetic mutations that may interfere with successful procreation (at least such is the evolutionary explanation for this sensitivity).
He he ... did you know that during formation, the fingers of the hands are fused. There is then a process called "apoptosis" that destroys the cells in between and separates the fingers (likewise, blood vessels are solid, before their inside is eaten away). Sometimes this goes wrong, especially in feet. So its just an evolutionary process - we were all ducks once !
On the settee ...cont A lot of discussion arises around hands and feet that are cut off, yet I'm always surprised to see that in pictures that are published in PHOTO or VOGUE, none of the top rated photographers that publish in such magazines really care very much for such details ... I wonder if we don't all suffer from an excess of zeal sometimes ...