davidrosen

I’ve gotten some good points from this discussion. Cropping is not a cop out for sub-par photos, but simply a tool to help the artist tell a story, whether it’s done pre or post shutter release.

Crystal Beach, ON, Canada

If we consider digital technology on the timeline with painters, Daguerre, and film, they all changed the methodology of art. Digital photography does not necessarily have to be a technique of “catch all” and then cull like the fisherman and his net, or the miner and his mining pan. Some photographers are very intentional and methodical. I wish I was more like that. But for now I have to cast my net.

I thought I wanted all my images to at least match the camera’s native ratio even when I crop. But 1) I think most digital cameras offer at least two aspect ratios (my MFT offers two); 2) Lightroom offers a handful of standard aspect ratios; 3) square often begs to be used sort of like a photo begging to be b&w when viewed originally in color. So perhaps it is the artist who decides and not the film or camera manufacturer.

After reading the Images > Seeking Critique > Babie-face thread I thought about cropped photos. I crop most of my photos because of my method of shooting. They’re not planned shots, with a tripod setup, waiting for perfect lighting, framing the view from edge to edge. Often I don’t fully realize what I have captured until I have downloaded into the computer and studied the results. I may discover an area in the photo I want to zoom in on, and so I have to crop. When I do crop, I try to conform to the rule of thirds to end up with an intentional composition. One downside to my method is the obsession over megapixels is rendered moot (because of cropping). Whenever possible I try to keep it to a minimum. I’m always pleasantly surprised when I have a final image with no crop.

Ok, let me get us back to the original intention of this post, described a little differently. If you make a print of your photo but nobody sees it, does it Inspire, affect, thrill, touch?

I’ve seen photos by famous photographers that do not speak to me at all. My closest critic is quick to say what she likes and doesn’t like. Then I’ll “explain” why the photo “speaks” to me.

There is some truth to that statement. There are bad photos I just cannot bring myself to delete. I guess they "speak" to me in some way. Is not that a sound?

Enough to say only the photographer needs to be the viewer (that is, if you consider the act of photographing more than mere vacation or family event snapshots).

So, although the photographer can view his or her photos, Adams distinguished between photographer and viewer. I contend it is not enough for the photographer to be the only viewer.

Ok, so when I told my wife about this posting she did not get it. I told that's the story of my life; most people don't. What I really wanted to discuss is whether you think it is worthwhile to take photos if nobody else sees them? That is not to say we should derive pleasure from our own work. But, is that the end game? Are we not looking for some validation from other people? And for some, in the form of monetary compensation?

If you take a picture but no one is there to see it, does it make a sound?

No I haven’t but my old boss left the very same message on my Instagram account. He also grew up in Buffalo and said everybody went to the midway in Crystal Beach. They just completed a new beach for the residents.

Does you heart sink a little because nobody replies to your posts (I do)? I’m still running an older Dell workstation that has not slowed down enough to enable me to convince my spouse that I must invest in another pc. I’ve been looking at Dell XPS systems and there may be used/refurbished ones but I have not checked. I’ll start with new because it will be a long term investment and I want to choose cpu, ram, storage and graphics. But cost is a consideration. I think intel i9 will be great for me and 32 gb ram. I’m not a gamer so graphics will be selected carefully. I noticed Apple’s recently announced high end graphic design systems utilize AMD cpu’s

Crystal Beach, ON, Canada

If you’re photographing a group perhaps use center metering and set exposure and then frame the shot. It will compensate if subjects are in shadow or faces shaded by hats.

Exposure: +0.5; Highlights: -100; Shadows: +32; Contrast: -91; Whites: +16; Blacks: -8; Vibrance: +13; Tone Curve: Red 98/60%, Blue 97% (about one-third from upper left)

Also, if someone utilizes and add-in to Lightroom for edits, virtual copies will not work, but the concept will still apply.

Good idea. So the copy does not have to be virtual.

I want to share an important element of my work on images in Lightroom (Classic CC - whatever the current version). It was greatly influenced by Peter Krogh in his book The DAM Book Guide to Organizing Your Photos with Lightroom 5. The fact that the book was written when Lightroom 5 was current is irrelevant with regard to the latest version because his concepts absolutely apply to the current versions as well. He may not be as strict as the process I describe below, but he was my influence. What I want to share is how I minimize the risk of editing an image unintentionally. I now only edit virtual copies of an original image. Editing is only done from a collection and not from the folder where the original image is stored. The virtual copy only exists in the folder with the original image, and in the collection. There could be multiple virtual copies with different edits of the same original image, but these virtual copies would reside in separate collections. After I have completed edits to the image, I update the metadata Copy Name to match the collection name. The only place where this virtual copy can be accessed is from the folder where the original image is stored or in the collection. If I restrict edits to collections only, the risk of unintentional edits is minimized (but not guaranteed). All of the virtual copies of a single image can be found in the folder where the original is saved, but the only other location for those virtual images would be in separate collections.