Square Crop AttemptModerators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators
Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent. Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature. Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread. Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.
Previous topic • Next topic
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Square Crop AttemptI'm trying to get the square crop concept down - been looking at my photos trying to see what would benefit from a square cropping. Here's a photo from a recent trip to Belgium - before and after. Subject is kind of bland - but I'm focusing on the crop here - square good or bad?
After Before `S
Never have been a fan of the square crop... see I would have cropped so the subject was more in a corner so there is a sense space in the image...
New page
http://www.potofgrass.com Portfolio... http://images.potofgrass.com Comments and money always welcome
Scott,
Rather than trying to convert an existing image from your library into a square image, you might find it more useful to go out and shoot with a square crop in mind. g.
Gary Stark Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
In my opinion, subjects that are already square or circular work well with a square crop. Subjects that aren't necessarily square or round, but are as wide as they are high can also work. e.g. a close up of a spider in a web works for me. But that's just the obvious ones.
I look at the photos you have provided, and I think you have cropped too much to make the square crop.
For me, the columns on the left and right do not do a huge amount for me ... I would crop the left (as I view it) to almost the edge of the pillar closest to the statue. On the right, I would go just outside the candle near the bottom. It may not be exactly square in the actual dimensions left-right vs top-bottom, but it would be very close ... my 2c worth Russell
Nikon D700 // 50 1.4 // 70-200 2.8 VRII // 24-120 f4// Tamron 90 // SB-800 // 70-300G I'm on Redbubble too ... http://www.redbubble.com/people/rflower If you can make one of my photos look better and you have the inclination ... please do so.
The reason I don't think this image works as a square crop (the image itself is very good) is because of a lack of symmetry. I believe an image destined for a square crop should either have a symmetry in either the vertical, horizontal or diagonal planes (or all three) or have an absolute lack of it creating a sense of unbalance. In this photo, the statue head is in the centre of the image space, but is looking to camera right, so is only just 'unbalanced'.
Dunno if that made sense Regards, Patrick
Two or three lights, any lens on a light-tight box are sufficient for the realisation of the most convincing image. Man Ray 1935. Our mug is smug
Previous topic • Next topic
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
|