Topic: Great Blue and Big Lake (Read 5111 times)

RSL · « **on:** July 02, 2014, 01:02:37 pm »

Here come the croppers.

Eric Myrvaagnes · « **Reply #1 on:** July 02, 2014, 03:18:25 pm »

Very creative composition. All the pieces, and the off-center balance, really work.

If anyone asks you to crop it, just crop a copy down to about an eighth of the image in the upper left corner and send that to them.

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #2 on:** July 02, 2014, 04:23:32 pm »

Quote from: RSL on July 02, 2014, 01:02:37 pm

Here come the croppers.

Not me. Well, I suppose I might remove some of the space (not much) from the left, to emphasise the off-centre bird. Other than that, it's a lovely shot. And unlike your "horses", which I just don't understand, this one means something to me.

Jeremy

wolfnowl · « **Reply #3 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:51:30 am »

Nah. I wouldn't crop it, but I'd be awfully tempted to clone out that dark patch at the top of the frame, just to see.

Mike.

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #4 on:** July 03, 2014, 03:26:55 am »

Quote from: wolfnowl on July 03, 2014, 01:51:30 am

Nah. I wouldn't crop it, but I'd be awfully tempted to clone out that dark patch at the top of the frame, just to see.

Really? I think it's really important that it's there.

Jeremy

William Walker · « **Reply #5 on:** July 03, 2014, 03:32:31 am »

Quote from: kikashi on July 03, 2014, 03:26:55 am

Really? I think it's really important that it's there.

Jeremy

I agree. I think this would make a very good large print. Serene, but not boring.

William

seamus finn · « **Reply #6 on:** July 03, 2014, 05:29:18 am »

Don't touch it!

francois · « **Reply #7 on:** July 03, 2014, 06:33:55 am »

I like it as it is, no crop & no dark patch removal (it would make the frame empty)…

Well done!

Chris Calohan · « **Reply #8 on:** July 03, 2014, 11:09:56 am »

In 90% of all bird shots I've either shot myself, or admired from others the water droplets from the birds' feet add focal interest. In this case because they are not contrasted enough from the background, I find them distracting...other than that, whoohoo, lovely composition.

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #9 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:56:32 pm »

Any views on a high key monochrome version, Russ? I think it might work.

Jeremy

RSL · « **Reply #10 on:** July 03, 2014, 05:45:55 pm »

Actually, I tried that, Jeremy. Here's the result. I don't like it as well as the color version. A great blue has some really subtle, beautiful colors on his body. Oh, and here's the picture from the second shutter trip. Don't know that I'm thrilled about that one. For those who are wondering why I didn't swing the camera farther right: There are some trailers on the shore over to the right and I didn't want them in the shot. I rarely center a subject, but this is one time it seemed reasonable.

mal mcilwraith · « **Reply #11 on:** July 04, 2014, 01:44:37 am »

I prefer your 2009 image, titled "Great Blue Ascending" and I'll stick my neck and be unpopular and state I would crop this current image - but hey we have different opinions - that may be healthy.

Mal

Jim Pascoe · « **Reply #12 on:** July 04, 2014, 03:00:24 am »

Russ, for me the left third of the picture needs to go! At first I thought the dark patch at the top was an intrusion, but I agree it balances the picture, but the left side adds nothing and just puts the bird unnecessarily central.

Jim

stamper · « **Reply #13 on:** July 04, 2014, 04:07:55 am »

If a magazine wanted to buy it for a front page - and why not - then there would be enough room for text?

Jeremy Roussak · « **Reply #14 on:** July 04, 2014, 01:05:31 pm »

Quote from: RSL on July 03, 2014, 05:45:55 pm

Actually, I tried that, Jeremy. Here's the result. I don't like it as well as the color version. A great blue has some really subtle, beautiful colors on his body. Oh, and here's the picture from the second shutter trip. Don't know that I'm thrilled about that one. For those who are wondering why I didn't swing the camera farther right: There are some trailers on the shore over to the right and I didn't want them in the shot. I rarely center a subject, but this is one time it seemed reasonable.

I agree that the b&w is not as good. I'd not realised how much I liked the golden glow in the lower right until it wasn't there any more. I still think cropping a bit off the left improves it but I'm prepared to accept that I won't convince you!

I'd be happy to have taken the second shot, but it's not as good as the first.

Jeremy

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #15 on:** July 04, 2014, 01:11:48 pm »

Quote from: Jim Pascoe on July 04, 2014, 03:00:24 am

Russ, for me the left third of the picture needs to go! At first I thought the dark patch at the top was an intrusion, but I agree it balances the picture, but the left side adds nothing and just puts the bird unnecessarily central.

Jim

+1

Chairman Bill · « **Reply #16 on:** July 04, 2014, 01:40:53 pm »

Meh. No hand of man

Slobodan Blagojevic · « **Reply #17 on:** July 04, 2014, 01:48:33 pm »

Quote from: RSL on July 03, 2014, 05:45:55 pm

... There are some trailers on the shore over to the right and I didn't want them in the shot...

Russ not willing to include hand of man

RSL · « **Reply #18 on:** July 04, 2014, 02:41:05 pm »

Like I said, "Here come the croppers." I'm glad you guys didn't let me down.

luxborealis · « **Reply #19 on:** July 04, 2014, 10:09:08 pm »

You certainly baited the thread with your comment, "Here come the croppers." If this photo had been posted by anyone else without the "croppers" comment - yes, you would have received a slough (slew?) of critiques suggesting cropping. But you are Russ, and everyone who reads & posts regularly knows you're attitude about cropping, and, with your photography, you have demonstrated a level of ability that would preclude many from taking issue with this photo. I can hear them now, "yup, this needs cropping, but, hey, it's Russ. He knows what he's doing."

Well, thank goodness someone had the fortitude to stand up to you - thank you Jim Pascoe and a +1 to you, too, Slobodan and Jeremy.

Yes, the photo "needs" cropping to fall within the "rules" of "good" composition. And, yes, there are times to break those "rules". In fact, purposely breaking those rules, like you've done, sets up a purposeful tension, a dissonance that creates a kind of dialogue with the viewer, with the viewer thinking, "Gee, this really should be cropped. But the photographer didn't. Either he really knows what he's doing or he's a rank beginner who desperately needs some lessons in composition." and the photographer simply replying with the photo "as is".

So, this begs the question, are rank beginners who don't know how to compose simply skipping the seemingly unnecessary learning and getting right to the free-thinking "art" of it? Or, should more experienced photographers stop hiding behind their flaunting of the "rules" and realize that sometimes photos need cropping? Or should we be free to do what ever the heck we want with no room for criticism because we are free to do what we want and that's our "style"? Or...

Besides, when camera formats were decided all those years ago, who knew the world doesn't always appear in a nice, neat 3:2 (or 1:1 or 4:3 or 4:5 or 1.6235:1) ratio?

Personally, I'd crop this to 1:1 cropping (yup, I said it) from the left side as suggested. But, it's not my photo, it's Russ's.

(Edited for spelling and adding Jeremy to the list of croppers.)

Author Topic: Great Blue and Big Lake (Read 5111 times)