On Sep 18, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 9/18/2017 7:07 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Sep 18, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 9/18/2017 1:17 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Sep 18, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Sep 18, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 9/18/2017 2:32 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On Sep 17, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

While you guys were arguing, I went out to take advantage of heavy surf.
While the surf was great, this is an imge of the ability of most of the
surfers I observed.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vcxbxh9oqliycro/20170917_surfing_5872.jpg?dl=0

That is a pretty good capture, and the D500 is doing what it does best.

That's why I got it.

As far as the surfer’s ability goes, he was out there wasn’t he?
Yep!.
There is a surfing competition coming up there next month. I was really
hoping to get some of the better surfers practicing.
There were few that were decent:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/q49tiud6ywe5d5m/20170917_surfing_5859.jpg?dl=0

Hmmm...
PN crop time.


However, there are some things which I find odd.
What is it with his right hand, especially the fingers?
Then with the shot taken right into the Sun/flare behind the board there is highlight clipping, his body is put into shadow deep enough to hide detail, and the skin tones seem somewhat reddish.

It was a foggy day. Had there been sun it would have been from my left.

In that case there is an issue with your post processing, because there is something odd about that fuzzy hot-spot to the right of the board.

I was facing SSW. You can check the exact position of the Sun on TPE.
The images were taken at Gilgo Beach, At about 10:00. I applied the ACR
fog remover, sharpened, and are you sitting, noise reduction. Here are
the RAW files to play with:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/x3snxtwr76t53xx/20170917_surfing_5872.NEF?dl=0

My processing and crop were different, with surfing shots, the actual surf/wave provides important context.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ipn74lo6fu2jb5g/PN_surfing_5872.jpg

Another wipeout:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/x75vd7gk9mc239h/20170917_surfing_5875.NEF?dl=0

My rendition of that one.
BTW: that might be the better shot of the two.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ipn74lo6fu2jb5g/PN_surfing_5872.jpg

Oops!!
Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a4v4akvj9e57vqi/PN_surfing_5875.jpg

Needs to be cropped. How much is always a judgement call.

It was cropped. In my judgement just enough. I also changed the aspect ratio.
I also dealt with the CA and fringing which was contributing to color noise, and I didn’t use a heavy hand on the ACR Dehaze.

Your severe crops do not always benefit the image. What would you have cropped in the case of these two shots to get close to your originally shared image?
The crop you made on your originally shared rendition of *5672* is too tight, and removes most of the wave, any interpretation of energy in that wave, and the context of the surfer’s action. Having the complete image with the context of the wave, and surfer tells the whole story, including the wave energy the surfer is dealing with. Crop to just the surfer, and the entire image suffers. I believe that is what Ron was trying to tell you.

For over sixty five years, I have cropped images.

There is nothing wrong with cropping an image. However, it should be done with planning, and restraint. I have been using cropping as a tool for a good percentage of my life with photography, from wet darkroom to digital. Sometimes a change in aspect ratio can be as effective, sometimes more so, than a bad crop.

i used to call it image mining.

Call it what you want, but cropping for the sake of cropping without planning, can lead to a ruined image.
Most of the cropping I have seen from you is when you are lacking reach from the lens in use, and you tend to over do it. Digital zoom is never satisfactory when over done.

I am not likely to stop now, unless the image doesn't call for it.

I wouldn’t expect you to stop, but consider the qualification you made above; “unless the image doesn’t call for it”, and apply it more often than you are known to do.

If I understand what you and Ron are saying about context, is
that more of the wave can show the context.

Exactly our point. Consider it as valid advice.

As non-duffer I am looking for the form of the surfer, as an abstraction. We are seeking a
different meaning from the same image.

Consider the action of the surfer, and the energy of the wave, which together can transcend your never ending search for finding abstraction out of everything.
What meaning is there to seek? The surfer caught in a decisive moment, is action frozen. It isn’t a navel contemplation.

If I cropped this image, it would convey a totally different feeling.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xjtalhb8vo60yrw/Sunflower%20Field.jpg?dl=0

Are you trying to argue my point? That image cropped would be awful.


BTW: I have been a surfer whenever the opportunity arrises for over 40 years, and I have been a more frequent, and enthusiastic Windsurfer since 1974.

Since I plan to do monochrome conversions, I am not overly concerned
about the color.

Monochrome might not be the best choice for surf shots, but who knows?

IMHO many sports shots can look more dynamic in monochrome. I am inot
intending my shots to sell location.

It always depends on the shot, how it is rendered, and presented.
Color is not always a tool to sell location, and as I said, B&W MIGHT not be the best choice for surfing shots.

--

Regards,
Savageduck