How to crop this photo?

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:52:44 -0800 (PST), RickCanada
wrote:

Hi: I need help in cropping this photo. Uncropped, to me, it is
unbalanced. I need to crop to a 4X6 format but I can't seem to
get it right. Either too much of the sky gets cut or too much of the
water is left leaving a horizon right in the middle of the picture.
Any advice?

http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/568938237EVjshK


First of all, straighten that image. You have a nice equidistant far shoreline
for this purpose. The slightest bit of skew in an image will be unconsciously
perceived by the viewer as "something's not right", but may not be able to pin
their mind's-eye on it. It makes the viewer uncomfortable and they don't know
why. Uncomfortable = not pleasing. This one needed a counter-clockwise rotation
by 0.77 degrees.

Use your rotation tool so it fills in the new border after rotation with solid
black. This is usually done by just selecting the darkest value in you image as
your editor's background color. In this case black is black. This will give you
a little more border to work with at the bottom later when cropping, and it
needs that little extra black there.

The image is "okay" but it can be a little more by doing a couple of things.
(It's basic stock-photography so there's not a lot that can be done to make it
"spectacular", but a few things will help to make it more pleasing.)

Cut off the extraneous sky at the top. It bores the eye and it's an easy place
for the mind to wander off the image. There is also a little too much of the
tree clutter on the right. It detracts from the smooth tones and clean open
expanses. You can use some of it to your advantage by noticing something in the
sky in the upper-left. See that faint wisp of cloud pointing to the upper-left
corner? Do you see a thin branch on the tree on the upper-right pointing to the
upper-right? You can use those two diagonal features to help tie and balance the
two corners of the image together. It's not so obvious that anyone would notice.
A subliminal balance to keep the viewer's eye drawn into the image.

Since you now have more black border at the bottom to play with (after that
rotation), go ahead and include it. The contrast between that, the blacks on the
right, and the lighter hues works well to frame the image. I thought it needed a
tad more black on the bottom when I first saw it, the needed leveling easily
creates it for you.

See this example to how I would have cropped it.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/...d8bd770b_o.jpg

Doing it this way strikes a good average between the oft' quoted "rule of
thirds" and the golden-ratio, putting the most important subjects at an average
of their intersections. Note too the slight crop on the left. I did it this way
because one of the clouds was trying to lead the viewer's eye out of the image a
little too much. It's all subtle things like that which will help with
composition and make someone stay to enjoy a photo rather than have their eye
slide off the view onto something else.

One last thing. The blues in the sky were rather grayed-out (probably from using
auto-white-balance?). I used an editing tool to increase saturation on the blue
hues only, and also darkened them a bit. It gave it just that little bit more
color needed to contrast and balance with the oranges of the sunset. Due to JPG
compression I couldn't select the hues that needed to be changed with much
accuracy, they were in large JPG sized blocks in your sample image, so ignore
that in my example where they become obvious when saturated more. It won't
happen on your original (it not having huge JPG blocks) if you take similar
steps. Darkening and intensifying the blues also helps to frame the subject with
the blacks, again with the intent of keeping the eye inside of the image instead
of having it slide off of an edge.

"shane traster" [email protected] wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:52:44 -0800 (PST), RickCanada

wrote:

Hi: I need help in cropping this photo. Uncropped, to me, it is
unbalanced. I need to crop to a 4X6 format but I can't seem to
get it right. Either too much of the sky gets cut or too much of the
water is left leaving a horizon right in the middle of the picture.
Any advice?

http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/568938237EVjshK


First of all, straighten that image. You have a nice equidistant far
shoreline
for this purpose. The slightest bit of skew in an image will be
unconsciously
perceived by the viewer as "something's not right", but may not be able to
pin
their mind's-eye on it. It makes the viewer uncomfortable and they don't
know
why. Uncomfortable = not pleasing. This one needed a counter-clockwise
rotation
by 0.77 degrees.

Use your rotation tool so it fills in the new border after rotation with
solid
black. This is usually done by just selecting the darkest value in you
image as
your editor's background color. In this case black is black. This will
give you
a little more border to work with at the bottom later when cropping, and
it
needs that little extra black there.

The image is "okay" but it can be a little more by doing a couple of
things.
(It's basic stock-photography so there's not a lot that can be done to
make it
"spectacular", but a few things will help to make it more pleasing.)

Cut off the extraneous sky at the top. It bores the eye and it's an easy
place
for the mind to wander off the image. There is also a little too much of
the
tree clutter on the right. It detracts from the smooth tones and clean
open
expanses. You can use some of it to your advantage by noticing something
in the
sky in the upper-left. See that faint wisp of cloud pointing to the
upper-left
corner? Do you see a thin branch on the tree on the upper-right pointing
to the
upper-right? You can use those two diagonal features to help tie and
balance the
two corners of the image together. It's not so obvious that anyone would
notice.
A subliminal balance to keep the viewer's eye drawn into the image.

Since you now have more black border at the bottom to play with (after
that
rotation), go ahead and include it. The contrast between that, the blacks
on the
right, and the lighter hues works well to frame the image. I thought it
needed a
tad more black on the bottom when I first saw it, the needed leveling
easily
creates it for you.

See this example to how I would have cropped it.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/...d8bd770b_o.jpg

Doing it this way strikes a good average between the oft' quoted "rule of
thirds" and the golden-ratio, putting the most important subjects at an
average
of their intersections. Note too the slight crop on the left. I did it
this way
because one of the clouds was trying to lead the viewer's eye out of the
image a
little too much. It's all subtle things like that which will help with
composition and make someone stay to enjoy a photo rather than have their
eye
slide off the view onto something else.

One last thing. The blues in the sky were rather grayed-out (probably from
using
auto-white-balance?). I used an editing tool to increase saturation on the
blue
hues only, and also darkened them a bit. It gave it just that little bit
more
color needed to contrast and balance with the oranges of the sunset. Due
to JPG
compression I couldn't select the hues that needed to be changed with much
accuracy, they were in large JPG sized blocks in your sample image, so
ignore
that in my example where they become obvious when saturated more. It won't
happen on your original (it not having huge JPG blocks) if you take
similar
steps. Darkening and intensifying the blues also helps to frame the
subject with
the blacks, again with the intent of keeping the eye inside of the image
instead
of having it slide off of an edge.

This crop is better I think. But it's a pity you have to crop 4x6. It would
look much better cropped wide.

PDM

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:10:20 -0000, "PDM" pdcm99minus this
wrote:


"shane traster" [email protected] wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:52:44 -0800 (PST), RickCanada

wrote:

Hi: I need help in cropping this photo. Uncropped, to me, it is
unbalanced. I need to crop to a 4X6 format but I can't seem to
get it right. Either too much of the sky gets cut or too much of the
water is left leaving a horizon right in the middle of the picture.
Any advice?

http://outdoors.webshots.com/album/568938237EVjshK


First of all, straighten that image. You have a nice equidistant far
shoreline
for this purpose. The slightest bit of skew in an image will be
unconsciously
perceived by the viewer as "something's not right", but may not be able to
pin
their mind's-eye on it. It makes the viewer uncomfortable and they don't
know
why. Uncomfortable = not pleasing. This one needed a counter-clockwise
rotation
by 0.77 degrees.

Use your rotation tool so it fills in the new border after rotation with
solid
black. This is usually done by just selecting the darkest value in you
image as
your editor's background color. In this case black is black. This will
give you
a little more border to work with at the bottom later when cropping, and
it
needs that little extra black there.

The image is "okay" but it can be a little more by doing a couple of
things.
(It's basic stock-photography so there's not a lot that can be done to
make it
"spectacular", but a few things will help to make it more pleasing.)

Cut off the extraneous sky at the top. It bores the eye and it's an easy
place
for the mind to wander off the image. There is also a little too much of
the
tree clutter on the right. It detracts from the smooth tones and clean
open
expanses. You can use some of it to your advantage by noticing something
in the
sky in the upper-left. See that faint wisp of cloud pointing to the
upper-left
corner? Do you see a thin branch on the tree on the upper-right pointing
to the
upper-right? You can use those two diagonal features to help tie and
balance the
two corners of the image together. It's not so obvious that anyone would
notice.
A subliminal balance to keep the viewer's eye drawn into the image.

Since you now have more black border at the bottom to play with (after
that
rotation), go ahead and include it. The contrast between that, the blacks
on the
right, and the lighter hues works well to frame the image. I thought it
needed a
tad more black on the bottom when I first saw it, the needed leveling
easily
creates it for you.

See this example to how I would have cropped it.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/...d8bd770b_o.jpg

Doing it this way strikes a good average between the oft' quoted "rule of
thirds" and the golden-ratio, putting the most important subjects at an
average
of their intersections. Note too the slight crop on the left. I did it
this way
because one of the clouds was trying to lead the viewer's eye out of the
image a
little too much. It's all subtle things like that which will help with
composition and make someone stay to enjoy a photo rather than have their
eye
slide off the view onto something else.

One last thing. The blues in the sky were rather grayed-out (probably from
using
auto-white-balance?). I used an editing tool to increase saturation on the
blue
hues only, and also darkened them a bit. It gave it just that little bit
more
color needed to contrast and balance with the oranges of the sunset. Due
to JPG
compression I couldn't select the hues that needed to be changed with much
accuracy, they were in large JPG sized blocks in your sample image, so
ignore
that in my example where they become obvious when saturated more. It won't
happen on your original (it not having huge JPG blocks) if you take
similar
steps. Darkening and intensifying the blues also helps to frame the
subject with
the blacks, again with the intent of keeping the eye inside of the image
instead
of having it slide off of an edge.

This crop is better I think. But it's a pity you have to crop 4x6. It would
look much better cropped wide.

PDM


I agree, that's why I didn't originally crop to 4x6. I didn't even pay attention
to that requirement, I never would. I think the image should define the crop,
not the other way around. That's always my first instinct when I or someone else
says "crop this image". If needing to be printed the blank paper will take up
the slack as white or black border if it has to fit a certain size.

Here's the same scene workably cropped to 6x4

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3141/...75e9c4cc_o.jpg

And 4x6

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3038/...a48b1b1d_o.jpg

To get the vertical crop some minor twigs and a small bit of half-cloud riding
the right edge had to be cloned-out, as well as cloning in a bit of sky at the
top to be able to get it to fit that proportion, it doesn't work as well
vertically. Not enough image to work with. Needed more foreground. It could be
easily cloned in but I don't know the experience of the OP.

Like this

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3218/...9c21e633_o.jpg

But then you have even more twigs and cloud to clone-out on the right, as well
as cloning in some sky on the top.

Now that I compare it to the other vertical, this one doesn't work as well.

Maybe a compromise between the two might land okay. It just doesn't work well
for vertical.

I missed cloning out that little power-line over the pier... Eh, enough time
wasted on this.

shane traster wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:10:20 -0000, "PDM" pdcm99minus this
wrote:


"shane traster" [email protected] wrote in message
...

[ ... ]

Like this

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3218/...9c21e633_o.jpg

But then you have even more twigs and cloud to clone-out on the
right, as well as cloning in some sky on the top.

Now that I compare it to the other vertical, this one doesn't work
as well.

Maybe a compromise between the two might land okay. It just doesn't
work well for vertical.

I missed cloning out that little power-line over the pier... Eh,
enough time wasted on this.

I wouldn't say "wasted"; very instructive and appreciated, more like.

--
Frank ess

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:33:50 -0800, "Frank ess" wrote:



shane traster wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:10:20 -0000, "PDM" pdcm99minus this
wrote:


"shane traster" [email protected] wrote in message
...

[ ... ]

Like this

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3218/...9c21e633_o.jpg

But then you have even more twigs and cloud to clone-out on the
right, as well as cloning in some sky on the top.

Now that I compare it to the other vertical, this one doesn't work
as well.

Maybe a compromise between the two might land okay. It just doesn't
work well for vertical.

I missed cloning out that little power-line over the pier... Eh,
enough time wasted on this.

I wouldn't say "wasted"; very instructive and appreciated, more like.

Well, one more note then.

After rereading this I didn't want the OP to get the impression that that
power-line should be cloned-out in any crop they might make of this image. In
the horizontal compositions that power-line actually works to for a nice
triangular element with the pier, leading the viewer's eye into the image. While
also creating a nice mirrored contrasting balance with the linear bright lines
in the clouds on the left. Both geometric elements tell they eye, "Go into the
image." The power-line also completes the content, letting the viewer know some
of the realism of today's piers and life-styles. It explains/defines/fits the
power-boats more fully. If the linear clouds weren't there and it didn't form
such a strong triangular element with the pier, then I would say, "your choice"
on whether to take the effort to remove it or not. If those were row-boats, that
too might be incentive to remove it if it wasn't a useful geometric.

Now in the vertical crop, where most of the triangular element are lost, that
bit of power-line now remains as an annoyingly distracting "what's that?" and
needs to be removed. No doubt about it. The eye lingers there wondering what it
is and by then you've lost interest in the content as a whole. Your eye falls
off the page there without much incentive to return once you've spotted it. The
two crop orientations are good examples to show why that power-line can work to
the advantage in one and detriment in the other.

Again, it's all subtle things like this that can make or break a good image.