Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Couldn't bring myself to crop any of this...should I? and all other comments welcome.

(Download)

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

I would not crop a single thing. That is one of the sweetest pictures I've ever seen. The composition is just nailed in camera (goes again to knowing what you are doing).

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Most of my grabs are a quick response as my models are very fluid Chuck. I usually have too much and have to crop and sometimes not enough and wished I hadn't gone so tight. Thank you.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I love the perspective and most of the framing. I don't care for the tall pole on the right. Because it's the only one and it extends to the top, it is a little too prominent in my view. You left it in for a reason, Frank, so I'm interested in your decision, if you'd indulge me.

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Interesting. It raises a question in my mind about finishing. Back in the day pretty much the choice would be between leaving it in or cropping it out. I like it cropped as it is, but I admit that I saw the pole and didn't care for it, but I would not like to change the composition with a crop to get rid of it. Of course the third thing is to clone it out. I'm raising something of a philosophical question: should we because we can? "Back in the day," other than cropping, we'd have to take an airbrush to that pole, then make a copy negative and print from that. My experience always was that that was to be avoided because the second generation was never as good. Now we can remove the pole seamlessly without harming the composition, but must we remove it because it's a minor distraction? I know that working for some news organizations altering a picture can get you fired. Obviously this is not that, buuuuuuut...

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Ultimately, it's the photographer who must be satisfied, not us viewers...unless we're paying Frank for a print maybe

I just posted a series to Gallery in which I joked about not being able to find crows to fly through the scene (always missing that "one" key element - lol). Could have added them, of course, but wanted to keep that composition pure (didn't even crop).

Interesting points for a potential lively discussion, Chuck, should someone wish to host (wink).

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

It's fine to carry on that discussion here. For me this image seems heavy left so led to my leaving the pole, to create some perceived balance. After reviewing comments perhaps a chainsaw to the horizon line might improve. This is another uncommon for me, un cropped shot Linda.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Thank you, Frank. I see now your issue with the balance. I always really enjoy understanding the viewpoint of the photographer. Appreciate!

Chuck_893 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

I always have to fall back on the "if I had made it" thing. That's a beautiful set, Linda. If I had made that sunrise and I had a handy flock of crows in my files I don't think I'd have much compunction about putting them in, up right, flying right to left, maybe 5 or 6 of 'em.

As for Frank's picture, If I Had Made It I think I would have cloned the post completely out, right down to the railing. It would be very simple to do even at my skill level. I don't personally think it provides any more heft to the right side than the railing does, plus I think it's a distraction. Indeed, ONLY Frank can make that decision.

The reason I asked the question wasn't necessarily about the ethics of doing so (although I have often seen ethical arguments against post processing in general and image alteration in particular), but rather more, maybe, the wonder of what we can do and, also maybe, if there is an ethical line? I take stuff out of pictures all the time if I think they distract from the main subject. Of course I dodge and burn and sharpen and blur and vignette, but I did all that in my wet darkroom. It was even possible to double-print in, say, a flock of crows, but that also would be a master print that then had to be copied because trying to make a print run double-printing all of them was pretty tedious. But prints from a copy negative, no matter how good, were never as sharp or crisp as the master.

In this new section we seem to be gravitating strongly toward the art of photomanipulation, which since the relatively recent advent of Photoshop and Corel Draw and others have brought it within reach of people (like me!) who before could not have dreamed of being able to do the stuff we can do now. And it gets easier all the time. I LOVE it! And have few scruples about using it. I have more than once added or moved a bird that was needed, or in the wrong place (stupid birds).

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

To answer the original question: I like the image as it is - in my mind it is "small kids in a large world"

to answer the added question: In the days of film, I usually used Kodachrome, and I never had a darkroom, so I never had an opportunity to manipulate images. As I've commented several times here, I'm not an artist, and the technician in me rebels at an image that doesn't reflect reality - but that is just me; if you showed me the image without the pole, I wouldn't have missed it {and that might even be true if I'd been there every year for the past twenty years}

added: on a second look, I like it better with the pole; without the pole, the area higher than the kids has too much pastel for my taste.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

I guess because I know the scene the pole is not a distraction for me. I thank you for your comments and appreciate your participation rehess.

Dannj

I love this shot as is. And I completely get your comment on the fluid models...I've been there!
Suggestion: Have you tried cropping it so that their hands become the center of the photo? To me that creates a whole different perspective, visually and emotionally.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Welcome to the section Dannj, thank you for the suggestion it is a viable option. Look forward to seeing more of you here.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Leave that pole for two reasons. 1. It adds some balance to the photo. 2. It's there; it's part of the scene and it doesn't distract from the primary subject, so why remove it?

ediesaul

Your series of the kids is wonder-ful!

In this photo, I would delete the metal things on both sides.