Surfer - does this crop work? (Page 3): Yes, this version may violate "the classic guidelines of moving into the frame," but it presents a clear exception. The composition, the...

anotherview Loc: California

Yes, this version may violate "the classic guidelines of moving into the frame," but it presents a clear exception. The composition, the subject, and the sense of motion call for just this framing to capture what you "saw and felt."

As to the triangles in the posture of the surfer, I didn't see them either at first. They hold the body of the surfer and his board tightly together.

I consider our perception a second way of seeing lying just below our conscoius awareness.

Craigdca wrote:

YES!!! img src="https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/i... (show quote)

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Craigdca wrote:

Hi Everyone, thank you for your responses here. I ... (show quote)

It's all about intention. If you know that the competition judges have a preference for focused cropping then go for that. However, looking at the original I would say there are other possibilities, and again it depends on your intention or preferences. You may want an action shot but you may also want to keep the photogenic qualities of the shot. For example you may like the translucent green of the wave which is in contrast to the darker sapphire blue of the deeper water at the foot of the wave. And you may have noticed that the wider shot still conveys a sense of movement and action so you don't necessarily have to crop in on the surfer unless you want it to be exclusively about the action. The version that's best for the competition may not be the version that's best for your wall.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Craig, I'd suggest exploring Expose To The Right/Expose Beyond The Right (ETTR/ETBR) techniques to solve your blown highlights and retaining detail in the shadows. However, these techniques work best if the original captures are in RAW.
--Bob

Craigdca wrote:

Thanks for the follow up, Bob. It helps knowing I’m on the right track. I agree about the bright highlights and hopefully can get a better exposure without losing the shadows too much. The polarized filter might just do the job next time

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

zug55 wrote:

I think that R. G.'s advice is very good. I would focus more on the negative space on the right--it makes this a more effective photograph. I would move the crop to give the surfer more empty space to travel into. If you have the option you may try to crop even less, using the same proportions. When I am not sure how to crop I make multiple copies of a photograph and then try different crops until I find the one that works for me.

That's a much more logical crop because it puts the surfer to the left of the center with somewhere to go.

The exposure is actually correct for the chosen ISO (the back-lit water drops are supposed to sparkle). But ISO 800 in this camera looks too noisy. It may have been made worse by too much sharpening.

What the image really needed was more exposure at a lower ISO, for example 1/2000s @ f/8 and ISO 400 or 1/2000s @f/5.6 at ISO 200. That would have reduced the noise on the surfer's body and face. It would have also brought the aperture well below the lens's diffraction limit.

Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA

To each.... The tightest crop is 'forced.'

The other problem with a closeup of the surfer and board is that it shows focus on the 'subject' is out of focus a bit. With Photoshop, I'd use the sharpen tool as a small brush so I could selectively sharpen at least the edge of the head and face to give it more apparent sharpness and contrast.

Craigdca Loc: California

anotherview wrote:

The UV filter supposedly filters the slight blue hue from an exposure outdoors. I keep one on all my cameras to protect the face of the lens. Your question may trigger some come comments.

I like them for protecting my lenses and have been using them that way, didn’t know they reduced the extra blue hue.

Craigdca Loc: California

zug55 wrote:

Thanks for sharing the original file. Based on that I would suggest a crop that is not as tight. I think that the negative space on the right is quite dramatic.

I could look at this longer than my version as it feels more inviting.

Craigdca Loc: California

R.G. wrote:

It's all about intention. If you know that the co... (show quote)

Noted

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Craigdca wrote:

I like them for protecting my lenses and have been using them that way, didn’t know they reduced the extra blue hue.

They filter out invisible UV but hardly any of the visible blue. Unfiltered UV is recorded as haze.

Craigdca Loc: California

rmalarz wrote:

Craig, I'd suggest exploring Expose To The Right/Expose Beyond The Right (ETTR/ETBR) techniques to solve your blown highlights and retaining detail in the shadows. However, these techniques work best if the original captures are in RAW.
--Bob

I love RAW. It maximizes what I can squeeze out of my T2i camera. Should my next camera be another crop sensor such as the rumored R7, or a full frame to gather more information from the shadows when lowering the exposure for such bright whites?

Craigdca Loc: California

selmslie wrote:

That's a much more logical crop because it puts th... (show quote)

I think you’re right about the ISO problems with this camera. I think 400 is the best it can do and I went beyond it.

Craigdca Loc: California

Paul Diamond wrote:

To each.... The tightest crop is 'forced.'

The other problem with a closeup of the surfer and board is that it shows focus on the 'subject' is out of focus a bit. With Photoshop, I'd use the sharpen tool as a small brush so I could selectively sharpen at least the edge of the head and face to give it more apparent sharpness and contrast.

Doh! I’ve used that sharpening technique for birds’ eyes but didn’t think of it for this.

Craigdca Loc: California

selmslie wrote:

They filter out invisible UV but hardly any of the visible blue. Unfiltered UV is recorded as haze.

I prefer to avoid haze but have been okay with RawTherapee’s dehaze slider.

I want to learn more about UV filters and found this article that seemed to give a good overview.
https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/uv-protection-lens-filter/

anotherview Loc: California

To each his own when it comes to the desirable rendition of a photograph.

All the same, the central principle of visual balance governs to impact perception. Another principle calls for filling the frame with the subject.

Effective image composition comes first in designing the presentation of a given photograph.

Other concerns, like focus and image noise, while important, come second. The human eye initially sees other elements above these concerns. Perception works that way.

Paul Diamond wrote:

To each.... The tightest crop is 'forced.'

The other problem with a closeup of the surfer and board is that it shows focus on the 'subject' is out of focus a bit. With Photoshop, I'd use the sharpen tool as a small brush so I could selectively sharpen at least the edge of the head and face to give it more apparent sharpness and contrast.

Hamltnblue Loc: Springfield PA

Another thing to consider when cropping is the ratio of the visioned printed pic.
If it is 4x5 (also 8x10, 16x20) try using one of the preset crops in your software.
Then drag your photo inside the crop until you have what you want. Then when it comes time to print, you aren’t disappointed that your selection doesn’t fit correctly.