Posts: bajadreamer | Ugly Hedgehog

larryepage wrote:

In my photography classes, I was taught to print t... (show quote)

Because I am shooting primarily birds, it is more difficult to fill the frame and so I have to make a decision with each shot as to how much background I want to include. Does it add or detract from the picture? With this shot, some unique (at least for me) circumstances intervened that precluded any pre shot consideration for aspect ratio.

Jun 7, 2022 17:49:57 #

User ID wrote:

If there were no distractions that needed to be cropped out, I would never have cropped the frame to match the subject. A subject needs an environment. If you seek to emphasise that a subject forms a narrow horizontal shape, try putting it somewhere within a square-ish field thaz barely wide enough for the subject but with plenty of room above and below.

In general I certainly agree with your thoughts. In this picture, that was impossible. I saw this bird coming some distance off and was able to acquire focus as he came toward me. He was flying fast and low; even though I was using a zoom, there was no way to adjust the zoom to compose. Unfortunately of the 28 shots in the burst, this is the one that had the best head and wing position. Bad news because the wing was clipped. I am attaching an unedited SOC shot. I had to add canvas to the L side in order to clone, reverse and place the L wing tip over to the right side. I then used the liquify tool to move that wing tip slightly to make it not a mirror image of the donor wing.

(Download)

Jun 7, 2022 17:43:59 #

CHG_CANON wrote:

Personally, I only use 'official' ratios. My images start at 3x2 from the camera. I may change the 16:10 that fits my own main computer monitor, or 16:9, when updating a landscape orientation. I'm more likely to retain 3:2 for portrait orientation, or 5x4. Although IG supports 5x4, I tend to crop to a 1:1 square for IG posts. If you don't use standard ratios, you can't control how your images might be viewed, nor how they'll find into frames when printed.

I guess that has been my reasoning in the past staying with 3:2 or 5:4 type crops. I do not post on IG so that is a moot point. I have saved and often check with your post of long ago on resizing.

Jun 7, 2022 09:02:16 #

PaulBrit wrote:

One of the benefits of a digital world is the ability to compose the shot to suit the image. As you have done on what is a superb photograph of this fantastic bird.

Framing the print is another matter using traditional frames, but perhaps a canvas print is the answer. Can they be framed easily?

I am going to contact Bay Photo about a custom canvas print. If I do print, it is usually canvas or acrylic.

Jun 7, 2022 09:01:18 #

fetzler wrote:

I think that aspect ratio is unimportant. The cropping should fit the image. This is what you did in your excellent photo. The only exception to this is for certain publications that may require a specific aspect ratio.

I always shoot RAW in the native aspect ratio an then crop accordingly in post.

Pretty much my thoughts. I have never submitted any images for publication so not sure how I would approach that.

Jun 7, 2022 09:00:25 #

DWU2 wrote:

When I think to, I try to leave some extra space around the subject. Since I shoot RAW exclusively, I can then re-crop the photo if I want to use it for a different purpose. That said, many of the photos I take are family snapshots and reminders of events, and the aspect ratio for them is of little consequence.

Thank you. I also find myself recropping frequently. What looked good to my eye initially sometimes changes.

Jun 7, 2022 08:54:41 #

zug55 wrote:

Great shot! Like several others, I prefer the 3:2 ratio because it stresses horizontal lines and gives the image a somewhat cinematic look. I recently have begun experimenting with square cropping which balances out horizontal and vertical lines and gives an image a balanced look. Occasionally, I chose different ratios if I feel that the image warrants it; the picture posted here would be a good example for a wider ratio. Of course, this is a personal personal choice.

Thank you. My default is 5:4; not sure why but just seems to work that way. PS "remembers" my last crop so defaults to that.

Jun 6, 2022 13:00:18 #

kmpankopf wrote:

For me, and my thought only, any shot I take will show up on a monitor or TV before it gets printed. My final products are 16:9.
My saves are all original so I can go adjust if I want to print.

I have tried to go 16:9, but because I shoot almost exclusively birds, that aspect doesn't always work so well. It often draws attention more to the background than subject. Certainly when I display my images on the TV that looks best.

Jun 6, 2022 12:58:28 #

rmalarz wrote:

Like yourself, I tend to stay with traditional ratios. This comes from darkroom printing, 8x10, 11x14, and 16x20. However, on occasion, I will resort to less than the traditional ratios, such as you presented here.

The example photograph you posted is fantastic. Though, I think there is a touch of hue contamination.
--Bob

Thank you for the thoughts. Yes, there is a color shift/hue. It was right at sunrise and the light was very yellow. The underlying grass (it was over a fallow field) was dry and yellow also. I debated changing the WB and/or hue but decided against it as it accurately portrays the colors I remember.

Jun 6, 2022 11:29:47 #

47greyfox wrote:

If I have the need to crop, I try a few standard ratios. If they don’t give me what I want, I’ll immediately switch to free form and go for it.

I need to do that more than I have in the past.

Jun 6, 2022 11:29:05 #

SonyA580 wrote:

How important is the aspect ratio to you?

Very important. Going back to film days ..., I always left some extra on the right and left margins (horizontal shot) knowing I will loose some of the edges of the scene when reduced to 4x5 ratio. I still do that today with my digital shots. Almost all of my prints are 8x10 so I store files as 4x5 at 300DPI. Wonderful shot!

Interesting. My photography during the "film" days was limited to Kodak Instamatics so was not an issue.

Jun 6, 2022 11:28:00 #

kpmac wrote:

It's a great image no matter how you got there.

Thank you. This was the best of a series of 28 frames. Fortunately I saw him coming from a distance off and was able to start tracking him.

Jun 6, 2022 11:27:05 #

dave.speeking wrote:

Not concerned about aspect ratio.

Never?

Jun 6, 2022 11:26:12 #

Linda From Maine wrote:

Highly effective result, I'd say!

now it's all about how I want the image to be presented. The story and/or subject determines the aspect, not where or how it will be displayed.

Good thoughts. I have to keep that in mind more than I do.

Jun 6, 2022 11:25:24 #

philo wrote:

I don't know about the ratio, but this is one heck of a shot.

Thank you. This is an example of how "newer" cameras help me out. Many frames per second and tracking autofocus made a tremendous difference.