Optimisation enhancement or manipulation?

Ahh cropping, that's one that gets the juices flowing. Ok, now that I'm shooting with fixed lenses, it seems more times than I'd like, I'm running into shots where the minimum focus distance stops me from getting the exact composition that I'd like.

The inference is always: "If you're cropping a shot, you're not composing properly".

So guess my question is, if you find a three headed seahorse giving birth and you're down to 100 psi, and just as you snap the shot a Parrot fish swims over the top of your frame creating new reef, do you toss the shot? Ok, that's a bit over the top but, I'm just not seeing the issue with cropping macro shots if you're up against MFD.

Rand

Hey Rand, cropping...

What i mean is in the realm of competitions. If you want to crop for prints or your own library or even for publication that is up to you and nothing wrong with it, it is done all the time and is part of the business.

However, i don't think it should be a part of a competition, competitions are about fairness etc. Therefore it should be the image taken, not a crop.

M

I suppose that cropping would come under enhancement! Hadn't really thought about this as I never crop (except to fit print sizes) as I see this as just wasting information.

I remember that there was a lot of complaining back in 2002 when this picture won the Wildlife Photographer as a very distracting bird had been cropped out of the top of the image.

http://internt.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2...catdescrip2=wpy

I guess the problem was compounded by the fact that all of the judging was wierd that year and nobody really rated the winners. Oh and this rather ordinary image (at this level) was taken by the wife of a BBC presenter!

Alex

hmm..

I kinda like that elephant picutre. It's like the elephants are standing around the "water cooler" listening to some gossip from the bird.

M.

Don't forget, that Croping often also is good for reef protection. When youtake a picture of a sanil for instance you can go with a bigger Picture angle and don't have to "ram" your camera into the reef and do cropping later.

Or you use a camera with a smaller sensor - all that reef damage is being done by people still shooting film as they have to get closer to fill the frame ! Alex

Hey Alex, I really wish i knew how to make some sort of pot stirring smiley face...guess that means we can give lots of crap to people like Eric and those others with tres expensive Canon full frames....even better when Eric's on holiday! (again, he's starting to remind me of Rand....)

Yee ha, where is that pot stirring smiley face!!??!

Mike, my diving is for the better good. I do this not for myself, but for all...(insert BS smiley here____)

Rand

I am suffering death by computer at the moment (doing loads of dodgy manipulations in Photoshop, obviously). I only have to make it until September then I am off to Bali (my field scout James is there at the moment).

I think that RSI (Repetative Strain Injury - from too much computer) is nature's way to police image manipulation! That and time. I am really looking forward to having a day away from the computer soon. I am waiting for that call for a nice day off packing Magic Filters...

Alex

Away from computer is synonym with away from the city for me.

When I am in Sweden my computer is every day on. In Greece or egypt I can stay 3 -6weeks no need for computer TV etc...

Maybe this show how our lifes sometimes is.:-(

No computer for me tomorrow , I'll be diving and looking for whales in Pacific Panama.

Hmmm, for me? Morning..mantas, computer in the afternoons and evening...

Editing a TV commercial at the moment, can't you just tell my heart is really into it?

I know this is a rather old topic to bump; but what about when it comes to digital black and white images? The very idea of a black and white scene is unnatural. Also, what about toning images for artistic effect or to perhaps convey a mood? Obviously a no no if it's supposed to be used for natural history etc purposes, but as general artistic photography? Does underwater have different "rules" compared to above water?

They say that Generals always fight the last war. I think the same is true of photo competitions. The rules seem like they are thinly grafted onto digital from the film days. The idea is that techniques from the darkroom are okay, but entirely digital techniques are not.

This has unintended consequences. For example the competitions for "traditional" photography strongly bias results towards tropical waters. I don't care how careful you are with strobe placement, you will end up with some backscatter in temperate water images.

The injunction against cropping means that all images have the same aspect ratio as the camera. I personally like shooting square format images, but without cropping it ain't going to happen.

Also recall that backscatter isn't "real." It is typically the result of lighting with artificial light. Motion blur isn't "real" either, nor is zoom blur. These are all image manipulation techniques that occur in the camera. For that matter, the whole issue of "stop motion" by shutter or flash should be considered artificial.

I am not arguing that there should be no rules, but simply that the digital imaging has changed the way we shoot, and the way we look at the natural world. The boundaries of what is "acceptable" should change too.

I agree that rules seem to be too oriented towards film days - perhaps because a replacement is awfully tricky?

I also think backscatter is tricky, because it does seem to bias things a fair bit towards blue water shooting, which hardly needed the help anyway.

My 'ability' to avoid backscatter jumps significantly in that area when Im shooting there. In practise it does just mean green water gets an extra barrier in competitions, but perhaps its a necessary sacrifice considering the amount of manipulation it would 'legalise'? Or maybe judges do usually take it into account when judging shots and Im just not trusting enough of that.

Otara

However, i don't think it should be a part of a competition, competitions are about fairness etc. Therefore it should be the image taken, not a crop.

 

M

But, talking about fairness, are we all having the same cameras, housings, lenses, accessories, strobes, and trips?

There is no fairness in photography, unless all photographs are judged on same stuff in the same place at the same time.

so, if you're using a 1:1 macro lense, because you have no money to buy more, and then crop at 3:1, is maybe as fair as the guy who have a 3:1 lense way more expensive. and, his image quality will still be better.

so, about croping, even if I kind of agree with you, I don't think we can invoke fairness in this kind of competition : there is not !

edit : and same for sharpening : what about a 6000$ lense against a 700$ one? is it really fair to forbid the 700$ to use a bit of post processing sharping to reduce the price difference of the lense?

and and and same for a lot of things....

I've noticed that underwater photography is going more towards the style of illustration in a photographic style. Retouch out the detritus, up the colour saturation and increase the sharpening. I have had a few old limited edition prints (illustrations) on my walls that more and more people are now assuming to be photographs!

Is it a case of life imitating art?

I've noticed that underwater photography is going more towards the style of illustration in a photographic style. Retouch out the detritus, up the colour saturation and increase the sharpening. I have had a few old limited edition prints (illustrations) on my walls that more and more people are now assuming to be photographs!

 

Is it a case of life imitating art?

How about art imitating life?

Here's an illustration from the NY Times - which looks to me an awful lot like what a strobes and a camera might capture ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/science/...fish&st=cse