Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/01/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Well, as the voting in FOM2 for this and the previous 2 years shows, there is a huge variety of preference when it comes to images, so for my 2 cents, I prefer the uncropped version. In the latter -- to my eye, the sense of where it was taken is lessened AND I find the fence bottom left becomes TOO dominant in the cropped image. I know it focuses on the subject, but the iron roof, the workmanship on the wall etc add to the viewers sense of where he is and what is happening. Cheers On Thursday, Jan 8, 2004, at 05:48 Australia/Melbourne, Daniel Ridings wrote: > I'm one of those who (probably out of laziness in my case) don't crop > much. Funny ... when it counts (when I'm delivering a shot to someone > paying) I do. But hardly ever (well never) in my PaWs. > > BD sent me a nice crop of the water picture. I'm going to have to take > cropping seriously. > > BD's crop: > > http://folk.uio.no/danielr/images/v34-0005-51349crop.jpg > > The original: > > http://www.leica-gallery.net/dlridings/image-51349.html > > The crop is better. I'm posting this as an example of constructive > criticism this group is capable of. Sometimes that gets questioned. > Despite all our off topic rants, there are some real pros here. > > The original was taken with a 35mm lens. If I had used the 50, it would > have almost equalled the crop. My non-resolution ambition to get to > know > the 50 better this year in my PAWs seems like a good idea. > > Best, > > Daniel > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > > Alastair - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html