Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/06/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Cropping and the whole damn thing [was: Digital cropp ing]
From: "Mark Pope" <mark.teampope@ntlworld.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 20:51:45 +0100
References: <45EDA71CFF25D411A2E400508B6FC52A031E082E@orportexch1.internal.nextlink.net>

<snip>, I think I need to
> trust my initial instinct -- meaning what I saw in the viewfinder

I agree 100% with you David.  Another good reason is that I want to make
full use of the negative area to maximise the quality of my prints.  The
35mm neg is small enough as is is!

.<snip> But the feedback the people gave me
> was that the uncropped images looked more natural. I think one person
said,
> "This one just looks more real." The images were taken during some
> festivities. The people that I showed the prints to, and that made the
> comments,  were people who were in the photographs

Interesting.  I wonder if the reason why your cropped images were preferred
has anything to do with the notion that there is one 'right' rectangular
shape?  Apparently, there is something called the 'golden mean' that is used
by architects to get the proportions of buildings to look pleasing to the
eye.  I can't remember the ratio, but I'm pretty sure that it isn't 1:1.5.
Perhaps someone out there can tell us what the ratio is.
On the other hand, perhaps they preferred the cropped images because they
were more prominent in them.



Mark Pope
Swindon, Wilts
UK

http://www.monomagic.co.uk

In reply to: Message from "Rodgers, David" <david.rodgers@xo.com> (RE: [Leica] Cropping and the whole damn thing [was: Digital cropp ing])