Taking note of the work of photographers I admire, like Jim McGinn, I come cross the repeatedly stated ethos of not cropping. Photographic artists argue that the real creative worker does all the framing of the picture in the camera at the shoot.
As a writer I approach my work with an understanding that all text must be cropped to have full effect. So I never considered that I was compromising my artistic development by cropping photographs, I was just doing that I had always done, sharpening an image with an editorial eye.
What do others think about this?
Do you feel that you have failed a little or lowered your standards when you have to crop a picture to make it work?
Loading
2 comments
.t.a.o.n. said:
Serge Schmitt said:
Never!!! Each image is ja a cropping of the reality!
Do you ask a painter why he "cropped" the reality as he did?
It's obvious that the fixed frame makes cropping unavoidable and a rigid position goofy. altough one can make uncropping a constraint or a discipline. The rule is there is no such rule, only choices: Ansel Adams cropped currently and Cartier-Bresson never cropped.
We know that the dear Henri had no humility, whereas Adams was generously granted with. Perhaps an indication... ;-)