Which is better (when using a DSLR):
Should I take as wide a picture as possible (or reasonable) and then crop the picture to bring attention to the subject?
-or-
Frame the subject as well as possible when snapping the picture and use cropping later sparingly? (In other words, the image in the viewfinder should be as close to the desired end result as possible.)
When I was a working photographer I was sent to a concert at the Royal Albert Hall. In the photographers room afterwards everyone was editing and sending their images. A renowned Getty photographer (who I won’t name) was cropping extremely heavily and it made me reconsider how I shoot, because I always framed the picture as well as possible. He was cutting heavily into the images, without even trying to keep the original ratios. Completely reframing the shots.
But for him it would have helped that he was using a zoom lens (so little distortion across the image) and a very high resolution camera.
I still like to frame the subject and you kind of have to if you are shooting with a wide lens. Because a wide lens will distort the image increasingly towards the edges, and unless you crop out just the centre part you will get an odd result.
These days I try to leave a little fat around the edges if I’m shooting seriously, but it’s less fun than trying to get it right in the camera. And I feel there is an art to working on your original image as shot.
Basically: it depends. But as wide as possible? No.
What do you find the most rewarding? I would suggest you do that.
Shoot for the final image you want in-camera. You can leave a little air on the sides, but generally, the advice I have always followed when framing and shooting is to “fill the frame.” It will also teach you to get closer to your subject, which is generally a good idea. As Robert Capa said, “if you’re pictures aren’t good enough, you aren’t close enough.” Shoot with intent. Figure out what you are focusing the viewer’s eye on. Of course, these are all guidelines, but they have served me well in my career.
This is a “pineapple on pizza” question. Different people will swear their technique is inarguably correct.
Personally, since I have 45 MP cameras, I tend to shoot loosely and then crop while I am developing the image in Lightroom.
I would try to get as close as possible. I choose the lens and camera specifically for the feel that the combination provides.
For example, I love shooting 120 film in a camera with 6x6 negatives because the square format changes my view of things. Surely I could crop to get that from 3:2, but I prefer to shoot as close to the final image as possible.
Same holds true for the lens. If you use a wide angle lens and crop to a tiny bit in the middle, well, it has ceased to be a wide angle lens and lost the special appearance of a wide angle lens.
Furthermore, with pixels or film grain, at some point you will run out of resolution and cropping will not improve the image quality.
ETA: To clarify, I prefer to get it as close in camera as possible because I prefer to make the artistic decisions at the point of the shot. I suspect that there are many circumstances (e.g. news photography) where getting the shot is more important than perfecting it on the spot, so get a camera with a great sensor and go for it!
(Deleted)
Yeah, sometimes you want to interact with the subject, and sometimes if you’re standing in the midst of something you connect with your surroundings or the event on an emotional level in a way you cannot do from further back.
Plus the relative angles of things look different from close up. That might be aesthetically more pleasing, or on the other hand something might look better from further back. There’s a world of difference between an image taken from close in with a wide lens and the same subject taken from further back with a longer lens.
[Moderating]
This is an artistic question, not a factual one. Off to CS.
Oops. Of course. I don’t know what I was thinking.
Thank y’all for the conversation. I’m wanting to take a picture of our family at Thanksgiving (which we’ll be doing on Friday). It sounds like I should create the picture is close as possible to the desired result in the camera and then edit lightly as needed.
With group photos – and there’s so many kinds – but for a basic shot, I generally like not to use a very wide angle and stand close to fill the frame. The edges of the frame distort with wides, so you have to be careful with that when putting human subjects close to the edge. Like, say, at a family or event shoot, unless I want to include a lot of the environment in the photo, I will shoot as long as I can (I like to get at least 35mm, more like 50-70mm, but I’ll even shoot up to 105mm or more) to get everyone in frame. I’ll frame it with what feels like enough space around the subjects at the end. I don’t want them right up against the edge of the frame. I do this by feel, but thinking about the photos I take, I would say I leave a buffer of at least one person, not with the idea of cropping down later, but with the idea of giving the frame enough room to breathe and not feel claustrophobic.
If you’re outdoors, this will be easy. Indoors, you just make adjustments and do what you can with the space you have.
This would be my key decision making point for this question. You might benefit by looking over your background and taking a practice shot or 2 before you line everyone up.
In general:
‘If it’s not right in the camera, it’s not right’ is really a throwback to before the modern digital darkroom, OTOH, aggressive cropping turns your 20MP camera into 6MP, OTOH, some subjects are skittish if you’re too close, and unpredictable subjects, like kids and wildlife, can benefit by having more space around them before they’ve bolted out of the frame. Choosing different setups because of the optical properties of different lenses, is valid, IMHO, but maybe next level. YMMV.
Yes… Portrait lens if you have a long enough room! Otherwise people near the corners have their faces elongated along the diagonals, not a great look.
If you have time to compose the shot, it’s generally better to frame it carefully and crop it sparingly. But if you don’t have time for that, it’s usually better to take a wide shot and crop more. For instance, if you’re shooting a landscape from a tripod, you’ll generally get a better picture if you take your time and frame it the way you want it to come out. But if you’re shooting a sporting event, or some other scene that’s changing quickly, you’re more likely to get a good picture if you shoot at a wider angle and crop it later.
Of course, cropping is better if you have a good lens and a lot of pixels. The more you crop, the more apparent things like chromatic aberration and soft focus will be, and the more likely you’ll start to see the pixels.