You're getting a lot of input here, and it's a nice experiment on how small changes can totally alter how an image feels.
Looking at both of them together though, I like the original more. Here's why: As Cindy pointed out in the original my eye is pushed left, but that leaves me with a primary dynamic motion that is aligned with the bridges direction. In the square crop however, the primary motion is the water flowing under the bridge, and it feels to my like being stopped in the tracks, smacking my head into the bridge. So it's a lot more static rather than dynamic, and the bridge is more adverse then in harmony of that dynamic.
No right or wrong here, just different visual reactions.
If you want you could try a third option, which is to go back to the 2/3rd ratio, but crop a good amount of the bush and bottom off, but maybe leave a bit more bush than in your square crop. That way the left/right dynamic may come back, but the bush isn't as overwhelming. I eyed this on screen yesterday and liked it.
I went into Photoshop and made the crop you suggested and I liked the results there as well. Now I have three children from the photo and couldn't possibly pick a favorite between them! :-) This is one where I'll let the client pick the crop (after I make the sale of course)!
I like the crop, but I can see Jan's perspective and the point she makes too. One thing you have to take away from this is that you have a really good photo no matter how you cut it (or crop in this instance).
I am an accountant for a private oil and gas exploration company based in Houston, Texas. I'm a member of the Bay Area Photo Club and the Houston Center for Photogaphy.
5 comments:
Improved for sure. The bridge is much more prominent in the shot now.
You're getting a lot of input here, and it's a nice experiment on how small changes can totally alter how an image feels.
Looking at both of them together though, I like the original more. Here's why: As Cindy pointed out in the original my eye is pushed left, but that leaves me with a primary dynamic motion that is aligned with the bridges direction. In the square crop however, the primary motion is the water flowing under the bridge, and it feels to my like being stopped in the tracks, smacking my head into the bridge. So it's a lot more static rather than dynamic, and the bridge is more adverse then in harmony of that dynamic.
No right or wrong here, just different visual reactions.
If you want you could try a third option, which is to go back to the 2/3rd ratio, but crop a good amount of the bush and bottom off, but maybe leave a bit more bush than in your square crop. That way the left/right dynamic may come back, but the bush isn't as overwhelming. I eyed this on screen yesterday and liked it.
Jan
Hello Jan!
I went into Photoshop and made the crop you suggested and I liked the results there as well. Now I have three children from the photo and couldn't possibly pick a favorite between them! :-) This is one where I'll let the client pick the crop (after I make the sale of course)!
Thanks for your always valuable feedback!
Cheers!
Barry
I like the crop, but I can see Jan's perspective and the point she makes too. One thing you have to take away from this is that you have a really good photo no matter how you cut it (or crop in this instance).
DHaass
Thanks Doug!
I hear what you are saying! I take a lot of shots that no particular crop can help. :-)
Cheers!
Barry
Post a Comment