|
leuallen
|
 |
« on: October 20, 2012, 10:20:00 PM » |
 Reply
|
I am usually a nut for the 16:9 ratio if shooting a single frame or between 2:1 and 3:1 if doing a pano. This is for landscapes. However I think this image looks good in both 4:3 and 16:9. Which one do you prefer? I am curious to see if others prefer the 16:9 also.
A really great day in central Illinois for photography. Started with a great fog at sunrise and just shortly after this shot it turned crappy. Looked out the window near noon and it was great again - nice white clouds, blue shy and good sun. Got some good shots of the fall color which is really great this year. Went all the way until it was dark.
E-M5 with 12-35 at 18mm, seven shot HDR.
Larry
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JeffKohn
|
|
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2012, 11:32:54 PM » |
Reply
|
I prefer the 16:9, in this case I don't think the extra vertical space adds anything to the composition.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
wolfnowl
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2012, 01:07:31 AM » |
Reply
|
I agree with Jeff... same reasons.
Mike.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
francois
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2012, 03:32:30 AM » |
Reply
|
Another vote for the wide aspect ratio version.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Francois
|
|
|
|
ErikKaffehr
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2012, 03:47:02 AM » |
Reply
|
Hi, I'm with Jeff on this, too. My tendency is to crop sky a lot if there are no very good reason to keep it. Best regards Erik I prefer the 16:9, in this case I don't think the extra vertical space adds anything to the composition.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Jay
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2012, 04:38:49 AM » |
Reply
|
The 16:9 ratio has much more impact in this particular image.
My $0.02 worth
Tony Jay
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 21, 2012, 04:43:11 AM by Tony Jay »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
shaunw
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2012, 07:11:33 AM » |
Reply
|
For me...16:9 it says all that's to be said in a tighter package....nice shot well done.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Canon 5D mk II Sigma 10-20, Canon 17-40mm L, Canon 24-105mm L, Canon 70-200 L, Lee Filters, Manfrotto geared head/tripod. ''Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop''. – Ansel Adams http://www.shaunwalbyphotography.com |
|
|
|
Chris Calohan
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2012, 07:43:18 AM » |
Reply
|
Wide-wide-wide...nice contrast range in the vaporous atmosphere.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What! Me Worry?
|
|
|
|
luxborealis
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2012, 08:59:15 AM » |
Reply
|
Beautiful photograph in ideal conditions - well-captured!!
I prefer the 16:9 crop as well. The bit of sky showing above the structure provides all the atmospheric contrast you need, so the rest of the cloud and bit of sky near the top do not add to the dynamic of the scene.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Myrvaagnes
|
|
« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2012, 12:18:13 PM » |
Reply
|
I'll go along with the herd if you are showing it as a single print.
However, if you are displaying it along with others, then I'd go with whichever version fits best with the rest of the show.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
james-greenland
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2012, 12:43:13 PM » |
Reply
|
I'll go along with the herd if you are showing it as a single print.
However, if you are displaying it along with others, then I'd go with whichever version fits best with the rest of the show.
valid point made here. It definitely pays to have the show look like a cohesive set... I'm also a fan of the 16:9. Looks like the decision has been made!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
leuallen
|
|
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2012, 01:05:07 PM » |
Reply
|
Beautiful photograph in ideal conditions - well-captured!! I was lucky. Those conditions existed for only very few short moments. Before this exposure, the sun was not kicking into the ground fog and a couple of minutes latter the sun was hidden by the clouds above. It was dull blahsville following til about noon, then it got nice again. It was a great photo day. I've posted three more from that day: late afternoon, late evening, and after sunset. I still have a hundred or so photos to process from that all day outing. Larry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stamper
|
|
« Reply #12 on: October 22, 2012, 02:44:12 AM » |
Reply
|
Cropping whether you do it in camera or on the computer is - imo - an art in itself. I agree with the posters about the 16.9 and the poster who said that there wasn't any point in having empty space in the sky. I am surprised that Michael hasn't shown an article - if he has I can't remember - about the merits of cropping and some before and after images to prove the point.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jhoc
|
|
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2012, 07:07:08 AM » |
Reply
|
ANother vote for 16:9
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stamper
|
|
« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2012, 02:55:43 AM » |
Reply
|
Thanks for the link.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kikashi
|
|
« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2012, 01:43:33 PM » |
Reply
|
I am surprised that Michael hasn't shown an article - if he has I can't remember - about the merits of cropping and some before and after images to prove the point.
He probably doesn't want to upset Russ. Jeremy |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
