Bob Talbot <BobTalbot@st-abbs.fsnet.co.uk> wrote/replied to: >For your image: OK, you like your crop, I preferred mine. The >interest for me is why there is the difference in preference. Maybe I >want to focus right in on the birds but for you they were just a part >of the whole. I mailed you my "take" of your image off list. Did it >get through? I'd have loved others opinions on which of the two crops >worked best as an image (over the web). Cropping, one of the biggest decisions we have to make for every image. This particular photo of mine was the first in my new 'back to basics' theory. See I think the old 8 by 10 format is much more pleasing than the 2 by 3 format of 35mm. Most subjects just fit it better. It looks more balanced. I did get your cropped version, looks fine. Thanks for that, I appreciate seeing how others prefer these things. Strangely, here in Japan I have found the American 8 by 10 ratio is very common for frames and photos. Sure, they got different sizes like A2, A3, A4, etc but the old 4 by 5 ratio seems to be prefered for any kind of blowups or framing. I found a store had some nice large frames, they were called A2. I couldn't find a lab that had ever heard of that size. Tough to get a print then find a frame for it, tough to buy a frame then try and get a print made for it. If I stick to the good old 8 by 10, 11 by 14 or 16 by 20 I know I can find a frame for it :-) Yes, this week's gallery looks half and half at first glance, I think I'll go and review it. You can take the week off if you want... Jim Davis Nature Photography http://www.kjsl.com/~jbdavis/
