On 2013-06-02 20:41, RsLittle wrote:
Cropping a poorly framed compositions doesnt make for a better composition.
Cropping and framing are in no way different; the end results are identical.
If you find your self cropping that much you might choose to aquire the correct equipment to create your compositions. Most apsect ratios exist for a reason derived from some pyscological study.
The standard size papers don't even match the standard camera aspect ratios! (Anywhere below large-format, anyway). The suggestion that the huge range of standard aspect ratios are somehow each carefully considered artistic choices with a scientific basis is absurd.
Arbitrarily changing them defeats the use of the human brains natural desire for certain things to be in certain ways. rules are made to be broken only if you understand why the rule exist in the first place. Loose framing wont help lens distortion.
Loose framing gives you room to correct lens distortion without losing vital elements.
(It also gives the editor room to crop the picture to work right on the page with the other design elements, which is why I was originally doing it. When one is shooting "art" then this one picture, or the construction the artist is planning around it, is all that matters, but for most commercial work the picture is going to be used as an element in a larger design, and the best cropping and aspect ratio isn't determined solely by the photo.)
A proper undistort tool that properly scales the image is the right tool.
I think you are misunderstanding the problem. The tools we have now are "proper". The problem is that the "proper" correction leaves the picture funny-shaped, and when we then crop it back to a rectangle again, sometimes we lose things we didn't want to lose. Planning ahead for this can avoid this problem.
-- David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
