Crop Those Photos, Baby!

"I'm not taking a photograph, I'm making a photograph." - Ansel Adams

I want to talk about an important subject, which inspires disagreement...cropping photos.

"Wait, Sensei...what is cropping a photo?"

Cropping a photo means to cut out edges of the photo in order to improve the photo, or to improve the composition.

I want to say this right now...there is absolutely nothing wrong with cropping your photos.

“Why, Sensei?”

Because...THERE ARE NO RULES.

This is the main idea I try to impart here in my blog posts and in my conversations with other photographers…there are no rules.

It is your photo, your art…you can do absolutely anything you want... whenever you want...in any way you want.

(Let me be clear here, though...if a photographer crops a photo, or manipulates it in any way using Photoshop or some other method...but claims that he or she did not do so...then that photographer is being dishonest. There is nothing wrong with manipulating an image any way the photographer wants....but, she or he cannot lie about it. And this is especially of utmost importance with regards to documentary photography and photojournalism.)

So, to continue about cropping photos…

There is a well-known and popular YouTuber/photographer, Jared Polen, who has been around for years. His videos are very informative, and I have learned some things from him, and I do like him and his videos. But...he takes every opportunity to say that he never crops his photos. What he is basically saying is..."I'm so great, I don't need to crop." This is ridiculous.

Many great photographers crop, many legendary photographers crop, many famous photographers crop…photographers have always cropped, from the earliest beginnings of photography.

There is another popular YouTuber/photographer, Sean Tucker. I also like his videos very much. He posted a video on cropping, in which he explained that there is nothing wrong with cropping. And he explained that he does crop sometimes. Ok, so far, so good.

But, when he said that he cropped, he said it in an almost apologetic manner..."I crop just a little bit...to just tighten up the composition a little." (I'm paraphrasing him).

Why does he need to qualify the statement that he crops? Either it is ok to crop, or it is not ok…no matter how much. If you say that cropping is ok, but then you quickly say that you only crop occasionally, and only crop a little bit...why are you making excuses for it? Why do you feel compelled to make sure you say "only a little?"

Again, I like both of these people, and I like their videos and what they do. My issue here is with their comments on cropping. And I'm only using them as an example because they are popular and have big followings...there are many other photographers who claim they don't crop, as if that makes them special.

So, let me just clearly say it here…I crop whenever I want....as much or as little as I want. I do not hesitate for a moment.

If I think it will improve my image, I'm cropping it. Period.

It is very important to understand that there is absolutely nothing wrong with cropping your image. In fact, it is one of a photographer's key tools and techniques.

I will prove it to you in a moment. But, first, in case you forgot, remember...

THERE ARE NO RULES! ;-)

You do not need to take my word for it...here, below, is just a short list of famous, legendary photographers who are known to have cropped their images. I have also included some of their famous, cropped, images. This is just a tiny list I'm giving you...there are many, many more great photographers, past and present, who have done it, and who continue to do it.

"I would cut any inches off my frames in order to get a better picture.” - Walker Evans

“There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs.” - Ansel Adams

Here are some famous photographers who have cropped their photos:

Ansel Adams - considered by many to be the greatest landscape photographer ever.

Henri Cartier-Bresson - legendary pioneer of street photography.

Arnold Newman - famous master portrait photographer.

Elliott Erwitt - legendary street and documentary photographer.

Edward Weston - He has been called "one of the most innovative and influential American photographers"...and "one of the masters of 20th century photography." The first photographer to receive a Guggenheim Fellowship.

Alfred Eisenstaedt - Famous photographer for "LIFE" magazine.

Robert Frank - Legendary documentary photographer. Created the book "The Americans," one of the most influential photography books of the 20th century.

Dorothea Lange - Famous documentary photographer. Inducted into the National Women's Hall of Fame.

Walker Evans - legendary photographer. Many of his works are in the permanent collections of museums.

This list could go on and on.

And here are some famous photo examples for you, showing how the photographers cropped them:

Arnold Newman (1918-2006), legendary portrait photographer.

Arnold Newman

Arnold Newman

Arnold Newman

Arnold Newman

Arnold Newman

Arnold Newman

Elliott Erwitt (b. 1928), legendary documentary photographer.

Elliott Erwitt

Elliott Erwitt

Elliott Erwitt

Elliott Erwitt

Henri Cartier-Bresson (1908-2004), legendary master and a pioneer of street photography.

Henri Cartier-Bresson

Henri Cartier-Bresson

Henri Cartier-Bresson

Henri Cartier-Bresson

Do you see?

Crop to your heart’s content. If it is good enough for legendary master photographers, it is good enough for everyone else, too.

Take Many Pictures!

One of the biggest mistakes you can make, especially in street and travel photography, is not taking enough photos of whatever scene or subject you are shooting. You need to take A LOT of photos.

If you only take one or two shots, you could easily not have the best photo you could have taken:

  1. You may miss focus

  2. The exposure may be incorrect for that one or two shots

  3. You shook the camera, thus causing the image to be blurry

  4. The scene improved, making for a much better photo...but, you didn't take the shot, because you "already took a couple."

  5. The person you were shooting may have blinked, causing a bad shot

  6. The person or persons suddenly gave an awesome expression or gesture, but you missed it, because you had already stopped shooting

"But wait, Sensei, great photographers don't need to take many photos, they are experts." That is not correct, Grasshopper.

Most, if not all, great and professional photographers take an unbelievable amount of photos of their scene or subject:

Steve McCurry, legendary photographer and National Geographic magazine contributor, would shoot hundreds of rolls of film on an assignment. National Geographic photographers would regularly shoot 300 to 600 rolls of film on each assignment. Each roll of film was 36 exposures...so, that equals 11,000 to 22,000 images shot, just to get the 5 - 20 photos that would be printed in the magazine.

Steve McCurry, Agra, India 1983

Steve McCurry, Agra, India 1983

Steve McCurry, Rajasthan, India

Steve McCurry, Rajasthan, India

Steve McCurry, Rajasthan, India 1983

Steve McCurry, Rajasthan, India 1983

I read a story about Sebastião Salgado, the great master, and my all-time favorite photographer. He had visited a village and taken photos. Later, a reporter spoke to one of the villagers and asked him what he thought of Sebastião. One of the villager's responses was "I was surprised by how many photos he took."

Sebastiao Salgado

Sebastiao Salgado

Sebastiao Salgado

Sebastiao Salgado

Sebastiao Salgado

Sebastiao Salgado

Garry Winogrand, considered by many to be the greatest street photographer ever...in addition to all of the photos he had shot and printed during his life, at the time of his death (at the age of 56) it was discovered that he also had 2,500 rolls of film which he had shot but never developed, 6,500 rolls of developed film that he never printed, and about 3,000 rolls for which he only made contact sheets. It is estimated to be over 300,000 pictures!

Garry Winogrand, New York, 1955

Garry Winogrand, New York, 1955

Garry Winogrand, New York, 1964

Garry Winogrand, New York, 1964

Garry Winogrand, Park Avenue, New York, 1959

Garry Winogrand, Park Avenue, New York, 1959

Robert Frank, another legendary master, traveled around the United States taking photos for what would eventually be made into a book. The book was called, The Americans. It is considered one of the great photography achievements and it made him famous. The book contains only 83 photos…but he took over 25,000 pictures!

Robert Frank, Elevator, Miami Beach, 1955

Robert Frank, Elevator, Miami Beach, 1955

Robert Frank, Times Square, 1947

Robert Frank, Times Square, 1947

Robert Frank

Robert Frank

Do you see?

In the film days, at least there was the excuse that film cost money, and getting the photos developed and printed also cost money...so, it was at least understandable to try to take as few photos as possible.

But, now, with digital cameras, the cost of a photo is ZERO. You can take the photo, process it with an app, and share it online...at no cost. There is absolutely no excuse now to not take many pictures in order to make sure you get the big winner.

Just shoot and shoot and shoot. Later, look through your photos and simply keep the best ones. Deleting the bad photos costs you nothing...and no one will ever see the bad photos.

If another photographer thinks he or she is special and tells you "I don't need to take many shots to get what I want"...just remind yourself of the truly special photographers: McCurry, Salgado, Winogrand and Frank (and many other legends…too many for me to list here). Taking many shots was no problem for them…in fact, they did it on purpose.

So, never, ever, hesitate to take "too many"...or, feel that you are less of a photographer for doing so. There is no such thing. In fact, try to take too many, in order that you become accustomed to it.

It is infinitely better to go crazy and shoot hundreds of photos of a scene...and come away with one great image, and delete the rest...than to only take a few shots and know that you made a mistake and missed getting that awesome photo. No one is going to look at your mediocre photos and say "At least you didn't take too many."

People will remember you only for the great shots, and they will never think, for even a second, about how many shots you took to get them.

On a similar note…

If you come upon a scene, and you are not sure whether the scene is worth photographing...JUST SHOOT! You have lost nothing if you do not end up with a great photo.

But...if you realize later that you missed a great opportunity...that is a disaster. THE SCENE WILL NEVER BE REPEATED...YOU MISSED IT...FOREVER.

Wayne Gretzky, the legendary hockey player and goal scorer, said he never hesitated to just take a shot, because... "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take."

Just do it.

Phone vs Big Camera

Many times, people have asked me whether their phone camera really is “good enough” to take truly great photos. Even though they have seen great phone photos on Instagram and other places, they still doubt, because they really don’t understand why, or what that actually means.

So, here I will try to explain it to you.

The fact is, your phone can take excellent photos, and you can create stunning images with it. But…there are limitations.

I will not talk about the option of having and using more than one lens (and other accessories) for people using big cameras, because they are not necessary for taking great photos, and it will needlessly complicate what is really very simple. I just want you to understand the most basic underlying reason.

So, here is what causes the main limitations of a phone camera, which you might already have known, but don’t know why:

A phone camera has a much, much smaller image sensor. The sensor needs to be small, because the phone is small.

Bigger cameras have differing sensor sizes, but they are all much bigger than a phone’s sensor.

“Full-frame,” “APS-C” and “micro four-thirds” are the three sensor sizes found on most cameras (Full-frame is the biggest of the three).

“Does that mean the bigger camera is better, because of the bigger sensor?”…Yes!...and...No!

“Wait. What?”

I’ll explain…

Although the phone’s camera sensor is tiny, it can take outstanding photos, just as outstanding as a big camera. There are countless stunning photos (award-winning photos; photos published in major magazines and newspapers) that have been created with phones:

Also, there are many well-known professional photographers who shoot with their phones:

"Sooo, then…Why is the answer also ‘Yes,’ … that the big camera sensor is better?”

Because, the smaller image sensor of the phone's camera limits some of your creative options and flexibility…both before, and after, you’ve taken the photo.

For example...

1. The focusing of the phone camera, many times, is basically stuck at infinity.

When you take a picture, basically everything in the photo, near and far, is in focus (infinite “depth of field”). You cannot make adjustments to the camera in order to blur some areas before you take the photo (yes, I know some phone cameras have “portrait” mode, but that is not the same thing...Portrait mode is a software imitation of true “depth of field”).

"What is depth of field, Sensei?"

It is how far into the distance the photo is in focus (what parts of the photo are in focus).

With a big camera, before you take the photo, you can change the depth of field to be farther, or more shallow, depending on what you want. Therefore, you can keep some parts of your photo in focus, and blur other parts, in order to make the main subject of the image stand out (for example, blur the background to emphasize what is closer).

Thus, you have much better control with a big camera over what is in focus.

Here is an example of deep depth of field…almost everything is in focus:

Here is an example of shallow depth of field. Only the subjects closest to the camera are in focus:

2. The phone's photos show more “noise” when taken in low light.

"What is noise?"

In simple terms, noise is the tiny dots that you can see in the photo...the more “noise,” the more or bigger the dots.

Usually, this makes the photo not look as nice as it could...but, not always! Sometimes noise looks good. Noise is also called "grain," and many photographers like grain to be present in their photos.

3. The phone's photos show more noise when cropped.

"What is cropping?"

Cropping is cutting out edges of the photo that you don't want to see, in order to remove distractions and make the photo look better. You do this with the "cropping tool" in a photo app, such as Snapseed, or software, such as Photoshop. The more cropping (cutting) you do, the more noise will emerge and be visible.

With the big camera’s bigger image sensor (and, usually, higher resolution…”megapixels”) you can crop more freely without worrying too much about noise becoming visible in the photo.

4. The phone's photos show more noise when enlarged to make big photo prints.

For example, with the big camera you might be able to enlarge the photo to 16 x 20 inches (40.64 x 50.8 cm), or larger, and there may be almost no noise (grain). With the phone, you might already start to see noise in a 5 x 7 inch (12.7 x 17.78 cm) print.

"But, does that matter?"

Not really! However, that is a discussion for another post. (I will give you a hint...the bigger you make your print, the farther away from it people will need to stand to look at it and take it all in.)

5. If you try to "zoom" by pinching the screen on your phone, the photos will have...YES, YOU GUESSED IT!...noise.

The more you "zoom," the worse the noise.

"Goodness! Is there a solution?"

Yes…you “zoom” with your feet...meaning...you walk closer to your subject ;-)

This is also the same solution for the big camera…you would zoom with your feet (unless you have a zoom lens attached). Although, with the bigger sensor, you also have leeway to crop the image…that would make objects appear closer (but noise may start to appear, depending how much you cropped).

(BTW...I have zoom lenses, which I basically never use. I almost always use a 24mm, 50mm or 85mm lens, and I just zoom with my feet when needed.)

6. The phone's photos have less “dynamic range.”

"Jumping firecrackers! What is Dynamic Range!?"

In a scene with uneven light (some very bright areas and some very dark areas), it is how much of the black (darkest area) in the scene, and how much of the white (lightest area) in the scene, the phone can capture with detail.

"Why would this matter?"

Because...when you use a photo app, or Photoshop, etc., to make adjustments to uneven photos taken on a big camera that has good dynamic range, you can still bring out a lot of detail in the blacks (shadows) and whites (highlights) of the photos, which at first you could not see.

With the phone, there is a limit to how much you can do this. If you take a photo in uneven light with a phone, and you end up with pure black, or pure white, areas in which you cannot see any detail…you will not be able to fix that. (You have, surely, seen this in photos...such as photos of sky and clouds, in which you cannot see the cloud details because the bright sky is completely white...“blown out.”).

“Isn’t there anything I can do?”

Yes. When you focus on your phone, you do it by tapping on the spot you want to set in focus. Many phones also allow you to also tap a second time, to select the spot that you want to set for “exposure.” For the second tap….tap on the brightest spot in the scene. That should make the brightest area “expose” correctly when you take the photo, thus keeping the details visible in that area. Professionals almost always expose for the brightest spot.

(You will probably see the the rest of the scene become darker….but that should not be a problem. Because, you should be able to brighten those dark areas with whatever photo app you use after you have taken the photo.)

Here is an example of a “blown out” sky, and one that was exposed correctly:

Now...here are some positives of the phone:

  1. It's tiny! It fits in your pocket…it doesn't look like you're pointing a bazooka at someone…and, it's much less noticeable if you are trying to take candid shots.

  2. It is always with you. So, less of a chance of missed moments.

  3. If you take the photo in good light and don't crop or zoom, the photo quality is excellent. Basically, just as good as a bigger camera. No noise!

  4. You can make adjustments to the photo immediately, right on the phone, using any photo app (you don't need to import your photos to a computer, as you do with a big camera).

  5. If you want, you can immediately post your photo to social media from your phone; or text or email it.

  6. You can make phone calls 😜

And…just to keep things balanced, here are some positives of the big camera:

  1. If you shoot in very low light, or uneven light, or you need to crop, the photo quality can still be fantastic. Not too much noise!

  2. You have more options and flexibility with how you can take your photos, and how you can make them look afterwards. For example, depth of field; shadow/highlight detail.

  3. Huge selection of lenses, of various abilities, available to you.

  4. You can usually customize your camera extensively.

  5. If you are ever stranded on a deserted island, you can crack coconuts with it 😜

The above is not a full list of possible advantages and negatives of phones and big cameras; but, to me, they are the major points that matter most, and which many people don't really know about or understand.

Again, people always hear…"phone photos are just as good as those taken with a big camera" or "big cameras take better photos"...but no one really explains why, or why not. That is why I wanted to write this post.

So, in conclusion…

You just need to remember…

If you take the same photo with both types of cameras in good lighting conditions, and you do not crop the photos, or greatly enlarge them, then both photos will look equal in quality.

Once you change things, however (the lighting is not bright enough, or is uneven….you crop the photo….you enlarge the photo too much) that is when you will begin to have problems with the phone's images.

So, if you have a phone as your camera, that is absolutely fine...as I said and showed above, there are professionals, and amateurs, who use phones to create fantastic images. Therefore, you…“Me?” Yes, you!…can create stunning, award-winning, publishable photos with just your phone.

Just keep in mind the limitations that I’ve pointed out here…and you can then work around them to create awesomeness!

Gabriella Cigliano - iPhone Photography Awards 2019 Grand Prize Winner

Gabriella Cigliano - iPhone Photography Awards 2019 Grand Prize Winner

Lens Sharpness

Lens sharpness…

Ahh...one of the secret ingredients for photographic excellence. Without the sharpest lens possible, your photos will simply not be as good as they should be.

That is the conclusion that you would most likely reach from reading or watching lens reviews on the newest “must have” lenses.

Sure enough...once you've read or watched enough of those reviews...you will want to purchase the sharpest lens you can afford, maybe even go into debt to get it. Because, you are told, it is "super sharp!" "The sharpest lens we have ever reviewed!"

Which is, of course, the purpose of most of those reviews...to convince you that you need to spend your money to acquire that sharp lens. If you do buy it, they imply, your photos will be so much better, so much more “professional-level.”

It is all misleading.

Throughout photographic history, a great many beautiful and important fashion, landscape, portrait, street, and fine art photographs...published in major magazines and displayed in galleries and museums all around the world...have been created with "un-sharp" lenses. Many of those images hailed as masterpieces.

There have been a great number of famous photojournalism and documentary images, created by legendary photographers, past and present, which have helped to raise awareness of important issues and possibly helped to end or shorten suffering…images that have been less than sharp. This did not diminish their impact.

You, most likely, have seen many of these images yourself…and they have touched and moved you.

Having your images be as sharp as possible is not a requirement for them to be great, compelling and powerful.

Just look at paintings. I doubt Rembrandt worried about how sharp his brush was ;-)

All you really need is a lens that is “sharp enough,” not the sharpest lens in the world (and the average person looking at your photos would not know the difference, anyway; and, even if they had the ability to tell the difference, or even cared, they would need to put their eyeball up against the photo…no one does this).

The lens, or lenses, you have right now are “sharp enough.” Ansel Adams, arguably the greatest of all landscape photographers, wrote that any modern lens is sharp enough. He wrote that in the 1930’s.

I had someone ask me…”I need a new lens, and can afford one that costs $300, but there is a really sharp lens for $800 that I keep hearing about...should I use my credit card for the $800 lens?” No. Buy the $300 lens…you will be able to create just as many great photos with that lens, as with the $800 lens.

So, please do yourself an emotional and economic favor...forget the reviews (“Look what happens when we take a photo of a brick wall and zoom in 1000%….now you can see how sharp!”)…and ignore the hype about the newest sharp lenses.

What really matters for great photos, is this (not in any particular order...and not all are necessary in every photo):

  • Is the photo beautiful or interesting?

  • Does the photo tell a story?

  • Does the photo have emotional impact?