# POLL: Do you wide-screen frame/crop?



## Marsu42 (Feb 22, 2015)

I know I have inquired about this before, but I'm still undecided - sorry for that. So I'm asking the regular two contributors  to this subforum for another input, it's about framing again. The problem is that imho you have to have this in mind when shooting, and cannot just casually crop around later - or can you?

The one current reason is that I can only think of so many possibilities to squeeze horsies into the viewfinder. Some scenes simply only have boring grassland or sky on top/bottom, and some shots profit from the enhanced sense of direction or space with wide screen framing.

The other reason is that with current displays, 16:9 (with small borders on 16:10) is full-screen and doesn't waste as much space, it's not like we print all shots, do we? And viewing 2:3 on widescreen somehow looks stupid, like trying to put a film into a dslr.

The question are: 

Is 16:9 too amateurish because all clients/sites expect with 2:3 framing? And real photogs traditionally frame for the native res of their big 100% ff viewfinders?
If you frame for wide-screen, do you do additional shots/composures or simply post-crop if it happens to work out (see poll)?

Thanks for any input or discussion on this, after accumulating some 2:3 horsie shots and learning the basics of pressing the shutter button I feel like I need to advance in one direction or another. I even did some pano stiches when the animals were so helpful not to move for some seconds


----------



## sulla (Feb 22, 2015)

During shooting i frame in such way that i capture everyting that i want to have in the Photo.
Sometimes i already know beforehand that some ugly, unwanted Detail would have to be cropped away, but - to be honest - Most of the time i Do Not pay enough attention right away.
Then, on PC, i think which crop would work the Best for a given shot, Then i crop what's needed. I, however, Do not restrict myself to certain anspect ratios, like 3:2, 3:4, 16:9... I just adjust the crop freely to what the picture asks for, whatever the finaal apect ratio may be.

I might Choose some special aspect ratio like classic 1:1, 2:3, but treally just if the natural croppingis reasonably close or if i need IT for another purpose, like printing, presentation on a Beamer or tv or someone asks me specifically for IT.

But i honestly never frame for a specific cropping right away During shooting. I would have, if i shot Video, obviously.

In all, i would like canon to makea circular Sensor to capture all of the Image circle and crop only in Post...

PS. Please excuse my capitalisation, the Autocorrection of my Android Tablet drives me nuts.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 22, 2015)

sulla said:


> But i honestly never frame for a specific cropping right away During shooting.



For what I do, I find that this often doesn't work as a "cropped" 2:3 framing is too tight when cut down to 16:9, sometimes 16:10 works a bit better.

For example on the second sample shot with the foal and mare, for 2:3 cropping I held the camera higher so I've got more of a top-down view and less useless space on top and bottom.



sulla said:


> PS. Please excuse my capitalisation, the Autocorrection of my Android Tablet drives me nuts.



And some people claim technology is there to _simplify_ our lives :-> ... but I admit I'll never get as natural with iSomethings and Facebook as those youngsters seem to be. Thank the maker I'm old enough to be spared


----------



## beforeEos Camaras (Feb 22, 2015)

I shoot loose and crop to the best angle to send the idea I am trying to see in my minds eye at the time of the photo. just keeping on size of view limits my creativity.


----------



## Zv (Feb 22, 2015)

I hadn't even thought about it until now. I always try and maintain the original proportions even after cropping just because I thought that is how it is meant to be and how we are used to looking at images. Plus it makes it a whole lot easier when trying to send to print. 

Personally, I love the widescreen formats and will now keep them in mind when shooting!


----------



## Sporgon (Feb 22, 2015)

That's what portrait orientation stitching is for 

Seriously though, you want to crop a 20 mp 1.5x1 sensor to 2x1; it's no big deal in terms of overall resolution lost. However a camera such as the 5Ds may make such cropping even more acceptable. 

Anyone who has an issue with sheet cut paper sizes, get a printer that can work from a roll.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 22, 2015)

I never give 16:9 a seconds thought.


----------



## Berowne (Feb 22, 2015)

I am still moving in the good old "24x36mm-Film".


----------



## jcarapet (Feb 22, 2015)

I shoot for what works for my subject matter and the reach I get with my lens. And I hope it works well for print.


----------



## chauncey (Feb 23, 2015)

I routinely use a long lens, >185, take lots of images and photo-merge, then crop to whatever.


----------



## JMZawodny (Feb 23, 2015)

I decide the proper aspect ratio for the crop after I shoot and post process. Sometimes it ends up 3:2 or 2:3, sometimes it is 1:1 and other times its 16:9 For rocketry, I also go with 1:2 or rarely 1:4 (w:h). So, this poll seems too limited to be useful.


----------



## ecka (Feb 23, 2015)

I stitch 16:10 (mostly for screen) or 2:1 or whatever works best, possibly 5:2 (like 10K+ by 4K+ in resolution).


----------



## Hillsilly (Feb 23, 2015)

I only think about widescreen cropping when I'm making a timelapse movie. Otherwise, I just crop as each picture demands. Lately, I've been doing more panoramas, but even then I haven't settled on a standard crop size, but I do like around 2:1, which isn't that far off from 16:9. Hmmm, you've got me thinking for the next one.


----------



## Zeidora (Feb 23, 2015)

I shoot 2:3, get all the info I can get. Afterwards, usually I retain that aspect ratio if I print. After that, my most frequent crop is 4:5 having done a bunch of LF on an Arca. Once in a blue moon a long skinny (vertical or horizontal) comes around, but it is extremely rare. Most of my PP presentations are in VGA format, only once did I have to design for 16:9. But even then, each PP slide has multiple elements, do aspect ratio of images is not 16:9.


----------



## ReggieABrown (Feb 23, 2015)

I shoot with the 16:9 ratio in mind quite often. I do a lot of cinematic photos, so this ratio is very common amongst the cinematic photography community. I'm posting 3 pictures that I framed specifically for the 16:9 ratio crop in post.


----------



## ReggieABrown (Feb 23, 2015)

Here's the 3rd pic.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 23, 2015)

JMZawodny said:


> So, this poll seems too limited to be useful.



It's designed to be useful to me :-> because I won't do arbitrary cropping to any aspect ratio that fits, but will either frame for 2:3 with additionally occasional 16:9 and maybe 1:1.



ReggieABrown said:


> I'm posting 3 pictures that I framed specifically for the 16:9 ratio crop in post.



Thanks for the samples - the bridge is great, but I have my usual 16:9 problem with the house: It feels too tight, with parts nearly cut off, like framed for 2:3 and then cropped because it seemed like a nice idea. In a movie with the house zooming in/out, this would be fine, but as a still not so much. Is that just me?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Feb 23, 2015)

I crop a lot of my images. 

My favourite aspect ratio is 5x4 for portraits. For landscapes sometimes use 16x9 or 16x10 on occasion, but I also do shift-stitched shots with my TS-E 24 which I crop down to 5x4. I crop an image on merit. If if works best as 1x1 then that's how I crop it.

The Facebook cover-image is super wide 27x10 (851 x 315px) so sometimes I shoot with that aspect ratio in mind.

P.S. I see that ultra-wide aspect ratios TVs and monitors are becoming more and more common. I wonder if 21x9 will rise to the same popularity as 16x9.


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 23, 2015)

I'm drawn to the 3:2 format and was always annoyed by the 4:3 format of compacts. I will shoot for 16:9 if I know the photo will be used in video, but will also shoot with other formats in mind. If I'm doing head shots, I leave room for the inevitable 4:5 (8x10" print) cropping, and for a lot of the canvases I sell, I shoot with 1:1 in mind as sets of square canvases, particularly florals, sell quite well for me.


----------



## NorbR (Feb 23, 2015)

I'm quite liberal with cropping, and will adjust the ratio based on what the picture calls for. But even though that sometimes requires exotic ratios, most of the times I stick to 3:2, 16:9 or 1:1.

But I do have a soft spot for 16:9, and use it far more often than 1:1 or other non-OOC ratios. In fact I would say that 16:9 is the only ratio that I do frame for a priori, i.e. visualizing the scene in that aspect ratio prior to clicking. I don't think I ever do that with 1:1 or other formats ...

So yes, framing wide and cropping wide, quite a bit. I'd have to check the stats in my library, but I'd guestimate somewhere between 10% and 20% of my pictures.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 23, 2015)

I generally shoot for 3:2, but I crop to 16:9 for my 14" widescreen digital frame. If that doesn't work for an image, it doesn't go on the frame. For portrait orientation shots I combine two into a single 16:9 image.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 23, 2015)

Much of the time, I cannot control a scene, so I crop to fit the subject. Since I shoot RAW, cropping in the camera makes little sense to me, however, when needed, a person can purchase a focus screen with guide lines for various or specific aspect ratios if they want to frame to a certain aspect ratio. This gives them the ability to easily recover from partially cutting off a subject or cropping tow tightly, or correcting the level.

I'm sure that there are certain types of photography where specific aspect ratios are required, like printing portraits on 4 X 6 or 8 X 10 paper. In cases like 8 X 10, using a different aspect ratio makes sense.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 23, 2015)

I only use 16:9 to get rid of excessive sky or foreground in a landscape or real estate photo. Really, I'm liking the 4:3 aspect ratio every time I shoot portraits as I gives me plenty of room to crop to just about anything.


----------



## eninja (Mar 5, 2015)

I crop retaining 2:3 aspect ratio, because 4R photos and photobook dimension is 2:3 also.
Last time I like 16:9, but nowadays 2:3 seems normal and convenient to my eyes, idk why.


----------

