www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

I rarely manage to keep any of my butterfly photos "complete"...by complete, i mean that the images have not been cropped at all.
Cropping is subjective(like most things associated with photography!) but for most of my butterfly photos, i tend to crop them.
The question is, which crop works best???

Below are several samples of crops, these are the types/sizes of crops that i tend to use.
Any type of feedback on these crops, would be appreciated, cheers Paul.

Subjects are a pair of mating Common Blues, that i photographed on the 25/7/15.

600 x 450 600 x 500 600 x 600

600 x 450 600 x 500 600 x 600

I think with the images that you have posted, its a bit difficult to mess about with radically different crops. With a single butterfly image, you can use the rule of thirds, and have the subject looking into a bit of space. But with a breeding pair it's probably best to have an even amount of space in front of both butterflies. I rarely use a square crop for anything, but I think it works best with your image.


Regards Gruditch

Like you, I frequently crop my photos but don't follow any hard and fast 'rules' I like to crop out parts that I feel are superfluous to the 'subject' of the picture and I like to make sure that there is some 'space' around the main subject. I simply put the original up on my screen and use the 'unrestricted' crop in Photoshop Elements to try various ideas until it looks 'right' to me. In the case of your first example, this is what I came up with:
But, tomorrow, I might do it differently.

It's still a nice pic, whatever you do to it

Mike

ps for the 2nd image, I agree with Gruditch - square crop works well

Gruditch wrote:I think with the images that you have posted, its a bit difficult to mess about with radically different crops. With a single butterfly image, you can use the rule of thirds, and have the subject looking into a bit of space. But with a breeding pair it's probably best to have an even amount of space in front of both butterflies. I rarely use a square crop for anything, but I think it works best with your image.


Regards Gruditch

Thanks for that, and yes, i guess it can be difficult to choose the right type of crop, when dealing with a breeding pair.
I have to confess though, i always used to opt for a squarish type of crop(mainly cropping my images to something like 600 x 450) but for the last year or so, Im now trying different types of crops, such as a 600 x 600.

MikeOxon wrote:Like you, I frequently crop my photos but don't follow any hard and fast 'rules' I like to crop out parts that I feel are superfluous to the 'subject' of the picture and I like to make sure that there is some 'space' around the main subject. I simply put the original up on my screen and use the 'unrestricted' crop in Photoshop Elements to try various ideas until it looks 'right' to me. In the case of your first example, this is what I came up with:

Crop-1.jpg

But, tomorrow, I might do it differently.

It's still a nice pic, whatever you do to it

Mike

ps for the 2nd image, I agree with Gruditch - square crop works well

Thanks for that, and yes, your crop looks good. Its not a crop that i would normally use myself, but i guess there is nothing wrong in "mixing it up a bit".

Thanks for the compliment, i shot both photos using the Nikon D700(i know you are also a "Nikon man" yourself).
This FX body is certainly different to my DX body, the 1st thing you notice is the size/weight of the D700, its big/heavy!
My D7100 had 24MP's to play around with(good for cropping) whilst this D700 has 12MP's...but there is still plenty of room for cropping, because as we know, its not All about the amount of megapixels available
Its early days yet, but the D700 images look cleaner to me, however my next step is to shoot in RAW now, because ive always just shot in JPEG, having never printed any of my photos, so didnt feel the need to use anything but JPEG.

I remember many years ago, when photos were made on film and prints were stuck into albums, seeing a friend's album where he had cut his prints to various different shapes and assembled them as a 'layout' on each page. Up until then, I had just stuck standard-size prints in serried rows but I was instantly converted!

Your D700 is similar in style to my D300s although, of course, full frame. I've been traveling in the opposite direction and am using an Olympus OM-D at the moment, which is proving pretty good, though I still reach for the Nikon for fast moving subjects, such as birds in flight. I think the 4:3 ratio of the Olympus sensor is often a better crop than the 3:2 of traditional 35 mm-based cameras although, quite by chance, I came up with a 3:2 crop on your photo! Perhaps my perception has been influenced by using 35 mm for so long

MikeOxon wrote:I remember many years ago, when photos were made on film and prints were stuck into albums, seeing a friend's album where he had cut his prints to various different shapes and assembled them as a 'layout' on each page. Up until then, I had just stuck standard-size prints in serried rows but I was instantly converted!

Your D700 is similar in style to my D300s although, of course, full frame. I've been traveling in the opposite direction and am using an Olympus OM-D at the moment, which is proving pretty good, though I still reach for the Nikon for fast moving subjects, such as birds in flight. I think the 4:3 ratio of the Olympus sensor is often a better crop than the 3:2 of traditional 35 mm-based cameras although, quite by chance, I came up with a 3:2 crop on your photo! Perhaps my perception has been influenced by using 35 mm for so long

Yes, being born in 1963 myself, I remember film, i also remember everyone had photo albums too. But ive only really been into photography for the last 5 years or so.

I did think about getting a D300/D300s, when i sold my D7000, but a mint 2ndhand D7100 came my way, so i put the D300 on hold. I was quite happy with my D7100, but once again, along comes a deal to good to pass up...a D700 with less than 4000 clicks. So i thought why not try full frame for awhile, plus the D700 came with a Nikon 1.7 teleconverter, at a price that was hard to beat!

The Olympus OM-D system(and other similar systems) look very impressive, perhaps something for me to look into in the future. Will the DSLR DX/FX bodies still be as popular in the next decade? who can tell for sure?

Well, as i said before, i rarely keep a complete image(99% tend to be cropped).

But this 1st image is in fact, uncropped! However, i think there is too much space above the butterfly, so i prefer the 2nd cropped image(where i cropped a little off the top) and the 3rd image has been cropped at both top and bottom of image.

Cheers Paul.

600 x 800

600 x 750

600 x 650

I asked this very question several years ago. And the answer is - to crop to suit the subject / composition. DO NOT be constrained by any fixed aspect ratios (4:3 etc.).

Some of my own photos, while shot in landscape, became portrait, and vice-versa, as a result ... and all for the better.

Cheers,

- Pete

I agree with Pete but you do have to decide what is the subject. If you were aiming to show the SSS specifically, then I would choose something like this:
It still lets you know that it is feeding from the flower but places the all-important eyes near the 1/3 points in the image space. I've now idea what the size ratio is - I just use the 'unrestricted crop' in PSE until i liked the look of it

Of course, if you crop too much, the result may look pixellated. This is one advantage of having lots of pixels to start from.

Of course if you do take a great picture like that, and crop like Mikes example. You should be arrested, and sent to prison, for crimes against photography.

Regards Gruditch

Thanks Gruditch

Hope you'll visit when I'm released.

Pete Eeles wrote:I asked this very question several years ago. And the answer is - to crop to suit the subject / composition. DO NOT be constrained by any fixed aspect ratios (4:3 etc.).

Some of my own photos, while shot in landscape, became portrait, and vice-versa, as a result ... and all for the better.

Cheers,

- Pete

Agreed, although i do "constrain" myself when it comes to re-sizing my images...i just dont like odd numbers, and always seem to create nothing but even numbers.

MikeOxon wrote:I agree with Pete but you do have to decide what is the subject. If you were aiming to show the SSS specifically, then I would choose something like this:

The attachment Paul'sSSS_crop.jpg is no longer available

It still lets you know that it is feeding from the flower but places the all-important eyes near the 1/3 points in the image space. I've now idea what the size ratio is - I just use the 'unrestricted crop' in PSE until i liked the look of it

Of course, if you crop too much, the result may look pixellated. This is one advantage of having lots of pixels to start from.

I can see where you were going with this crop Mike but because i only ever upload small size images, the crop you created from that small size image, was never going to look right.

I'll try to illustrate what you were trying to convey, with my crop..........but yes, i had the luxury of the original to work/crop from, and yes, it also works well.

Cheers Paul.

600 x 450

Gruditch wrote:Of course if you do take a great picture like that, and crop like Mikes example. You should be arrested, and sent to prison, for crimes against photography.

Regards Gruditch

Cheers for the compliment on my original image but as i said above, Mikes version/crop, was always going to look "pants" because of the small file size that he had to use. I hope ive rectified this with my latest crop.

Cheers Paul.

No you can't do that to that picture, I'm calling the police.

Regards Gruditch

Testudo Man wrote:

Gruditch wrote:Of course if you do take a great picture like that, and crop like Mikes example. You should be arrested, and sent to prison, for crimes against photography.

Regards Gruditch

Cheers for the compliment on my original image but as i said above, Mikes version/crop, was always going to look "pants" because of the small file size that he had to use. I hope ive rectified this with my latest crop.

Cheers Paul.

Hi Paul - this is nothing to do with the file size and everything to do with the composition. If you want a photo that helps with the identification of specific features of the adult butterfly, then perhaps a closeup and constrained view where the butterfly has no room to breathe is it - but it's never going to win any prizes in a photo comp! However, if you want a work of art that you'd be happy mounting on a wall, then your 600 x 750 is pretty close, in my opinion.

Cheers,

- Pete

Nothing like dropping the cat amongst the pigeons! I was simply pointing out that a photo may have another purpose, depending on how it is cropped. In case of any doubt, I agree your original makes a much nicer overall 'picture'

I don't usually comment on threads which discuss the technical aspects of photography, mainly because I don't have any knowledge of the subject. But this is more to do with the aesthetic; itself highly subjective, so we'll all see it differently.

The natural crop for me is as below. In the examples above I think the insect is too central. To my eye, the image requires significantly more space in front of the butterfly - that's where it will move to, when it takes off. Equal (or nearly so) distance behind it doesn't work for me. That's where it came from, before it landed, so is now history and redundant. To place it more centrally seems to gives the impression of it being stranded.

BWs, Neil

Your spot on Neil.

Regards Gruditch