Stop filling the frame!

This is seriously bad advice - the poster is encouraging people to make weak compositions while shooting with the idea that they will simply correct it later by substantially cropping (and thereby degrading) the image. That's crazy.

Just because it's easy to crop doesn't mean it makes sense to throw away all that data - it makes a lot more sense to get it right in the camera, or at least close to right. Even today's 24mp professional bodies aren't always sufficient for large prints - the heavily cropped images above would make very low-quality prints even at small sizes. If one only wants to use images on the web, it's fine to do as suggested, but if one wants to become an excellent photographer, the first step is learning to compose well in the camera.

My father, with awards for his photography, has always said fill the frame - with dramatic results. Your use of digital- age technology is definitely an improvement in fine- tuning the results.

I agree with Mr. Brady's theory, but I also agree with Mr. Bandes's objections.

The cropped pixel size suggested would only be sufficient for a digital photo competition because an image cropped to 1400 x 1050 pixels is fine for projection, but at 300 pixels per inch (ppi) - the recommended resolution for printing - the actual photo would only print out at 4.66" x 3.5" - not an exhibition or even snapshot size.

But with the much larger megapixel cameras today, such as a 20 mp camera, there is an advantage to having a little more breathing space in your photo to give yourself more flexibility for cropping. Just make sure you have adjusted your image resolution to 300 pixels per inch (in Photoshop > Image > Image Size > have resample UNCHECKED) before you start cropping so you will have a realistic idea of your final size.

Another advantage of high megapixel cameras is that they allow you to "zoom" in closer than the zoom lens on your camera because you can crop in to the subject as if you were able to zoom in even more. Just remember - if you plan on printing your photos, keep the resolution at 300 ppi and no resampling!

I think Charles Bandes is missing the point. The article was directed toward the competitors in Mr. Brady's photo club (or any similar club) who are constrained to 1400 x 1050 pixels. The idea of the article is to get impact in your projected photos in the club competitions and this method of filling the frame works very well for that.

Making large prints was not a goal of the article, but there is some relevance to print making also. The 2x3 form factor of many digital SLR cameras today will lose something like 16% on the long axis when making an 8x10 print. If you fill the frame in camera for impact, you may lose a critical part of the photo when creating that 8x10 print.

Excellent tips.

Agreed with Charles's comments about composing well in the viewfinder to become a good photographer. That takes time to think and sometimes wait before clicking. Too often shooters click too quickly. Unfortunately many digital shooters have a tendency to shoot lots of frames, since there is no film cost. Another digital "approach" is to shoot first and fix it later with Photoshop. After advising that good in camera composition is passe, will Jim follow up with advice that accurate exposures are only for the film shooters?

Jim's advice also illustrates the problem with camera clubs. Too weighed down with competitions, and not enough open minds. Camera clubs are great for the novices to learn the basic techniques, but in time they can become a detriment for those who really want to become great photographers.

Agree with all posters above.. but it seems "sloppy" for a lack of better terms to propose what Mr Brady talks about - and as he mentions has some serious drawbacks for folks that might read the article but shoot their fancy new DSLR in Auto mode such as: what is your ISO set to? MP count of the camera? Atmosphere distortion? Camera shake - sharpness? What was the aperture in the area you want to crop to?

Certainly there are fine times to crop in - but for the majority of folks that do not set their DSLR's manually (A/P modes), this method could lead to lost shots - IMO, it is better to take a composed shot if you can.

A

All comments and the article are both right AND wrong ... WHY? Simple - it all comes down to why you are taking the photo, what you are going to do with it, and how it is received.

Getting the composition right in the camera is a great ideal, but can be impractical (e.g. often in sports shooting, incorrect aspect ratio, grab shots on the fly, etc). How much information you need is based on the final product; e.g. slide presentation vs. poster-sized print. Often a mediocre shot can be received by the viewer more than the expert shot - i.e. the story it tells.

The one take-home message I get is this: Rigid mindset keeps you from thinking out of the box to expand your horizons.

The author makes a good point about cropping for competitions. But even for other purposes, cropping is somewhat of a necessity. No matter what format you shoot the picture in, you're going to have to decide how you want to view it, e.g., 4x3 full screen on a monitor, 16x9 full screen on a wide-screen monitor, 4x6 photo, 5x7, etc. All these viewing formats have different aspect ratios which will require cropping something. A larger starting point allows cropping for the perfect final viewing.

Agreed that an image's final intent of use should decide how the image is created, from beginning to end. However, thoughtful planning and decisions made before and during taking a shot will always make post processing easier, and the final result better, regardless of the intent. Many film shooters and new shooters who never get this down seem to think that this no longer apply in digital. They now have the mentality of shoot first without any thought process or camera control, and fix them later in Photoshop. In addition to Brady's "advice" on sloppy in camera composition, others don't bother with accurate exposure or DOF. After all, all these can be fixed in Photoshop, later. Digital offers many advantages, but unfortunately, it also help breed many poor photographers.

I would also add that every time you save a jpg file, information is lost in the compression process, so every change that is made and saved causes data to be lost. I understand it it something like 3% each time a change is made. I am a proponent of getting the image framed as close as possible to the final outcome and only relying on cropping for very distant objects for instance.

this article is horrible advice in the context of providing tips for improving one's photographic skills. compose and shoot with a purpose.

It seems that several readers were horrified that someone would suggest a technique not included in the official handbook: "How to Take Photographs." Kudos to RV above for getting the point that once in a while you need to think outside the box.

In the context of preparing images for camera club competitions, which is the clearly stated objective of the article, the advice in the article is sound. All the article suggests is that you compose less tightly than you might have composed when using slide film. It doesn't suggest forgetting about the elements of composition when you take the photo. And it certainly doesn't suggest that you forget about all the other techniques, skills, and experience that come into play as you trip the shutter.

But my favorite comment above is from "Anonymous" (what a surprise) criticizing the article for not following the rules of photography...and then criticizing camera club members for not having open minds. I invite Anonymous and any other reader, to gather your three best images and enter them at the next competition at your nearest camera club. You will learn more about photography from competing and watching others compete than from any article or book or class.

Master the basics...then think out of the box!

Camera clubs are great places for the beginners to learn the basics and to socialize. But the amateurs or pros who are beyond the basics would not come to these clubs for "out of the box" photography pursuits. Those who want to produce more than "mindless" photographs would realize that repeatedly winning ribbons within the tiny "competition" ponds from questionable judges can become a hindrance to their individual development.

"In photography, it is he who is responsible for the majority of mindless photographs. He is the joiner, the imitator, the photographer who plays it safe. Such people have surrendered their individuality in exchange for approval, approval by the system, the organization, public opinions, their fellows at the photo club. They have succumbed to fads and trends, they are the in-people who belong to a group or school, and they look down on anybody who does not belong." - Andreas Feininger

In response to fairnsquare, obviously each person is entitled to an opinion about camera clubs. I only offer that perhaps today's clubs are a more fertile creative environment than the clubs that Feininger might have experienced in the 60s and 70s. I know from personal experience that camera club competitions have provided me with the motivation and focus to push my own creativity. Granted, there are those who make images solely to please the judges. I've never done that. I continually try to enter images that challenge a judge to think beyond the "basic rules of photography." I'm sorry to hear that some photographers have such a jaundiced view of camera clubs. And I repeat my suggestion that even experienced photographers might consider going to a few meetings with an open mind. I think you would be surprised at how much you can learn. You can also visit www.bwps.org and click on Competition Results to see for yourself the wide range of excellent competition photographs.

Being a good mechanic is an asset in any trade. However, sometimes a mechanic of questionable ability can do a good job because he has the right tools. They don't make him or her a better a mechanic they just make for a better job. Early cameras took terrible pictures, but they were taken by some of the best mechanics. Digital has allowed more people to participate in photography. Most of the same techniques used for film apply and the ability of the digital camera along with the programming available today in photoshop etc. has given todays photographer new tools and some additional techniques.

I used to do that, but the final quality wasn't good, and my camera has a lot of megapixels. Now if I have time, I always compose in camera. If I haven't, like in sports, I set the zoom to use something like 1/4 of the frame (I like the air around people), shoot sequences of 3-5 photos, and the main care is setting the object on the first third of the frame. I like the movement sensation. Besides, the long sequences give you interesting options; you have closest and farthest versions of the pictures.