I see it as a habit from the days of 35mm film, which was really
meaningful in digital before the explosion of megapixels. 35mm was a
rather low fidelity imaging source. If you wanted a reasonable sized
print, with good detail, using a reasonably fast film, (varied with the
era but in the age of Tri-X ASA 400), depending on subject matter you
could get a decent 8x10 cropping at most 1/3-1/2 of the frame. This was
decent by the standards of the day, today it would be considered awful
with lots of lost detail. Today with a 16mp camera cropping away 2/3 of
the frame, (and assuming reasonable technique and a decent lens), you've
still got more data to play with than people had with early 2-4mp
DSLRs. If only processing for the web, crop away, I say.
On 1/24/2017 6:11 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote:
On 24/1/17, Bob W-PDML, discombobulated, unleashed:
I try not to crop very drastically
I simply don't understand this - either one crops or one doesn't. How is
it that more cropping (supposedly) equals being drastic?
Not being facetious, just fancy tempting some more prose out of you ;-)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
