Which is better crop?

[johnske]

This was taken as a wide shot, then I noticed in part of the pic the raintrees seemed to form a natural archway leading to a large raintree in the sunlight about 150-200 m away so I decided to crop to accent the 'corridor'.

In the 1st crop (portrait type) the feeling of distance is retained. In the 2nd crop (landscape type) the distance is lost but the intervening gloominess of the corridor under the trees is more apparent - I sort of like both, but what would you choose or what else would you do with this pic?




GE X5 digital camera
Exposure: 1/2000 sec
Aperture: F 4.9
Focal length: 30mm
ISO Speed: 600

[Photologyst]

Portrait.

Those are some BIG trees and portrait emphasizes that.

OTOH, you could crop even closer in LS to emphasize the tunnel effect.

Nice shots.

[johnske]

Originally Posted by Photologyst

Portrait.

Those are some BIG trees and portrait emphasizes that.

OTOH, you could crop even closer in LS to emphasize the tunnel effect.

Nice shots.

Thxs, you're probably right about the emphasis, I was aiming for a natural 'cathedral-like' appearance and cathedrals are always tall (as are these trees) - any other opinions tho?

[Photologyst]

For a cathedral like feeling I think that one needs to shoot up, rather than straight ahead. Cathedrals are designed to make mankind feel small and humble in the presence of the deity. Ditto for the natural cathedrals of trees.

I would do both the crops and see.

[Cola]

Personally I like the landscape orientation better. To me it shows more depth in the photo and my eyes are drawn through the "tunnel" #1 it does show more tree up top but there;s nothing really interesting and no real shape to the leaves above and with the way the branches come into frame it makes it look more like it was a crop than an original composition like #2 does. So my vote is for #2.

[RonD90]

I like the second cropping better too. I find the dead branches in the top portion of #1 very distracting and hard to keep my eye off from. I also agree that #2 could be enhance by cropping in the sides. The leaves on the right side seem distracting and draw attention away from the arch. Overall I think this a nice photo, not alot of "pop" because of all the dark shadows, but yet inviting, almost like it says "Come thru my arch into the sunny meadow".

BTW...I am new to this, so my opinion is only that...."my opinion", and nothing more. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[andrewdt]

I vote #1 - the height of the trees makes the shot

[emeraldln]

Landscape. I didn't even notice the subject tree in the portrait crop until I went back and read the description.

[johnske]

OK, thanx to all. By a narrow vote of 3:2 landscape view seems to be the preferred option so far...

I can appreciate the view that the dead branches in the foreground in the portrait view really add nothing but there's not much i can do about them, they are just 'there', and if I go back to get the full height of the raintrees the 'tunnel' becomes an insignificant dot and the small trees with the dead branches in the foreground will swamp everything.

At the same time i really don't like to crop any more in the landscape view because i lose detail and increase noise etc. So it looks like i'll have to take all these views on board and just take the shot again with a more specific purpose in mind (it's not far from home and the time of day {4:26PM} is in the originals EXIF info)

[sjakes]

I personally like the 2nd, I get a more full feel from it?