In the "Portraits with Leica M" thread below, Ralph Barker advises to "save precise composition for the darkroom". My question to everyone is, do you try to shoot everything full frame so you can print with black borders without guilt? Or is cropping in the darkroom okay? Of course there are many non-croppers: HCB and Erwitt come to mind. Kertesz and Eugene Smith had no such impediments.

Personally, I'm not opposed to cropping. It's just another tool in the process. Opinions?

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002

Answers

I shoot full frame when I can, I crop if it makes the print better.

I'd rather shoot full frame 'cuz it makes best use of the film area and will give me smoother grain and tonality in my prints than if I crop but IMHO there's nothing blasphemous about cropping.

-- Douglas Herr (telyt@earthlink.net), February 07, 2002.

As a medium-format shooter enlarging a full-frame 35mm neg is already bordering on disappointing to me. I crop if I really have to, otherwise not. I definitely try for full-frame composition.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 07, 2002.

If you're into projecting slides, you'd better crop when you make the exposure. I suppose that's why I've always preferred longer lenses and seldom use my 35 Summicron pre-ASPH.

-- Bud (budcook@attglobal.net), February 07, 2002.

I always try and shoot full frame - I feel that cropping should be done "in camera". This is IMO a more disciplined way of shooting and really makes you concentrate on the composition.

-- Giles Poilu (giles@monpoilu.icom43.net), February 07, 2002.

i just bought a book about man ray, "photography and its double". it shows something that you usually never see: the full frame prints with man ray's original cropping marks of many of his most famous photographs. he usually only used about half to a third of the frame for the final print, of course he used large format, but this was about 70-80 years ago. modern emulsions allow quite heavy enlargements and therefor generous cropping. this book is really worth getting. it appeared in the gingko press.

-- stefan randlkofer (geesbert@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002.

I compose my frames "in-camera" and then print the entire negative every time, and the process helps develop a more focussed, disciplined shooting style that has helped me learn to exploit the full frame pretty consistently. Additionally, printing full-frame means that each print has the same proportions (and in my case, each one has the black borders as well), which helps hold together a set of prints better than if they all were cropped to different proportions.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), February 07, 2002.

i print full frame. there is a purity to it that I appreciate. besides anything else is cheating!!

;-)

-- john molloy (ballyscanlon@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

I think it takes a lot more discipline to visualize a specific print size in the finder than to do everything full-frame. With full- frame, you have a pretty good idea what you will get without any mental effort.

On the other hand, I don't think it matters at all unless you are always cropping down to 10% of the frame. After all, I'm not showing most people my contact sheets, just my prints.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 07, 2002.

I shoot everything for full frame. When I shoot chrome, that's that. When I shoot B&W, I always print full frame and crop with a paper cutter (if needed). This keeps me disciplined and makes me a better rangefinder shooter.

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), February 07, 2002.

Hi, Jeff !

I shoot full frame.

In the begining I used to crop B&W. But then I had a 10+ years long "slides only" period and (logically enough) I began composing full frame without not even thinking about croping.

And I hadn't realized why I automatically compose full frame now (even going to some extra effort sometimes in order to do so)until I read Bud's posting, above . . .

I don't feel ethicaly compelled to full frame composing though. In fact, some of the best pictures I have were croped from larger compositions in my pre-slides time. It is only than now I compose full frame automatically with no reservations for later composition improvements.

Good question !

Regards, Jeff.

-Iván

-- Iván Barrientos M (ingenieria@simltda.tie.cl), February 07, 2002.

I think that most of us who habitually print full frame with black borders probably do it as a way of demonstrating (if only to ourselves) that we knew what the picture was when we shot it--that it wasn't an accident that was salvaged later. There's a certain pleasure in getting it right from the start, rather than trying to make it work after the fact out of what is essentially an imperfect vision at the time. That said, I sometimes crop, too, and certainly cropping doesn't make the resulting image less--it only indicates what lies behind making it.

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

I guess I should reply to my own post. I shoot everything full frame. I agree that it is a disciplined approach to shooting.

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002.

Even this Nikon shooter believes in full-frame. I shoot at all kinds of angles and distances to have a variety of compositions- If one owns a zoom, this may take some getting used to......

-- Mike DeVoue (karma77@att.net), February 07, 2002.

Eisenstadt said that it was the major flash of understanding in photography when he realised he could compose with the enlarger.

-- Tony Brookes (gdz00@btinternet.com), February 07, 2002.

Hello Jeff. I'm sure you can see most M users like to shoot full frame .. believe me, that bit of discipline in getting your eye in to shoot full frame is worth it.That look has been reinforced by the "little black border" around the image.If you still print your own black and whites see if you can print a fine black border around those prints.. then if you have to crop then at least your image will have that "full frame"look. Regards.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

Jeff,

Part of the issue may be a matter of semantics. Although I was referring to cropping in the portrait thread, some of the references here appear to be referring to cropping. That is to say, my preference is to make minor (a few mm) cropping adjustments (on a portrait orientation print) to the horizontal (the 24mm side of the neg) when the prints are made, along with a major crop on the vertical (the 36mm side of the neg) to keep the print on standard sized paper behind a standard sized matte in a standard sized frame.

My question to those who print "full frame" would be - what do you do about mattes and frames?" In the same vein, how do you go about getting the black border? (My 35mm negative carrier, for example, has a 24x36mm opening that doesn't reveal any of the film border.)

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), February 07, 2002.

I always shoot full frame now. Since my M6 does not have a self- timer, it's really hard to hold two pieces of cardboard in front of the lens and trip the shutter at the same time. I thought of using a cable release with a foot pedal, but it seems kludgy to me. If you need to crop when you shoot, it's probably easier with an SLR, a tripod, and a self-timer. (;-)

-- Hil (Hegomez@agere.com), February 07, 2002.

Ralph,

I agree. I should have noted your use: "precise composition". When I read your response, I knew what you meant. Semantics it is. Man Ray CROPPED. We are indeed talking about minor adjustments.

I don't have a darkroom anymore, but you used to be able to buy a slighly oversized carrier that allowed for black borders. I suppose for mattes and frames, anything not printed on standard paper is a custom job.

-- jeff voorhees (debontekou@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002.

I'm sure you can see most M users like to shoot full frame .. believe me, that bit of discipline in getting your eye in to shoot full frame is worth it.

This is nonsense. I know many Leica (and other) camera users who do not shoot full-frame. Most I know find that it's more important to shoot for a chosen print ratio or, if for publication, to proportions that fit the publication. Maybe you are talking about the 20 or so people that responded here, but that hardly qualifies as "most" unless Leica is really losing users fast.

Also, as I pointed out above, it actually takes more discipline to learn to crop correctly in the viewfinder. It seems like a lot of people are patting themselves on the back for how they shoot, but I have seen very few exhibitions (or books) where everything is at viewfinder size unless it is for the border. However, with most publishing and much prinitng going digital, borders are now added without full-frame shooting.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 07, 2002.

Masuda, Carmel, California, 2/7/02

Genrally speaking, I do not crop my personal work. Occasionally I tighten up the composition a little bit. Very occasionally I crop a square 6x6 to rectangular.

I print black borders on my 6x6 work just because I scan with a flatbed and the borders are a part of the scan. (A lame reason, I know.) I do not include black borders on my 35mm work because the negative carrier on my film scanner is plastic and filing it out would probably destroy it. (And I really despise phony PhotoShop borders.) Occasionally, if the image bleeds to white or a very light tone, I will add a thin border myself.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), February 07, 2002.

Years ago some of my buddies who were newspaper photographers taught me about photography. They cropped practically everything because of the medium in which they worked. Photojournalism is fast-paced and sometimes you have to get the shot quickly. The negative is easily cropped to print only what is esential for the shot. Ever wonder why the 24mm lens is so popular among photojournalists? It's quick and it catches a lot of in-focus image. Editing can be done easily in the darkroom later.

Although the guys I knew sometimes printed their personal stuff full frame, generally they were very condescending to amateurs who tried to give an artsy look to an inferior photo by printing it with a black border. I

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 07, 2002.

(sorry, I wasn't finished my post)

...To them there were a lot of HCB wannabees printing a lot of crap with an artsy black border.

Personally, I love the look of a full frame print, with a black border. I also agree that to aspire to always print full frame disciplines you to compose better. However, the fact of the matter is that I'm simply not good enough to always print full frame and recently I've gone back to sometimes cropping. When I knew what I wanted the image to look like, but had to shoot it quickly to capture the image before it changed, but some extra element or compositional flaw makes full frame not work, I have no problem "editing" the image to crop out what doesn't work. It's still the same image I originally had in mind, just without the black border.

If you always print full frame, you must really be good; or at least better than I am.

-- Dennis Couvillion (couvilaw@aol.com), February 07, 2002.

Full frame is the way I try to go.. It is a more disciplined approach. However, when on the run or if not able to use the right lens, careful cropping has proven to be beneficial...

-- Albert Knapp MD (albertknappmd@mac.com), February 07, 2002.

OK guys, I'm still confused with this "full frame" thing, so help me out here, if you would.

To me, in-camera composition means deciding precisely what is going to be on the negative - within a millimeter or two on the subject. Considering that the frame lines in the M are at best approximate, and adjustments from experience are mental, how do you frame with that degree of precision?

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), February 07, 2002.

In response to a couple of earlier posts:

1) To print B&W full-frame with black borders, either buy an oversize negative carrier (Beseler makes them for their enlargers with 25mmx37mm openings) or carefully use a file to enlarge the opening on your present carrier. 2)In response to Jeff's post, every print I've made in the last ten years has been full-frame; sometimes magazines crop them, but one mag I have worked with has often run the prints right out to the black borders. (Alas, that mag went belly-up last month. I don't think there's a connection, though.) 3) I agree that printing full-frame, every time, introduces valuable discipline and is a learning tool. Along with this technique, I also stick to just one focal length for most general shooting (a 35mm lens), and am now so comfortable with the field of view of this lens that I often shoot without looking thru the finder and still get frames that, to me, look best when printed uncropped. You just can't get that intuitive by using ten different lenses and cropping all the time, 'cause then you'll never get a feel for what a focal length covers.

-- Douglas Kinnear (douglas.kinnear@colostate.edu), February 07, 2002.

I don't think that most of the world knows (or cares) that a black border indicates that the photographer didn't crop. If it makes the image stronger, crop it.

-- Steve Wiley (wiley@accesshub.net), February 08, 2002.

You cannot shoot "full frame" with a Leica, unless you are using an auxillary finder.

-- (bmitch@home.com), February 08, 2002.

Maybe it is silly, but all of my personal 35mm is printed full frame. If i have to crop it , I don't print it! Same goes for my rolliflex tlr squares.

-- John Elder (celder2162@aol.com), February 09, 2002.

I don't crop for my own presentations of my work, but that's just laziness. I suspect slide photographers are more likely to use the full frame because the mounted slide is the finished product in a way a negative isn't.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), February 09, 2002.

I believe learning to shoot full frame will challenge you more as a photographer (I fell in love with photography 23 years ago on a Konica rangefinder). Think about the composition, choice of lens, and get to really know your equipment. I find that pushing oneself - to get the best shot you can - is a joy in itself. However, cropping (in print) is just another tool, not blasphomy. I do it when I've usually missed something. But, I'm not going to loose any sleep over it. What about toning, Grade of paper, choice of film, & enlarger? To a point, some might say these tools provide part of the creative touch (not just on the technical side). I've seen too many a near fine print, and said to myself: "if it was just a little tighter" ;0)

-- brooke anderson (dbanders@videotron.ca), February 09, 2002.

full frame -- "fill the frame is the name of the game" film is cheap, shot several versions... then and only then crop in dig dark or real darkroom.. you will see better quality... however dont believe the game of full frame only for purity - instead all that matter is the final image... I shoot alot of stuff digital or conventional with thought of -- I can manipulate to get the image I see in my mind..

-- David Natho (david .natho@wcom.com), February 12, 2002.