Actually, I have more problems with zooms than with primes. With primes, I know that I am most likely going to be cropping later and I can deal with that. With zooms, I try to get it "just right" in the frame. I have trouble convincing myself to back off a bit, sacrifice just a touch of "close-up" detail to give me breathing room in later cropping.
I don't remember anyone ever telling me that I "should" get it exact in the camera, but over the decades of photo books and articles, it seems to have become a habit. I can remember even 40+ years ago, in my relatively early days of SLR usage, feeling very put upon when I had to put crop marks on my slide mount to indicate how Kodak should crop when printing. stan On Aug 24, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: > Cropping was a lot more exacting in the days before zooms. > You didn't just zoom in or out to get your cropping right. > You had to zoom with your feet. > Regards, Bob S. > > On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 12:53 AM, steve harley <p...@paper-ape.com> wrote: >> on 2013-08-23 21:34 Matthew Hunt wrote >> >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:26 PM, John <johnsess...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I've never heard of "get it exact in the camera" before. >>>> >>>> I've always heard "get it right in camera" ... not the same thing. >>> >>> >>> I sure have. There are absolutely no-crop fetishists on the >>> Internet... and there were in the film days, too (showing the edges of >>> the frame as "proof"). >> >> >> some did tremendous work within that constraint; while i'm not a purist >> about it myself, being close to someone who was (in the 1960s), i think it >> offers a certain simplicity - first thought, best thought >> >> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
