To the Valley Below

[FrankMi]

One more cup of coffee before I go...

Sometimes I just can't seem to make up my mind.

In this case I have two crops of the same image. One is larger and shows more of the village. The other is cropped tighter and shows more of the detail in the village.

The detail may be easier to see if you open the images in Lytebox and expand.







Perhaps you would crop even tighter?

Be so kind as to offer your opinion as to which you prefer and why. Thank you!

[siggi]

Love the first image-shows just how secluded the village is.Cropping off foreground in the second photo turns it into a panoramic style,appeals to me.

[IzzieK]

What? No sky? j/k...I like #2 because I do. Losing the cut house at the left made it better...no coffee for me thanks...'been staring at the second one for a while and thinking why I like it. I do not think I like the "too much foreground. Go a little bit cropping but lose the greens at the front, see how you go...
Cheers...

[Shadowman]

2nd image shows more detail but village is lost amongst the greenery.

[Donald]

First image has too many trees! That is, we can see the context from the second image and don't, I think, need all that extra foliage of the first one that, in itself, has no distinct point of interest. The point of interest is the village and in the second one we can still see that it is in a valley surrounded by trees.

[Nancy Moran G]

No comment on the photo, as I am stuck on the Bob Dylan song now
Nancy
Looks like my kind of place.

[Brownbear]

I prefer the 1st image simply because of the beauty of the overall scene and the sense of the place, and all the beautiful, details, shadow and light in the trees in the foreground. If I were to crop it, I would crop a little off of the top and the right hand side because I love all those trees.

[AB26]

Frank,

I would reduce the crop as the location of the village is more important to me. A tighter crop is just another image of a village.
A bit of useless info: shooting in hazy conditions try setting the camera to more vivid and increase saturation.

[FrankMi]

Love the first image-shows just how secluded the village is.Cropping off foreground in the second photo turns it into a panoramic style,appeals to me.

Thank you for commenting Siggi! It is definitely secluded, sitting on a narrow road between two steep mountains, the image being shot from high up on the southern one. That may be why there is almost no development very far off the road.

[FrankMi]

What? No sky? j/k...I like #2 because I do. Losing the cut house at the left made it better...no coffee for me thanks...'been staring at the second one for a while and thinking why I like it. I do not think I like the "too much foreground. Go a little bit cropping but lose the greens at the front, see how you go...
Cheers...

Dang Izzie! I knew I was missing something, the sky, of course! LOL

So you would opt for a tighter crop? Would you also retain the 16x9 aspect ratio or let it go wider (2x1?) and just crop the bottom of the second one? I was a little reluctant to remove the darker green at the bottom caused by the shadow of the mountain as I thought that line of color difference added interest but you have a valid point.

Thank you for commenting!

[FrankMi]

2nd image shows more detail but village is lost amongst the greenery.

I appreciate your response, John. So would you go for crop tighter as well, John? If so what would you cut and what would you retain?

[FrankMi]

First image has too many trees! That is, we can see the context from the second image and don't, I think, need all that extra foliage of the first one that, in itself, has no distinct point of interest. The point of interest is the village and in the second one we can still see that it is in a valley surrounded by trees.

Great to have you chime in, Donald!

It sounds like you would prefer a tighter crop as well Donald. My concern with cropping too aggressively is where do we lose the sense of it being a village in a steep valley? Or perhaps that is not all that important?

[Manfred M]

I think Robert Capa's suggestion of if the picture isn't working for you, you're not close enough applies here Frank.

Number 2 is stronger than #1. It would be intersting to see what things look like if you kept roughly the same proportions of the image, but cropped things so only the buildings to the right of the parking lot are included.

[Wavelength]

I feel green is more rich in #1, which i like better

[Shadowman]

I appreciate your response, John. So would you go for crop tighter as well, John? If so what would you cut and what would you retain?

Hi Frank,

Yes I would go with a tighter crop; even isolate certain sectors.

[FrankMi]

No comment on the photo, as I am stuck on the Bob Dylan song now
Nancy
Looks like my kind of place.

Thanks Nancy, I guess I'm not the only one humming that tune...

[FrankMi]

I prefer the 1st image simply because of the beauty of the overall scene and the sense of the place, and all the beautiful, details, shadow and light in the trees in the foreground. If I were to crop it, I would crop a little off of the top and the right hand side because I love all those trees.

Thank you for your thoughts, Christina and Nandakumar! The sense of isolation and being hemmed in by the trees is what drew me into this scene. It just looked like a cozy nook where you could settle down in front of a crackling fireplace kind of feeling.

I will try other crops but my guess is that it just won't give that same feeling.

[FrankMi]

Frank,

I would reduce the crop as the location of the village is more important to me. A tighter crop is just another image of a village.
A bit of useless info: shooting in hazy conditions try setting the camera to more vivid and increase saturation.

I have the same feeling Andre, but I am also willing to experiment with other cropping ideas as well. It may change the emphasis of the image but then, perhaps there is more than one scene here to view.

This was a fairly clear day so I wasn't sensing a haze issue. I've also been reluctant to cross the line between expected foliage saturation and an oversaturated 'electric' look. Perhaps the saturation could be picked up a bit but if so, my guess is that the buildings are fine and the foliage may be a tad weak.

[FrankMi]

I think Robert Capa's suggestion of if the picture isn't working for you, you're not close enough applies here Frank.

Number 2 is stronger than #1. It would be intersting to see what things look like if you kept roughly the same proportions of the image, but cropped things so only the buildings to the right of the parking lot are included.

I appreciate your insight Manfred. I don't think it was as much that the image wasn't working for me but more that I was leaning more toward exploring the reasons why viewers would prefer the closer or further view. Hopefully I could then accurately apply that reasoning when trying to compose future images of this genre.

It is interesting that you selected those particular crop points as an option as that is exactly where I was considering an alternative crop if I had to go in tighter. OK Manfred and John. Let's see how it works!




I guess the question now is, having cropped tighter, have we gained more than we've lost, lost more than we've gained, OR is it now a different scene?

[TonyW]

I thought this was a reference to the song about "how could you use a poor maiden so" until I saw the mention of coffee.

I probably prefer the first image but it might depend on the size at which it is being viewed. I am often disappointed with a picture on a small scale which looks marvellous at full resolution on full screen.