Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Biweekly Shoot Out

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 2, 2004, 10:38 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Alan T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980
Default What are the rules for reflections and framing?

I spent ages cropping this image (and its portrait variant) trying to improve the layout, by eye and by 'rules' and finished up with the full frame after all. I Imagine the neurones in my aging head look something like this.

I suppose if you're photographing a reflection it's almost a rule that you need a line across the middle. Note also that my foreground framing got a little bent.



PS. Sorry it's unsharp. The original's better (says I looking at a 10x8 print). How much sharpening and compression do you posters use to get reasonably small images?
Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 2, 2004, 11:25 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

Alan, maybe the question isn't so much one of cropping as it is one of contrast. The nearer branches are so close in color and luminance to those farther away that it creates a confusion about whether or not this is two- or three-dimensional. The close-up branches create a frame for the true subject of the picture, but because they look so much like the subject, this framing isn't readily apparent.

What I generally do when resizing photos for posting is to first, change them to 72 pixels per inch, then check the actual dimensions, downsizing further if I think they'll require any scrolling to see all parts of the picture. Sharpening isn't consistent, always depending on the contents of the individual photos. For JPEG compression, I play with it, trying my best to get the compressed size below 75 kb, but if heavy compression destroys the quality of it, I'll either go with a larger size or give up on posting it.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 11:30 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

wow you manage to get your pics below 75k??!?!?!?! HAHA! i normally have mine around 200-300k lol

the photoshop option "Save For Web" saves some images very small VERY well.......depends on colors and stuff......like my signature came out like 20-40k (pretty big lol)(but normally around 1mb i think)

i think the important thing about resizing and compressing is the resizing....you want to resize it as 1/2 or 1/4......the pixels rearange better that way....
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 11:34 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

I rarely use Photoshop's "Save for Web." I've been using a plug-in called ProJPEG for years, and it always seems to do a better job.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 11:37 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

hmm.....the Save For Web let's you save as Gif images too (which you can pick the colors to delete or not use, therefore making the file size smaller .....if you do it right...and use the least amount of colors you can make it really small...)
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 12:04 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

Quote:
let's you save as Gif images too
Yes, but this is rarely good for photographs.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 12:09 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

I've been getting fairly good results with Photoshop CS save as jpg.

I resize image to fit an 800*600 monitor and save as jpg quality 7.
Oddly I find the file size seems to go up if I try using quality 6.

I'll have to take a look at the jpg plugin see if it can do better.
soooo many software packages soooo little time. :?
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 12:29 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Alan T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 2,980
Default On the other hand...

.. if cropping isn't the answer, perhaps I should go the other way?

My wife says she'd like this as wallpaper, believe it or not.
Alan T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 12:42 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,652
Default

Only on one wall, though. :shock:

Another thing you could try is using gradients to darken from the edges inward. Maybe an irregular vignette, but I think gradients might hold more promise. Or maybe it's just too complicated a photo and would be better re-taken with different camera settings and with an eye to simplifying it.

Often, what's beautiful to the eye ends up not being seen by the camera. If you have some slides where you can kill the picture in the frame, do so by removing the film. View your scenes through the slide frame before actually photographing them. It can help you see what the camera is going to see.
bcoultry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2004, 12:46 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
photosbyvito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,710
Default

are you talking about that little square? actually ...i guess that would be easier to use than i big square (less to carry lol)
photosbyvito is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:00 PM.