This one or that one?

[Joe Copalman]

Was trying to get caught up on a lot of shooting I did last year and came across this shot from San Diego.  When I started working on it, I went for a balanced, centered crop, but then I noticed that I lost a lot of the cool details in the background - unique roofs, palm trees, sailboat masts, the harbor - all the details that give it a solid sense of place.  Not sure I'm too crazy about how low in-frame the aircraft is in the second shot though.  Anyway, any thoughts on the framing?  Top?  Bottom?  Neither? 

[Jay Beckman]

I'm actually partial to the second one as I think the boats give it a sense of place...

I would, however, trim off just a little more at the bottom to eliminate that little crooked slide of darker taxiway shoulder.

[Jeff D. Welker]

I'm actually partial to the second one as I think the boats give it a sense of place...

I would, however, trim off just a little more at the bottom to eliminate that little crooked slide of darker taxiway shoulder.

I concur with Jay's assessment that image #2 has greater interest with the background (i.e. tile roofs and sailboat masts). That being said, I'd do the opposite of Jay's recommendation. I'd re-frame the image to take a tad more off the top. I don't think you need much room from the tops of the palm trees to the top of the frame. That would move the Airbus a smidgen more towards the center. The darker taxiway shoulder asphalt can be cloned away if distracting.

Another approach would be to go with more of a square crop and get both foreground and background. Thus getting the centered/balanced look you were originally seeking; however, in a funky "Hasselblad-like" format.

[Jay Beckman]

Not to go all "Point / Counterpoint" here, but IMO, the area beyond the boats adds depth and while maybe I'd burn it down some, I'd certainly keep it... 

Jeff?   

[Joe Copalman]

Good suggestions.

Jeff, I already went with a squarer format by cropping it at a 5:7 ratio rather than 2:3 to get more of the background in.  Cloning out the taxiway nonsense in the right foreground was my initial plan were I to proceed with that crop.  That said, I took another stab at this before zonking out in a sea of my own drool at my computer desk last night with a 2:3 crop that both eliminates the taxiway crud in the foreground and some of the negative space outside.  I typically HATE the airplane-at-the-bottom shots with nothing but sky taking up the top 3/5ths or more of an image, but I think in this case, the textures of the background make that not only justifiable, but desireable.  Will post a final shot later tonight if'n I don't drown in a drool-puddle.

Thanks for the feedback!

[Jeff D. Welker]

Not to go all "Point / Counterpoint" here, but IMO, the area beyond the boats adds depth and while maybe I'd burn it down some, I'd certainly keep it... 

Jeff?   

I concur Jay that the background adds depth and keeping it adds much to the image. I was just trying to squeeze some "bottom" frame real-estate back into the image by cropping the palm trees a tad closer to the top. The more I think about it; probably a minuscule gain at best. At the end of the day, it may be a situation where POV restricts having the great background and centering the Airbus. The lower framing of the Airbus is not distracting or detrimental for me.