100% crop

Status
Not open for further replies.

StillLife

Well-known member
Messages
229
Reaction score
149
Location
West Sussex, UK
Hi all, every so often I see articles or discussions about photography and there will be a photo and then a cropped version of the same photo, sometimes 2 or 3 different crops getting closer each time. It often says 50% or 100% crop. What is 100% crop? To me if you cropped something by 100% there would be nothing left!

This link has a bird pic half way through it with a 100% crop on the birds eye.


Any way if someone can tell me what 100% cropped means it would appreciated, thanks.
 
Hi all, every so often I see articles or discussions about photography and there will be a photo and then a cropped version of the same photo, sometimes 2 or 3 different crops getting closer each time. It often says 50% or 100% crop. What is 100% crop? To me if you cropped something by 100% there would be nothing left!

Any way if someone can tell me what 100% cropped means it would appreciated, thanks.
With most things their dimensions are described simply in physical lengths - 6 inches, 30 cm or whatever. That applies to photographs, of course - a FF sensor is 36x24mm, prints might be 8"x10" etc.

However, with digital photos there's another way of measuring: the number of pixels. A 24MP sensor has an array of pixels that's 6000x4000: On a FF sensor that's 36x24mm the pixels are each bigger than a 24MP sensor that's APS-C (about 24x16mm) or any other size.

Similarly, a common pixel size for monitors is 1920x1080 pixels although the physical size varies 22", 27" etc. If I post a picture here it might be 6 inches wide on my monitor but only 5 inches wide on yours. But its number of pixels stays the same. It's therefore common to describe digital pictures in terms of their pixel dimensions.

It isn't always necessary to count the pixels, if what we want is to know the relative size of what we're looking at. The percentage terms you ask about relate to the relative pixel sizes: 100% means that the relative numbers of pixels between image and monitor are equal: 1 image pixel is displayed on one monitor pixel. 50% means that 4 image pixels (2x2) are displayed on one monitor pixel, and so on.

If you look at an image posted here such as this you see it downsized to fit the window but if you click on original size you see it at the full pixel size - 100%.

But once it opens for you, you may not be able to see all of it (unless your computer resizes it again). If I wanted to draw your attention to just the eyes I might save you the bother of going to original size by cropping out a small section around the eyes.

It's that crop - a crop designed to show you the 100% pixel view - that we call a 100% crop. In other words, 100% crop means "cropped from a 100% view" and not "cropped by 100%".

4035c7476671479faa4defd70e58ee60.jpg

This term, like most terms (or jargon) in any specialist subject comes from practical reasoning. Although, as you say " if you cropped something by 100% there would be nothing left" is logical things just don't happen that way: if I wanted to remove the whole picture I'd say something like "delete it", not "crop it by 100%". If I wanted to describe what I actually did, changing it from the native 3:2 aspect ratio of the sensor I'd describe it as "crop to 16:9" rather than cropping to some %age ratio.

Note too that a ratio N:M has long been used photographically for aspect ratio. 1:1 means square, so while there is a 1-to-1 correspondence between image and monitor pixels confusion might arise if we said 1:1 crop, whereas 100% crop doesn't have any other meaning when used in photography.

Incidentally, ratios such as N:M are also used to describe the magnification - the ratio between the size of an image on the sensor and the real size of the object. Thus, to say view at 1:1 could cause confusion between viewing at pixel size or at an actual physical size. Note that aspect ratio and magnification are so different that there isn't confusion: it's clear what the context is.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
[email protected]
 
Correct.

100%CROP is nonsense. There is so much stupid terminology on this forum and in magazines too, if you want to learn something, go to the library and find a book made before the DSLR.

The DSLR introduced all this nonsense.

Episode two of this thread :


--

" Use the shutter button on the headset cord " - Leonardo Da Vinci
 
A quick summary of Gerry's explanation:
  • Viewing at 100% is when one pixel in the original image corresponds to one pixel on the monitor
  • A 100% crop is when somebody crops down a particular part of an image before posting so that it can be viewed at 100%
 
The percentage doesn't refer to the amount of the print cropped...it refers to the size of the zoom factor, whether the crop has been enlarged or reduced in size compared to the original. For instance this shows a 100% crop:

mSXVz.png


However, this image below is a 40% crop, meaning it's been reduced in size to 40% of the original size in order to fit on this page, but it doesn't mean it's 40% of the original image:

earlyedit.jpg


Unfortunately some people here make a fuss over semantics calling it a silly term, but it DOES have meaning in the photographic industry (as someone who has done photography for 40 years including commercial processing).
 
A quick summary of Gerry's explanation:
  • Viewing at 100% is when one pixel in the original image corresponds to one pixel on the monitor
  • A 100% crop is when somebody crops down a particular part of an image before posting so that it can be viewed at 100%
 
I think I've got that, but doesn't that mean it is only relevent to the posters monitor ( and of course any ony else with the same resolution monitor ), and wouldn't the monitor resolution be needed as a reference?
Say I have an 800x600 pixel image and I post a 50% version of it...it would be 400x300 pixels in size. Now what does the size or resolution of the monitor have to do with anything? If I posted a 200% version of the original size it would be 1600x1200 pixels! It's just basic math.

It doesn't matter if the monitor is a 3" or 30". It doesn't matter if the monitor is an old 800x600 pixel or a modern 5k. It's the percentage of the original image size to the resized version, NOT the monitor size!
 
100%CROP is nonsense.
It isn't nonsense, but you have to understand the language of photography.
There is so much stupid terminology on this forum and in magazines too,
Wrong. Every special interest has its own terminology developed to describe things that are useful within that specialism. What is stupid is trying to engage in an established specialism without bothering to learn its language.
if you want to learn something, go to the library and find a book made before the DSLR.
What has the DSLR to do with it? The term is concerned with digital imagery; a DSLR is just one of the tools used in digital imagery.
The DSLR introduced all this nonsense.
Wrong twice - the DSLR didn't introduce it and it isn't nonsense/
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbf
100%CROP is nonsense.
It isn't nonsense, but you have to understand the language of photography.
There is so much stupid terminology on this forum and in magazines too,
Wrong. Every special interest has its own terminology developed to describe things that are useful within that specialism. What is stupid is trying to engage in an established specialism without bothering to learn its language.
if you want to learn something, go to the library and find a book made before the DSLR.
What has the DSLR to do with it? The term is concerned with digital imagery; a DSLR is just one of the tools used in digital imagery.
The DSLR introduced all this nonsense.
Wrong twice - the DSLR didn't introduce it and it isn't nonsense/

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
[email protected]
agree to disagree.

I learned photography with a camera limited to three settings, aperture , shutter speed, and focus.

This is what you need for photography. A book from 1985 will be without this confusing "specialist terminology" , probably better for a beginner than to get answers here from you.

100% crop is not useful at all, it's just some nonsense, and it is not the only nonsense.

--
" Use the shutter button on the headset cord " - Leonardo Da Vinci
 
Last edited:
A quick summary of Gerry's explanation:
  • Viewing at 100% is when one pixel in the original image corresponds to one pixel on the monitor
  • A 100% crop is when somebody crops down a particular part of an image before posting so that it can be viewed at 100%
--
Chris R
I think I've got that, but doesn't that mean it is only relevent to the posters monitor ( and of course any ony else with the same resolution monitor ), and wouldn't the monitor resolution be needed as a reference?
The purpose of viewing an image (or a crop thereof) at 100% is that the pixel-for-pixel relationship provides one of the best ways to assess the "native" image quality produced by the sensor, without the additional complications and potential corruptions of software resizing algorithms and compression. That isn't the only was to assess image quality, but it is one that many people like to use.

In order for that to work, the image must be displayed on the monitor with each image pixel corresponding to one monitor pixel. There may indeed be differences in the physical dimensions of the crop displayed on the monitor, depending on monitor resolution, but the need to have a one for one pixel relationship overrides that. And the difference may be far less than you might assume, since monitors with larger resolutions (number of pixels displayed) also tend to be physically larger. So the actual pixels displayed per inch tends to balance out, with relatively small differences among monitors.

For instance, I have two monitors on my desktop: one is 24 inch (nominal) at 1920 x 1200 pixels, and the other is 20 inch nominal with 1600 x 1200 pixel resolution. The actual screen area of the larger monitor is 20.5 inches wide, so the resolution is 93.65 pixels per inch. The smaller monitor is 16.125 inches wide, for a resolution of 99.22 pixels per inch. In practice an image or crop at 100%, displays at just about the same size on both.

That may be less true of very high pixel density monitors, and that may complicate the task of using a 100% crop to assess image quality, but it doesn't change the definition or practical utility of the term.

Dave

--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
I think I've got that, but doesn't that mean it is only relevent to the posters monitor ( and of course any ony else with the same resolution monitor ), and wouldn't the monitor resolution be needed as a reference?
Say I have an 800x600 pixel image and I post a 50% version of it...it would be 400x300 pixels in size. Now what does the size or resolution of the monitor have to do with anything? If I posted a 200% version of the original size it would be 1600x1200 pixels! It's just basic math.

It doesn't matter if the monitor is a 3" or 30". It doesn't matter if the monitor is an old 800x600 pixel or a modern 5k. It's the percentage of the original image size to the resized version, NOT the monitor size!
Not that I want to confuse things further, but 400X300 is 25% of 800x600. You can fit four 400X300 rectangles in a 800X600 rectangle.

Whether or not the monitor resolution and the physical size of the monitor matters depends on what you're talking about so it's necessary to be clear. As Mike_PEAT mentioned, a 100% crop is a 100% crop on any monitor. On the other hand, people usually post 100% crops to discuss noise and other issues related to image quality. In that case monitor resolution and other factors do matter. I could be looking at the same 100% crop on my monitor that my friend is looking at on his monitor and he could be seeing a much larger image with more detail than I'm seeing.

So why post a 100% crop? Assuming that you don't want to post the full, uncompressed image due to bandwidth, viewing size, copyright, or other considerations, posting a 100% crop elimates one major factor related that can intefere with analyzing camera and lens image quality- the compression used by your photo editing software to downsize the image. That's a good reason to post a 100% crop.

"100% crop" is an oxymoron. Oxymorons make sense when you understand why the words fit together, i.e. for "jumbo shrimp", the word "shrimp" refers to the crustacean not the adjective for small size. In this case, the trick is that the adjective "100%" is not describing "crop". It's describing the resolution. "100% crop" is simpler than saying "crop at 100% of the source's resolution" so it's become the standard phrase.
 
Last edited:
I learned photography with a camera limited to three settings, aperture , shutter speed, and focus.

This is what you need for photography. A book from 1985 will be without this confusing "specialist terminology" ,
"... aperture, shutter speed, and focus" are specialist terminology. Try asking a non-photographer to explain them and you'll get all sorts of answers.

Aperture means any sort of opening through something - it could just as easily refer to a mouth; and a non-photographer wouldn't think of linking it to a lens. And, of course, your camera setting was probably f-stop rather than aperture.

Shutter speed is nonsense in the strict meaning of the words - logically it ought to be exposure instead of shutter and duration instead of time.

Focus as in focus group, for example?

Now I know and understand what you mean by those terms because they are part of the specialist terminology of photography. You seem unable to grasp that simple fact.
probably better for a beginner than to get answers here from you.
As with aperture, shutter speed and focus they are not at all confusing if one can be bothered to learn them. In case you hadn't noticed, photography has changed since the 1980s: it uses new technology with new terminology. You might just as well advise someone to learn computing from a 1980s manual.
100% crop is not useful at all, it's just some nonsense, and it is not the only nonsense.
Several people in this thread have explained that it is, in fact, useful and what that use is.
 
Hi all, every so often I see articles or discussions about photography and there will be a photo and then a cropped version of the same photo, sometimes 2 or 3 different crops getting closer each time. It often says 50% or 100% crop. What is 100% crop? To me if you cropped something by 100% there would be nothing left!
We had another thread about 100% crop this week. It was ENORMOUS and finally maxed out. :-)

This issue is not going away, because as everyone admits, there are MANY ways to understand what "100% crop" means. In that other thread, the OP though that it meant exactly the OPPOSITE of what you concluded; he thought "100% crop" was a crop of 100% of the image, thus not a crop at all!
Any way if someone can tell me what 100% cropped means it would appreciated, thanks.
My position is that it should be called "just a crop" and nothing else. The distinction that nobody ever makes when trying to help someone grasp what "100% crop" means is: "It's a crop w/o any RESIZING!" In other words, just a plane-jane CROP. There is absolutely nothing special that has to happen on the end where the individual is making that "100% crop"; they just make a crop!

Most of the difficult stuff happens on the receiving end. When someone sends a "100% crop" image, the person receiving it has to select a special mode that displays images pixel-for-pixel. There are several ways to do that on DPR. I'll not describe them here. Just understand that these "100% crop" images don't automatically display in a pixel-for-pixel way.

The program you run [browser] is aware of the resolution of your monitor(s) and can do a 1:1 pixel display, if asked to.
 
The percentage doesn't refer to the amount of the print cropped...it refers to the size of the zoom factor, whether the crop has been enlarged or reduced in size compared to the original.
Percentage is a construction that often leads to misunderstandings! It's employed by Marketing Sprocket Heads to confuse. There is an advertisement running on cable that says that a pill reduced the incidence of venous bleeds over a placebo. The placebo had an incidence of 17% and the pill being touted had an incidence of 3%. I would call the pill 14% better, but the add says it was 82% better! I understand the math, but just because you CAN compute the percentage of a percentage doesn't mean it's proper.

You are correct: the % is not the amount of the image cropped, but it COULD be. That would be just as logical a conclusion. The expression doesn't give the reader ANY clues about how the % is computed. Gerry is also correct; after learning from an experienced photographer what the % refers to, it's not a difficult concept. Millions of us survived.

But since few people mention resizing when trying to explain "100% crop", I conclude that most people don't really understand it. They are just faking it... :-0
 
Last edited:
I learned photography with a camera limited to three settings, aperture , shutter speed, and focus.

This is what you need for photography. A book from 1985 will be without this confusing "specialist terminology" ,
"... aperture, shutter speed, and focus" are specialist terminology. Try asking a non-photographer to explain them and you'll get all sorts of answers.

Aperture means any sort of opening through something - it could just as easily refer to a mouth; and a non-photographer wouldn't think of linking it to a lens. And, of course, your camera setting was probably f-stop rather than aperture.

Shutter speed is nonsense in the strict meaning of the words - logically it ought to be exposure instead of shutter and duration instead of time.

Focus as in focus group, for example?

Now I know and understand what you mean by those terms because they are part of the specialist terminology of photography. You seem unable to grasp that simple fact.
probably better for a beginner than to get answers here from you.
As with aperture, shutter speed and focus they are not at all confusing if one can be bothered to learn them. In case you hadn't noticed, photography has changed since the 1980s: it uses new technology with new terminology. You might just as well advise someone to learn computing from a 1980s manual.
100% crop is not useful at all, it's just some nonsense, and it is not the only nonsense.
Several people in this thread have explained that it is, in fact, useful and what that use is.
+1

A very logical, well thought out rebuttal to two post that are mostly nonsense.
 
I learned photography with a camera limited to three settings, aperture , shutter speed, and focus.

This is what you need for photography. A book from 1985 will be without this confusing "specialist terminology" ,
"... aperture, shutter speed, and focus" are specialist terminology. Try asking a non-photographer to explain them and you'll get all sorts of answers.

Aperture means any sort of opening through something - it could just as easily refer to a mouth; and a non-photographer wouldn't think of linking it to a lens. And, of course, your camera setting was probably f-stop rather than aperture.

Shutter speed is nonsense in the strict meaning of the words - logically it ought to be exposure instead of shutter and duration instead of time.

Focus as in focus group, for example?

Now I know and understand what you mean by those terms because they are part of the specialist terminology of photography. You seem unable to grasp that simple fact.
probably better for a beginner than to get answers here from you.
As with aperture, shutter speed and focus they are not at all confusing if one can be bothered to learn them. In case you hadn't noticed, photography has changed since the 1980s: it uses new technology with new terminology. You might just as well advise someone to learn computing from a 1980s manual.
100% crop is not useful at all, it's just some nonsense, and it is not the only nonsense.
Several people in this thread have explained that it is, in fact, useful and what that use is.
Can you please explain why 100%CROP is useful ?

Can you also please explain why a 100%CROP is more useful than the full image or a regular crop ?

Please don't answer with a long rant .
+1

A very logical, well thought out rebuttal to two post that are mostly nonsense.

--
Chris R
--
" Use the shutter button on the headset cord " - Leonardo Da Vinci
 
Last edited:
It is an ambiguous and counterintuitive term. The previous threads confirmed this. This thread just enforces it for me. More threads will happen.

The reason these threads exist is NOT BECAUSE it is a "special" term that needs to be learned. The problem is that it is "ambiguous and counterintuitive" term to begin with.

It is too easily misinterpreted because most already have knowledge about what % means and what crop means.

The fact that people in the know can't even agree or at least properly explain it makes it obviously a poor term.
 
Last edited:
"100% view" has been around long before digital cameras. It's been a part of digital imaging for years. It means a pixel-for-pixel view with no interpolation down or up to reduce the view on the computer screen nor expand the view on the computer screen. 100% views were important as some computer screens and software in the past could interpolate the reduced views very poorly, particularly views that required complex calculations like odd numbers such as 37% views whereas 50% and 25% views required less complex interpolation. In the past, computer screens tended to have a lot fewer pixels so we were constantly checking images at 100% views, 50% views, 25% views particularly when output sharpening scanned film. The 100% view, one pixel for one pixel is still relevant today because photographers, for expample, will use this view to most accurately assess the effects of sharpening on an image. This site uses 100% views of its sample images so we can check, or "pixel peep" every tiny pixel of an image. It's a digital term. Unlike analog photography, digital photography is made up from a finite number of discrete pixels. If we want to show a sample pixel for pixel, and only a sample because the whole image would take too long to download and store at full resolution, we call this sample a 100% crop. That's what you're doing when your checking test images on this site. Checking little samples at full resolution. We could say a "a sample crop ar maximum pixel-for-pixel resolution" or we could say a "100% crop". Yes, it's digital jargon but folks are happy to explain it and it's common usage so get over it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top