Semantics of "100% crop"

[dsjtecserv]

So just how do pixel-peepers quickly and easily crop 100% on whatever monitor they use? There must be a shortcut that doesn't involve counting pixels.

Go to an editor that allows full size view or some similar term. That brings the image to pixel-per-pixel size. Now use the crop tool to select an area that's comfortably smaller than the screen, crop and save.

Is that really necessary? I mean the first viewing at full size part before cropping? My perception is that I can get exactly the same crop regardless of the viewing ratio. I tried it and "Yes", the viewing ratio on my monitor has no affect on the resultant crop!

The reason for viewing at 100%/full-size is to ensure that when cropping you can see that the size of your crop fits within the useful area of the screen. It isn't strictly speaking necessary but it avoids the possibility that (when viewed at 100% of original) on the receiver's screen it is all there without needing to scroll around.

That makes some sense...sorta. Your first sentence implies that unless you FIRST view your image at 1:1, the crop may fall outside the bounds of the receiver's screen.

My FIRST question about that is, what if the receiver's screen is a different size [in pixels] than your screen; will this throw a wrench into the works? Like, suppose you have a screen that has pixel dimensions of 2560 x 1440, but the receiver has a screen with 1920 x 1200 px resolution. Will your crop potentially be bigger than the receiver's screen?

My SECOND question is, does DPR allow us to scroll around when it gets an image bigger than will fit or does it resize it to fit?

To answer the second question, when I upload a BIG image to DPR [not the gallery, but directly embedded in a post] and then subsequently click on "original size", it's obvious that what is displayed has been resized to fit my screen.

Here, I'll insert one:


4912 x 7380 image from D810

When I click on "original size" it shows a slightly larger version of this entire image, but it's not at 1:1. Mousing over the image and clicking displays the region I clicked in at 1:1. Only then do I see scroll bars. But, DPR never tells me the pixel ratio! I had to guess that it is 1:1.

Seriously? If you click on the image above it appears on a popup screen with "100% details" in the upper right corner; click on that to get a 100%, 1:1, 1 to 1, or "pixel to pixel" display of the image.

:-O

Dave

--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

It might already have been severely cropped before uploading. What does the 100% detail show then? A 100% crop of the original image file? Surely not.

Well would expect it would be; it is generally both a waste a resources and rude to your audience to upload a full resolution, uncropped image. The very purpose of a 100% crop is provide other people a close (pixel for pixel) look at the quality of an image, by showing an example, cropped from the full image. As has been explained several time before, by me and by others, the 100% part refers to the display percentage; the crop part of the fact that the image has been cropped for the convenience of the viewer.

All the hand-wringing about the meaning of the VERNACULAR term "100% crop" is at his point, I think, just willfully-feigned ignorance. Y''all know better.

Dave

--

Galleries by David S. Johnston

www.pbase.com

 

[Aberaeron]

dsjtecserv wrote:
All the hand-wringing about the meaning of the VERNACULAR term "100% crop" is at his point, I think, just willfully-feigned ignorance. Y''all know better.

;-)

 

[chuxter]

It might already have been severely cropped before uploading. What does the 100% detail show then? A 100% crop of the original image file? Surely not.

Your question baffles me! I don't know what you are asking for sure. Since I don't think that the term "100% crop" has a meaning, I'm at a loss to understand how to answer your question. But I think the answer is "YES!".

It matters not HOW an image got to be the size it is. It could be:

• An image taken by a 1 MP camera
• An image taken by a 36MP camera that has been cropped down to 24MP
• An image taken by a 36MP camera that has been cropped down to 1 MP
• A screen grab that is 100 x 200 px [0.02 MP]
• A drawing that has been exported as a JPEG; it can be any size

Each of these is a 100% image! It is what it is.

My point here is that if someone sent you an image w/ no EXIF data, how would you know how it had been created and processed? How would the DPR software know what a "100% crop" is? What the DPR software does is to display the image where one pixel in the image is one pixel on the screen. That can't possibly be termed a "100% crop" because no cropping happens! It might be a "100% view" or a "1:1 view".

I keep saying that there is no such thing as a "100% crop". All crops and images are 100% of what they are. When you crop an image, there is no residual of the original image inside it. It is a NEW image! The OP has a problem with this too, as he thinks that your "severe crop" is anything except a "100% crop", since it eliminated most of the original image.

When you get an image, you can choose to look at it in a 1:1 mode, where each image pixel is displayed by one screen pixel. You can do this w/ any image, regardless of how it was created and processed.

When you do that, you are not showing a "100% crop"; you are just showing the pixels at a 1:1 ratio.

There IS NO 100% CROP!!!

 

[Leonard Migliore]

There IS NO 100% CROP!!!

I would rate this entire thread as being extremely close to 100% crop.

 

[chuxter]

dsjtecserv wrote:
All the hand-wringing about the meaning of the VERNACULAR term "100% crop" is at his point, I think, just willfully-feigned ignorance. Y''all know better.

;-)

LOL. Yes, I'm willful, but I have to be when dealing w/ other willful people. :-0

The word "vernacular" is a poor choice. It means:

"The language or dialect spoken by the ordinary people in a particular country or region"

It's the OPPOSITE of what dsjtecserv was thinking, IMO! To use a vernacular expression instead of "100% crop" would be to use a word that the "ordinary people" understood. Those "ordinary people" are the Beginners" who come here for information and advice.

A better word to use would be "jargon:

"Special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand"

In this case, it's an issue of using a term that doesn't lead to understanding. It's an issue of being confusing.

Normally I ignore insane, arcane expressions. But when they impede the education of Beginners, somebody has to say something. The term "100% crop" is bandied about by you guys as if the Beginner had to do something SPECIAL when making a crop, in order for it to be a proper "100% crop". That is not true. There is no "100% crop" tool or procedure. It is simply the default crop w/o any other operations, such as resizing. Call it a "pure crop" or a "non-resized crop" or my favorite, " "just-a-crop".

THIS is the issue. Your term confuses Beginners because it implies that there IS a special tool or process that they have to use to do one of those special "100% crops". If the guild had simply coined a term that was used to indicate that the user was supposed to "just crop it" and the recipient of that image was intended to display it at a 1:1 pixel ratio, as long as that term didn't imply something else, we would not be having this little discussion. Call it "blitspik". It carries no baggage. Nobody knows what "blitspik" means so they learn a new word. But calling it "100% crop" carries baggage; it imparts an impression that there is a special kind of crop, when there is not. Worse yet, it doesn't look like a new word that must be learned! It looks so benign. Then the Beginner finds out that he can't understand what it is. He looks on YouTube for videos produced by 14-year-old kids to explain what a "100% crop" might be. The dark side sucks the beginner down...

This forum is supposed to help Beginners understand photography and your guild's pig-headed refusal to change your language does not make the members good Forum citizens.

All living languages change. Dead languages don't! To brag that a term has been around since the dawn of photography is actually saying something bad. Much of the language of photography is dead. :-(

There are many of you in your guild. I suspect that a sizable percentage don't have a clue what "100% crop" means! They let the high priests worry about those details. It's upsetting when a rebellious infidel tells the flock that the high priests are wrong. In the past people lost their heads for this type behavior.

 

[chuxter]

There IS NO 100% CROP!!!

I would rate this entire thread as being extremely close to 100% crop.

Hmmm... I had added, "This thread is 100% __A_, but deleted it.

--
Leonard Migliore

 

[skyglider]

After trying to think of a replacement for "100% crop", I think the most concise replacement that will express the poster's intent is to call it:

..... "1:1 crop"

When asked what that means, the answer is:

..... A crop that should be displayed as 1 pixel of image to 1 pixel of display to see the details without pixel peeping.

Sky

 

[dsjtecserv]

dsjtecserv wrote:
All the hand-wringing about the meaning of the VERNACULAR term "100% crop" is at his point, I think, just willfully-feigned ignorance. Y''all know better.

;-)

LOL. Yes, I'm willful, but I have to be when dealing w/ other willful people. :-0

The word "vernacular" is a poor choice. It means:

"The language or dialect spoken by the ordinary people in a particular country or region"

The key element is the word "particular", which you gloss over. Vernacular is not "standard" or "generic" speech, but rather language the is peculiar to group. If you go beyond the top line in a google search, you'll find definitions referring specifically to the use of vernacular terminology in particular trades, crafts, and professions, as well as among people who share geographic proximity.

In other words, it is a quite apt term to describe terms of art, such a "100% crop", "shutter-speed", "dragging the shutter", "fast lens" and innumerable other terms having unique meaning in photography, and which make no sense if you take their common English meaning literally. Even neophytes who hang around the street corner with the other bad boy photographers gradually pick up the lingo. And for the most part, they are none the worse for it. They go out and take pictures, and are able to converse with their now-fellow cognoscenti.

Except for when the collective self-stimulation exhibited in threads like this takes hold, where the sole apparent purpose is to pretend that we don't know something, in order to make others -- inevitably unsuccessfully -- teach us what we already know. Then we can walk away all self-satisfied, knowing that we've shaken the hold of the elites on the power of language, or something like that.

Whatever. Threads like this don't advance anyone's knowledge nor help beginners understand their craft; they just serve as exhibitions for those who enjoy the sport of internet foruming. Thankfully, and mercifully, the number 149 approaches.

Dave

--
http://www.pbase.com/dsjtecserv

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

After trying to think of a replacement for "100% crop", I think the most concise replacement that will express the poster's intent is to call it:

..... "1:1 crop"

That already has a photographic meaning: a square (aspect ratio 1:1) crop from a frame of different aspect ratio.

When asked what that means, the answer is:

..... A crop that should be displayed as 1 pixel of image to 1 pixel of display to see the details

If the aim is to eliminate confusion using a term that already has a different meaning is counterproductive.

 

[LynniePad]