I suppose it's down to what we consider the 'purpose' of photography to be. If it's to derive enjoyment from, then cropping is merely a tool to enhance the aesthetic qualities of an image. If it's to present the truth, to show the world as it is, then cropping could be frowned upon. But even then, cropping isn't necessarily changing the content, or the meaning of an image. I know in Street Photography it's often looked down on, but I think that's just because people aspire to some ideal where they can get their setting right, compose an image and take it in an instant, before the moment is gone.
It is good to be able to get it all right in camera, no question. But sometimes it IS all right in camera, as in the shot you posted by Newman, but when the image is there in front of you, you can see something better.
Cropping is one of the single most powerful tools that we have. Even for a purist cropping is essential - after all, the shape of a format may not be ideal for a given subject. It might be necessary to shoot a square image, or a more elongated widescreen style. Either way, cropping is the only way to get it right.
Using the tools we have to improve our images can never be cheating. Unless of course we're talking about competitions and then we need to observe the rules, whatever they may be.
kevinlowe wrote:
It is good to be able to get it all right in camera, no question. But sometimes it IS all right in camera, as in the shot you posted by Newman, but when the image is there in front of you, you can see something better.
