Newbie question : meaning of "100% crop" ?

In article , John Bean wrote:
It's the same number of pixels there are in the crop.

That seems a touch circular to me, John. Saying that a 100% crop "has the
same number of pixels as there are in the crop" doesn't greatly advance my
understanding of the term, I'm afraid.

Roger

On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:17:32 GMT, Roger Whitehead
wrote:

In article , John Bean wrote:
It's the same number of pixels there are in the crop.

That seems a touch circular to me, John. Saying that a 100% crop "has the
same number of pixels as there are in the crop" doesn't greatly advance my
understanding of the term, I'm afraid.

Not circular at all, though confusing. The "100%" doesn't
refer to the crop, it refers to the image. It means it's
some arbitrary crop from a full, unadulterated,
pixel-by-pixel, 100% scale image. If you had downsized the
image to half size before cropping it would be called a 50%
crop, and if you upsized it to double size before cropping
it would be called a 200% crop.

I didn't invent the terminology but that's how it's used,
like it or not.

--
John Bean

On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:17:32 GMT, Roger Whitehead wrote:

It's the same number of pixels there are in the crop.

That seems a touch circular to me, John. Saying that a 100% crop "has the
same number of pixels as there are in the crop" doesn't greatly advance my
understanding of the term, I'm afraid.

It seems to me that some other ways to describe what people here
are indicating by a 100% crop, as "Cropping for Dummies" might
describe it is:

° A crop, pure and simple.

° No form of processing has been applied to the piece snipped from
the original image file.

° Slice a paper print using a pair of scissors into two or more
pieces and each piece will be a 100% crop. If any piece is colored,
stretched (distorted into another shape), spindled, mutilated or
burnt, it's no longer a 100% crop.

° If a piece of the print (or image file) has been modified in any
way so that it's no longer a 100% crop, not only is the "100%" no
longer valid, no other numeric percentage is meaningful, since it's
an all or nothing kinda thing.

In article , John Bean wrote:
I didn't invent the terminology but that's how it's used,
like it or not.

Thanks, John. Not complaining, just trying to understand.

Would I therefore be correct if, when I see "100% crop", I read it as
"100% /of the/ crop"?

Roger

On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 11:00:25 GMT, Roger Whitehead
wrote:

In article , John Bean wrote:
I didn't invent the terminology but that's how it's used,
like it or not.

Thanks, John. Not complaining, just trying to understand.

Would I therefore be correct if, when I see "100% crop", I read it as
"100% /of the/ crop"?

Yes, just think of the percentage as meaning the image
scale, where 100% is full scale - neither reduced nor
magnified. The "crop" part means what it says, that you're
only seeing a part of the image.

--
John Bean

In article , John Bean wrote:
Yes, just think of the percentage as meaning the image
scale, where 100% is full scale - neither reduced nor
magnified.

I like the sound of "full-scale crop". I shall use it hereafter.

Roger

Roger Whitehead wrote:

In article , John Bean wrote:
Yes, just think of the percentage as meaning the image
scale, where 100% is full scale - neither reduced nor
magnified.

I like the sound of "full-scale crop". I shall use it hereafter.

And then someone will come along and say that "full-scale"
implies the whole image - and therefore uncropped..... G

In article .com,
wrote:
And then someone will come along and say that "full-scale"
implies the whole image - and therefore uncropped..... G

Hard to avoid an apparent oxymoron, isn't it?. 8-)

Roger

On 14 Jul 2006 09:01:27 -0700, wrote:


Roger Whitehead wrote:

In article , John Bean wrote:
Yes, just think of the percentage as meaning the image
scale, where 100% is full scale - neither reduced nor
magnified.

I like the sound of "full-scale crop". I shall use it hereafter.

And then someone will come along and say that "full-scale"
implies the whole image - and therefore uncropped..... G

"G" aside, I think the uncropped image would be
"full-size" not "full-scale". Scale says nothing of actual
size, only the relative erm... scale :-)

I think "full-scale crop" is better than "100% crop" but
unfortunately the latter is already the de-facto standard
phrase for the job.

--
John Bean

In article , John Bean wrote:
I think "full-scale crop" is better than "100% crop" but
unfortunately the latter is already the de-facto standard
phrase for the job.

Given the amount of confusion over it evident here, I'd say it's due for
replacement. There aren't many mentions on Google, so it doesn't seem that
entrenched.

Roger