I have been wondering why many of us choose certain cropping decisions. So I hope this will start some discussion about why you make your cropping choices. Which image do you prefer? Do you shoot full frame or leave extra for cropping?

I do my absolute best to shoot full frame, composed as I want the final image. That said, things don't always work out so I have no problem cropping, or even shooting a subject that is small in the frame when I don't have enough lens.

As for which version of this I prefer; that's tough. They each have their own distinct feeling.
The first reminds me of a knight chess piece, very formal, dignified and striking.
The second is much more relaxed.

If I had to pick, I'd say I give the edge to the first, because it is a little more unique.

Use both. They are both different and distinct.

I like both but in my mind the purpose or objective would dictate. I prefer showing the "hands", it gives a real warm live feeling. The first as Jim pointed out, is more formal. Nice image overall.

PeggySue,
I shoot with room to crop and leave the creative decision-making to post-production. I guess that comes from shooting ring formals where everything has to be in the shot so you leave yourself "bleed room".

I actually prefer the second assuming the shot was taken for sale to the dog's owner. I believe that most owners could care less about artsy fartsy cropping and want to see as much of the dog in a portrait as possible.

When I shoot my own dogs, I will often crop tightly to emphasize a particular feature -- Rowdy's eyes, for example.

As Jim and Bob said, it depends on the purpose of the image. If you're selling it as a portrait, I think the second is more salable. If you're shooting for your portfolio, the first is more artistic.

Jim

I guess I missed the other question. I now always shoot full and leave the option to crop later, when I remember to. There are times I get carried away and go in close and have to do a mental reset. Too many times I took the close shot only to wish I had opened the shot up to get more of the image. One of the reasons I just added the 5D to my bag of weapons! :-)

First, you must decide what is the purpose for the shot, what is it that youre trying to convey with the photo, then, crop in camera, shoot the image for the planned output. . .

cropping is key to great images. The closer you can come in the camera to your plan, the better the image. If youre shooting covers, leave enough for a header, etc. Your images should have a purpose.

If I'm really in doubt I shoot horizontal and then crop a bit, with 12 mp you can still get a cover out of one side or the other of a horizontal image. . . the thing that takes time and practice is to know what your shooting for and "fill" the frame for that specific output.

Many times if you shoot too tight, you wont be able to crop to your output. . . in this case, the shot may still be nicely exposed but it may well be too large for the output.

so, in my view always "crop" in camera, I know other's that just shoot a bit wider and crop at home, much of it depends on the output and the subject. . .

I like both and I absolutely love the background color with this particular dog. I do a lot of portrait type shots working a lot with "head" breeds, but I do go both ways - try to get the crop in camera and also back out and chose what I want later. I do take tons of shots both ways and let the owner chose which they like. 9 times out of 10 -- at least for me -- they are choosing a head shot and not a full body shot.

My one comment on #1 is that I would have chosen a different crop. For my tastes, the dog is cropped to close on the left side. I would like to see more of the arch of neck leading down. Not a lot, but my mind's eye just wants to see more on that side and there is a gorgeous arch of neck to work with. I also would have cropped the cushion totally out on the bottom, which at the same time would have removed the hint of the missing leg down there.