On Feb 11, 2011, at 9:06 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
>
>
> Following the link posted by Liz, I came across another short article
> (blogpost?) on about.com written by her,
> http://photography.about.com/od/developingandprinting/qt/ImageFormats.htm
>
> I liked the subject: I thought it was the first time that I've seen
> somebody discussing different aspect ratios of the prints of different
> standard sizes and the planning needed for that.
>
> I've discussed briefly a related question earlier here, on PDML, in some
> comments that I personally tend to favor two aspect ratios : 2:3 and 1:1
> (aka 6x6 :-) ). And these are the most common sizes that I tend to post
> to the web. In the past, when I was ordering prints at the labs,
> I usually ordered prints in those ratios (4"x6", 10cmx15cm, 20cm x 30 cm,
> 8"x12", etc.), and then it was sometimes harder to find a premanufactured
> (read: inexpensive) frame for 8"x12", as 8"x10" were more popular.
I have been printing in 4x6 and 8x12 for a very simple reason, those are the
convenient sizes of paper that costco offers. If they print an 8x10, they do it
on 8x12 paper and leave the margins.
I do not, however, generally crop my photos to 8x12. If I crop them, I crop
them to what works best, then when I print I "zoom to fit" leaving the margins
on the paper to come out as they will.
Liz's article seems to assume "zoom to fill" which seems silly to me. If you
want zoom to fill, then lock the aspect ratio when you crop to the aspect ratio
of the paper.
>
> Once I started printing my own photos with Epson R2880, I found that
> it is harder to do 8"x12" prints, as the paper usually doesn't
> come in that size. So, every so often, I am trying to fit my 2:3 photo
> to 8"x10" or 8.5"x11" ("Letter") formats.
I grew up printing on 4x5, because that was what I could generally afford to
print on. Printing 8x10s used up paper too fast. As such, I think that it has
left me feeling more comfortable with crops that are closer to that aspect
ratio than the wider aspect ratios of modern monitors.
> Second, the "squarest" ratio is 1:1! And that's been on the market for
> ages (albeit it's becoming less frequent, and may one day die).
A very good point.
>
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
