Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,832   Posts: 1,582,342   Online: 948
      
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,243
    Images
    9

    Aspect ratio question about film sizes compared to widescreen aspect ratio of 2.35:1

    Is the title specific enough.

    What film size is closest to the wide screen 2.35:1 aspect ratio? It is definately longer than 5x7 and less than 5x12 by just a little bit. 7x17 is just too long. Is 5x12 the closest I'll get?
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    963
    how about 6x12 cm in roll film? That way you can shoot in color.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,243
    Images
    9
    That is 2:1 very close.

    The price of 6x12 backs are totally out of my range. Hell, right now breathing is out of my range.
    Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy. Pope Paul VI

    So, I think the "greats" were true to their visions, once their visions no longer sucked. Ralph Barker 12/2004

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    148
    Hassleblad/Fuji XPan is 2.70

  5. #5
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,422
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    156
    On my slide rule, 5X12 comes the closest. 7X17 is next. A window mat will get the job done.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  6. #6
    blansky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Wine country in Northern California
    Posts
    5,043
    If it ain't close to the "golden mean" then it's blasphemy.

    Immersing yourself in the devils formats like that will come back to haunt you.

    There are a lot of people in the red states and they just may come and pay your ass a visit. Play it safe and stick with 8x10 and 16x20.


    You've been warned,



    Michael
    I couldn't think of anything witty to say so I left this blank.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    40
    Images
    3
    crop 5x4 to 5 x 2andabit. strangely 5x4 on the cheap would probably be the cheapest route...if you want to retain decent neg area.

    I dont think there is an off the shelf colution apart from 6x12 which you say is too costly...even the rollfilm holders cost a fortune (never figured out why they are nearly 2x cost of 6x9 holders, even when essentially the same construction, just different gears and bigger hole!). Maybe the hole cutting machine is very expensive to run and is controlled by a chap on £250,000 a day and the blades wear out faster?

    Tom

    Tom

  8. #8
    Eric Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    124
    Images
    16
    Sweet! The next film I shoot is going to be in the 8x10 format.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by mark
    Is the title specific enough.

    What film size is closest to the wide screen 2.35:1 aspect ratio? It is definately longer than 5x7 and less than 5x12 by just a little bit. 7x17 is just too long. Is 5x12 the closest I'll get?
    Well, if it's 2.35:1 you want 5x12 comes closest at 2.40:1. Shen-Hao is now offering a new 5x12 field camera and film holders are available from S&S.

    I personally shoot 6x12cm (nominally 2.00:1, but can be as much as 2.14:1 depending on which back you use). and 4x10 (2.50:1). Since I shoot color, these are both more practical than 5x12 for my needs.

    Kerry

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by tomishakishi2
    I dont think there is an off the shelf colution apart from 6x12 which you say is too costly...even the rollfilm holders cost a fortune
    Not all 6x12 roll film holders cost a fortune. The Chinese DAYI 6x12 roll film back (sold under the Shen-Hao name) is $395 new. I have one that I use on a stripped down Crown Graphic ($175 on eBay). It's no Linhof, nor even a Horseman, but it works. The actual image area is 56 x 117mm (2.09:1).

    There is another, even less expensive Chinese made 6x12 that regularly sells on eBay for less than $250. I have no experience with this back, so can't comment on the quality.

    Kerry



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin