SMHA - "35mm with its 3:2 ratio is probably the most popular format of all time. So why have paper manufacturers not make paper to the same ratio?" Popularity is not a measure of goodness or rightness, look at the results democracy has given us over the years
35mm still format grew from two standard 35mm MP frames (in still photography called 1/2 frame or single frame) - The 35mm standard is 18x24mm which is 3:4 which is still not 5x4 ratio of paper - Oh the joys of confusion
In reality, the only negative sizes that matter to me, and I am right about everything, are 10x8" and 5x4" and the paper fits them perfectly, so there is no problem
Thank you both for correcting me. The bad part is I knew that and forgot. However, it is close enough that my point on aesthetic reasons still basically stands.
Originally Posted by MattKing
I know that inkjet paper manufactures are now making 8 x 12 paper. But photographic paper has mostly stuck to 8 x 10. This leaves me wondering what size paper did Cartier-Bresson have photos printed on, as he preferred full 35mm frame.
Speaking of aspect ratios, I recently did a 2' x 3' painting in class and it looked odd which is ironic. Maybe this has something to do with the print ratio preference. I know that many painters used canvases that were not 3:2.
Bachelor of Fine Arts and Bachelor of Arts: Journalism - University of Arkansas 2014
Canon A-1, Canon AE-1, Canon Canonet GIII 17, Argus 21, Rolleicord Va, Mamiya RB67, Voigtländer Bessa
Because paper manufacturers acknowledge that in reality, the only film size worth printing is 4x5 or 8x10 haaaaaaaa.
But I've been wondering (since you brought up carte de visite) 11x14 and 8x10 are not so bad... You can quarter an 11x14 and get four 5x7's out with a couple test strips... and you can halve an 8x10 to a couple of 5x7's and get a couple test strips. So maybe 5x7 is the ideal size?
I was reading too fast and didn't realize you made the same point
Originally Posted by Grumpy Old Man
Yes, it is. At least as a film size. But 5x7 paper negatives are nice too.
Originally Posted by Bill Burk
“Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.” - Lao Tzu
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
My local supplier offers Ilford MG in 140 x 89, which has an aspect ratio of 1.57. I think that traditionally the demand for large prints was from professional photographers who mostly shot medium- or large format, which have aspect ratios closer to 1.25 (5:4). I see the "golden mean" as a red herring since while it has an interesting mathematical property, I see no evidence that it is aesthetically superior to 5:4 or any other similar aspect ratio.
Originally Posted by cliveh
One sensible aspect ratio that is not used much in photography is 1.41:1 (square root of 2), which has the advantantage that if you cut it in half with a cut midway through the long side then the two resulting sheets have the same aspect ratio as the original. This is used for the European A paper standard (A3, A4 etc). It always annoys me that if I cut a sheet of 8 x 10 in half, I end up with two 8x5s and cannot use the same crop as I would on an 8x10. Of course since 8x5 has an aspect ratio of 1.6 this may be the solution to your problem - simply buy 5:4 aspect ratio papers twice as large as you require, and cut them in half to get two sheets with an aspect ratio of 1.6.
Ilford make an A4 B&W paper in 100 sheet boxes, cat No. 1770478
This is virtually a direct proportional enlargement at a smidge over 8 times enlargement both ways, 8.75 times enlargement one way and 8.25 times enlargement the other way. Very nice prints from this size with 135 film.
6x7 and 645 negs work virtually perfectly on 8x10" paper as well, as does the aforementioned 4"x5" sheet film, although with 4"x5" film, the actual image size on the negative, is generally 95mm by 120mm.
Have to think you are right! I'd have to contact print, but that's not a problem since it's the perfect print size already.
Originally Posted by Jerevan
My wife nixed the idea when I saw a 5x7 Graflex SLR on a popular swap stuff site...
(p.s. I really use 11x14 paper for everything. How else can you tell what you really have on the negative?)
On the Ilford photo site there is a list of the stocked producst which includes paper sizes that they make, whith many sizes only sold in some parts of the world.
if you see a size you would really like, you can probaly get it form a dealer in one of the areas it is sold, or in some cases your local distributor can be persuaded to get you a case or three on their next order.
I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville
Regional availability of desirable paper sizes is frustrating as I find 11x14to be a very convenient size to print most formats on with a fair to generous border: I don't feel cheated printing 6x6 to 10" square, 5x4 and 6x7 to @ 12x10 (or smaller), and 35mm to 12x8 (or smaller). The more common 'mid' size in the UK appears to be 9.5inx12in which I find less satisfactory, whilst 12x16 is often too large.
Regards, Mark Walker