Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,338   Posts: 1,537,721   Online: 789
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    Regular Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Derbyshire
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Burk View Post
    I probably can't explain it in a way that you would understand, and I'm OK with that. But I have to have the irregular thin black border to satisfy an irrational desire to see all there is to see. It's more like an addiction than a desirable standard. My favorite advice to those who don't like or need to see the whole frame is "save yourself, it's too late for me"...

    I understand and used to do the same and may even go back to including the border, sometimes very wide black borders to hint at what it was almost like to look through the viewfinder. Personally, the photograph is there for its own sake and the black border was, for me, a characteristic of photographs, just as a big fat dent in the paper all round the image is a characteristic of prints from engravings. Recently I have eschewed the black border to change the overall feel of the photograph to be one of hanging there in the "white" surroundings of the paper. The black made me feel that the image was laid on the paper. Nowadays, for now, I want it hanging there. I still make the "crop" (from the physical world) at the time of the exposure as that is, for me, part of making the photograph, that is the final decision time rather than when making the print.

    RR
    Last edited by Regular Rod; 03-07-2014 at 03:21 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Oregon and Austria
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by ROL View Post
    So the tool dictates your "artistic" experience. How evolved. You must carry a lot of different tools with you to accommodate visions other than by a single manufacturer, if you have them.

    The beauty of the DR, enlarger, and easel is that you can make decisions such as cropping all by your little lonesome, without anyone's interference.
    ROL,

    Brutal, but so true IMHO... My interaction with my subject dictates the framing, aspect ratio and perspective I choose to use, not my film or camera. I don't think that the world comes packaged neatly in 4x5-inch packages anymore than it comes in 24x36mm or 6x6cm or ... packages.

    Whatever tool I choose to use is under my control and all its possibilities stand open to me, including shooting full-frame, which I occasionally do

    Best,

    Doremus

  3. #23
    Regular Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Derbyshire
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremus Scudder View Post
    ROL,

    Brutal, but so true IMHO... My interaction with my subject dictates the framing, aspect ratio and perspective I choose to use, not my film or camera. I don't think that the world comes packaged neatly in 4x5-inch packages anymore than it comes in 24x36mm or 6x6cm or ... packages.

    Whatever tool I choose to use is under my control and all its possibilities stand open to me, including shooting full-frame, which I occasionally do

    Best,

    Doremus
    Hardly brutal. More like sarcastic and oblivious of how others might think and act to make their photographs. Don't you find that if you go out with, say, a square format camera that you see your potential images in square format, or if you have your 35mm camera with you that you see them in the one to one and a half format and so on? Surely part of our work is packaging the world up into these various packages we take with us?

    Maybe the best explanation of "why" I work the way I do is that it is a continuance of the contact printing process that was how I made my first photographs? Who knows? Who cares? Does it matter? The final result is the only thing that matters.

    RR

  4. #24
    Chris Lange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    750
    Images
    33
    I also like printing full bleed, or using an unmasked large format glass carrier to print not only the edge of the film, but to black out the entire sheet of paper aside from the image. Suits certain images really, really well.
    See my work at my website CHRISTOPHER LANGE PHOTOGRAPHY

    or my snaps at my blog MINIMUM DENSITY
    --
    If you don't have it, then you don't have it.

  5. #25
    Maris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Noosa, Queensland, Australia.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    725
    The black border around a full frame photograph has been called a verification border. The photographer includes it to signify that they take full responsibility for everything the lens laid on the film. It's either a boast or an affirmation depending on how you want to take it.
    Photography, the word itself, invented and defined by its author Sir John.F.W.Herschel, 14 March 1839 at the Royal Society, Somerset House, London. Quote "...Photography or the application of the Chemical rays of light to the purpose of pictorial representation,..". unquote.

  6. #26
    Dr Croubie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rAdelaide
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,211
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Maris View Post
    The black border around a full frame photograph has been called a verification border. The photographer includes it to signify that they take full responsibility for everything the lens laid on the film. It's either a boast or an affirmation depending on how you want to take it.
    Of course, unless you're including the film-type edge-markings and/or sprocket holes, it's easy enough to just burn the border black...
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.

  7. #27
    L Gebhardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NH - Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,676
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    18
    I generally compose based on the camera frame, but have no issue cropping when I print. Especially with 35mm I find the image I want doesn't fit the camera imposed aspect ratio, so I crop a lot. Surprisingly to me I rarely crop my square images.

  8. #28
    Bill Burk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    3,230
    Images
    46
    I get pleasure from seeing prints from whatever the ratio, whether golden, elongated or square.

    If the worst that happens is you get a portfolio of square prints because you chose a square format camera... the world is still a better place with you in it.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Oregon and Austria
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by Regular Rod View Post
    ... Don't you find that if you go out with, say, a square format camera that you see your potential images in square format, or if you have your 35mm camera with you that you see them in the one to one and a half format and so on? Surely part of our work is packaging the world up into these various packages we take with us?

    Maybe the best explanation of "why" I work the way I do is that it is a continuance of the contact printing process that was how I made my first photographs? Who knows? Who cares? Does it matter? The final result is the only thing that matters.

    RR
    Hi Rod,

    I guess we work very differently. I determine framing and aspect ratio without a camera, i.e., with my eye before I unpack my equipment. Since I shoot negative material, I have the luxury of not having the negative as a final product (as with transparencies), but can use the portion of the negative that corresponds to my original concept of the framing, which is subject-dependent.

    Yes, I do shoot some square pictures, but mostly on 4x5-inch sheet film... And, I even shoot full-frame 4x5 from time to time. Always, however, each image has its own specific borders, determined by subject itself, and not by film format.

    FWIW, I dislike square film formats, not because I don't like square for some images, but because I usually end up cropping too much of the (already small) negative area away in so many cases. With 4x5 I have a nice compromise between long-and-skinny, for panorama, and square, which then gives me about 3-1/2 inches square vs. the 6x6 cm of MF square format cameras.

    Best,

    Doremus

  10. #30
    kb3lms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Reading, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    696
    Images
    5
    Why this obsession with full frame?
    An old, unwritten rule of 35mm photography has always been "fill the frame". Mostly I think it comes from slide photography where what you shoot is what you get and no option to crop later, as a slide anyway. Also, another idea being to reduce the amount of enlargement as much as possible because of grain.
    All this has happened before, and all this will happen again.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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