Enlargement sizes and aspect ratios for the numerically impaired

[tim k]

phenix, Good idea. I am going to write that down somewhere.

[Ira Rush]

Or, you could just crank on your enlarger till it looks "about right". Crop a little, so what? No calculator required.

............ and

I do it the same as tim k. Whatever looks right for that particular neg and that paper size I go with.

Exactly, I agree, that's what I've been doing for years.

But somewhere I came across those statements which I included in my original post and was going nuts trying to figure out how those precise numbers were calculated. I figured (no pun intended) that if I actually knew in advance,what the actual dimensions would be, I could save time (and paper) by more careful composition and time and paper in the darkroom.

Once again, thanks to all!

[Mike1234]

Here's what I think about "standard print sizes". They SUCK!! Print what feels right and don't worry about it!!

[Ira Rush]

Here's what I think about "standard print sizes". They SUCK!! Print what feels right and don't worry about it!!

Yes, I agree…

And now I see that it gets worse with other formats.

Now that I have had a “Math Enlightenment”, I figure that I am wasting about 20% of negative image area due to cropping when I am working with 6x6 and 8x10 and a little less than 10% when I shoot 645 and enlarge on 8x10.

Yup paper sizes suck!

(Wow... now that I no longer feel numerically impaired, maybe I can attempt to fix the economy... maybe I can screw around with those numbers... yeah right )

[tim k]

In the interest of saving the planet, going green and all, you just don't want to be going around wasting your negatives.
You need a 4x5. The math is so simple even I can do it. 4x5=8x10=no waste.

[eddym]

Yes, I agree…

And now I see that it gets worse with other formats.

Now that I have had a “Math Enlightenment”, I figure that I am wasting about 20% of negative image area due to cropping when I am working with 6x6 and 8x10 and a little less than 10% when I shoot 645 and enlarge on 8x10.

Yup paper sizes suck!

(Wow... now that I no longer feel numerically impaired, maybe I can attempt to fix the economy... maybe I can screw around with those numbers... yeah right )

Why don't you just print the negative full frame? Then you don't "waste" any negative space.

[Sirius Glass]

Why don't you just print the negative full frame? Then you don't "waste" any negative space.

[Ektagraphic]

I like to print full frame too. I love my ganz speed ez-el for this!

[clayne]

Plenty of people do NOT crop and just don't fill the entire paper. Nothing wrong with that at all and a healthy amount of print border almost always looks good.

[Rick A]

I stopped fretting over cropping issues years ago. I print what pleases me, I crop in my viewfinder. BTW- I get plenty of test strips from printing full frame 6x6 by trimming my paper before printing.

Rick