Quote Originally Posted by Cesaraugusta View Post
I agree there with fotch.

I have noticed, and I am amazed at how many folks believe that the shape of the negative must dictate the shape of the final print . . . a camera that produces a square negative must have the elements arranged within the framework as to produce a print that is also square. That may not be the case here in this thread . . . but, I make a point to place the elements desired well within the limits of the "camera's view" as to give me the option to print any orientation desired. A camera that produces a square negative can easily be used to produce a panoramic image in print, if "we can think outside the box". ;-)
Tell us this, how many different aspect ratios do you have in your portfolio?

You seem to assume that people who compose inside a given frame do so because they don't understand how composition should work, and don't know that it could be done another way.

Composition is not about a frame dictating how you arrange things inside it, but you dictating how things are arranged inside that frame. The world is not full of ready-founds, objects that have a natural frame around them. We do that to those objects. We arrange them inside a frame, any frame, such that it looks good.
You see, that's called creativity.