Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
So... What is so great about a square format vs a FF (or anything else for that matter)???
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
Dec 6, 2015 00:57:28   #
alycat Loc: Canton OH
 
Square came about with twin lens reflexes. If Rollies had a horizontal screen, it would be really difficult to take a vertical, think about it. So they made TWL format square.

Reply
Dec 6, 2015 08:54:38   #
Dick Z. Loc: Downers Grove IL
 
alycat wrote:
Square came about with twin lens reflexes. If Rollies had a horizontal screen, it would be really difficult to take a vertical, think about it. So they made TWL format square.




:thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Dec 6, 2015 10:47:00   #
rfmaude41 Loc: Lancaster, Texas (DFW area)
 
SharpShooter wrote:
The answer is that, that format is as small/large as it can go and not get overly big while still being a good sized negative for great detail. The 1:1format is the MOST compact format in existence!! ;-)
SS


Using that logic, a circular format would be the most compact (least perimeter for maximum area)...

Reply
 
 
Dec 6, 2015 10:50:11   #
wj cody Loc: springfield illinois
 
first, let me state i use hasselblad cameras and lenses in the 6x6 format.

i do not crop, my prints reflect the complete image seen in the viewfinder and captured on the film. i use, primarily, black and white and sometimes colour transparency materials. the advantages are obvious when compared to 35mm film (which i also use) and fx digital devices. firstly, the ability to compose the subject matter. secondly the greater defination in the final print. when using the hasselblad, i print square from 8x8 to 16x16 finished prints, and sometimes larger.
thirdly, enlargement of the negative or transparency is less than that of 35mm or fx. the less enlargement the less detail is lost.
now, compared to my 5x7 negatives and transparencies, the quality of the finished print is even more apparent. a 5x7 print is a direct 1:1, an 11x14 is 1:2 from the original.

i view the ability to compose my photograph in larger format sizes as a distinct advantage. think of it as a "canvass" upon which you are making an image. imagination is allowed greater play. you "see" much better. and understand the quality of light and dark in your subject matter.

i always remenber, when using 35mm (fx for digital) the defination of this format, by e leitz (leica) as "miniature". and who better to define this format than the folks who invented the 35mm camera (thanks to Oscar Barnack!).

so, there you go, the bigger the format, the larger the opportunity for exact composition and detail in the final print.

Reply
Dec 6, 2015 11:38:20   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
wj cody wrote:
... so, there you go, the bigger the format, the larger the opportunity for exact composition and detail in the final print.

Bigger formats encourage you to be more deliberate in your composition. That's really difficult to do well in a 24x36 mm format.

I like the square format even when the image includes the clear film edge to demonstrate that the photographer did is best to get it right in the camera, which many digital users misunderstand.

Reply
Dec 6, 2015 11:53:11   #
wj cody Loc: springfield illinois
 
so sad, but true.
thanks for your posting.

Reply
Dec 7, 2015 12:38:51   #
valley3photo
 
Square seems to be easer to crop. They usually are always
cropped.

Reply
 
 
Dec 7, 2015 18:02:48   #
wj cody Loc: springfield illinois
 
valley3photo wrote:
Square seems to be easer to crop. They usually are always
cropped.


the only time a negative or image should be cropped is for editorial necessity. other than that, there is only incorrect composition.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.