Cropping
Aug 29, 2022 11:50:55 #
Nalu wrote:
No rules. Crop for composition. Customize the framing and/or the mat.
Only what one wants to fit into a "common" frame or mat.
Aug 29, 2022 12:13:27 #
Architect1776 wrote:
The ones I looked at did not fit 8X10 format.
Me either. And the few that did, I didn't like. I crop for the content. When ordering canvas prints I have never had any complaints about "non-standard" crops, If I did, I would find another company to do them! They might be "ancient" rules, but they are NOT just rules!!
Aug 29, 2022 12:21:19 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
If you think rules stifle your creativity, you probably don't understand the rules.
I don't think they stifle creativity, I KNOW they do. And I don't loose any sleep over misunderstood rules.
Aug 29, 2022 12:22:29 #
Longshadow wrote:
I think maybe he meant a .8 ratio?
Why not what just looks best?
Ps, golden ratio is not 8x10 so I doubt the masters followed modern restrictions.
As to letting printers arbitrarily decide what looks best go for it.
How does your panoramic work fit 8x10.
This is not directed at you Longshadow but to be rhetorical.
Aug 29, 2022 12:45:53 #
Retired CPO wrote:
I don't think they stifle creativity, I KNOW they do. And I don't loose any sleep over misunderstood rules.
They actually do.
It is good to know certain principles but to mindlessly box yourself into them is foolish.
Additionally Wright would not have been able to build his designs today with current laws and codes. Yes, I am sure that he could still do wonderful designs but the pallette would be considerably reduced.
I just see living in a 8x10 world as stifling and wonder why so many creative people here mindlessly conform to the arbitrarily set boundaries by some corporate paper maker and printer.
Aug 29, 2022 13:02:58 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Why not what just looks best?
Ps, golden ratio is not 8x10 so I doubt the masters followed modern restrictions.
As to letting printers arbitrarily decide what looks best go for it.
How does your panoramic work fit 8x10.
This is not directed at you Longshadow but to be rhetorical.
Ps, golden ratio is not 8x10 so I doubt the masters followed modern restrictions.
As to letting printers arbitrarily decide what looks best go for it.
How does your panoramic work fit 8x10.
This is not directed at you Longshadow but to be rhetorical.
I've never printed a pano, only viewed on screens.
(It would be very skinny.
)Almost all my prints are 8x12 and go into 11x14 mats, however some I do crop to 8x10 or 5x7, depending on my/our framing intent.
Aug 29, 2022 13:44:05 #
Longshadow wrote:
I've never printed a pano, only viewed on screens.
(It would be very skinny. )
Almost all my prints are 8x12 and go into 11x14 mats, however some I do crop to 8x10 or 5x7, depending on my/our framing intent.
I've never printed a pano, only viewed on screens.
(It would be very skinny.
)Almost all my prints are 8x12 and go into 11x14 mats, however some I do crop to 8x10 or 5x7, depending on my/our framing intent.
I have a printed pano here on display in my house.
Aug 29, 2022 14:01:05 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Why are photos all cropped to some arbitrary XY dimension?
I was in the Smithsonian and I do not recall the paintings all being the same arbitrary dimensions.
What makes photographers believe that they must live in arbitrarily determined sets of dimensions?
Should the image determine the XY dimensions?
Or are we going to jail if we don't follow certain XY dimensions in our creations?
I was in the Smithsonian and I do not recall the paintings all being the same arbitrary dimensions.
What makes photographers believe that they must live in arbitrarily determined sets of dimensions?
Should the image determine the XY dimensions?
Or are we going to jail if we don't follow certain XY dimensions in our creations?
Aspect ratio conventions for photography evolved similar to that of cinema. For some reason I am more familiar with the cinema aspect ratio wars: proprietary equipment, practical limitations of theatres and cameras, artistic vision, silent film legacies. Disney had a 12:1 aspect ratio for projecting a 360 degree image.
There aren't really any rules except for one. IG doesn't allow aspect ratio's taller than 4:5
Aug 29, 2022 14:03:19 #
Aug 29, 2022 14:46:18 #
Architect1776 wrote:
I have a printed pano here on display in my house.
If I were to print one, I'd consider taking it to UPS as they have very wide printers,
so I should be able to get something along the lines of 2+feet wide easily.
Maybe for kicks & giggles I might try printing one on 12" long paper, just to see how it turns out.
Aug 29, 2022 14:53:35 #
Unless you enjoy making your own frames (or have customers who do) sticking to standard sizes (which pretty closely mimic the Greek
Ideal) will make enjoying your work a lot easier (the Mona Lisa is 20x30)
Ideal) will make enjoying your work a lot easier (the Mona Lisa is 20x30)
Aug 29, 2022 14:55:00 #
stan0301 wrote:
Unless you enjoy making your own frames (or have customers who do) sticking to standard sizes (which pretty closely mimic the Greek
Ideal) will make enjoying your work a lot easier (the Mona Lisa is 20x30)
Ideal) will make enjoying your work a lot easier (the Mona Lisa is 20x30)
That's what I do.
If I want to print an 8x12, I put it in an 11x14 mat.
It depends on the size frame I want to use, or if I want the whole picture.
Aug 29, 2022 15:56:06 #
Longshadow wrote:
If I were to print one, I'd consider taking it to UPS as they have very wide printers,
so I should be able to get something along the lines of 2+feet wide easily.
Maybe for kicks & giggles I might try printing one on 12" long paper, just to see how it turns out.
so I should be able to get something along the lines of 2+feet wide easily.
Maybe for kicks & giggles I might try printing one on 12" long paper, just to see how it turns out.
That would be very interesting to see.
Aug 29, 2022 15:59:11 #
Architect1776 wrote:
That would be very interesting to see.
Which? UPS print or the 12" paper.
Aug 29, 2022 16:23:33 #
Architect1776 wrote:
Why are photos all cropped to some arbitrary XY dimension?
I was in the Smithsonian and I do not recall the paintings all being the same arbitrary dimensions.
What makes photographers believe that they must live in arbitrarily determined sets of dimensions?
Should the image determine the XY dimensions?
Or are we going to jail if we don't follow certain XY dimensions in our creations?
I was in the Smithsonian and I do not recall the paintings all being the same arbitrary dimensions.
What makes photographers believe that they must live in arbitrarily determined sets of dimensions?
Should the image determine the XY dimensions?
Or are we going to jail if we don't follow certain XY dimensions in our creations?
Many old masters paintings use the golden ratio, approximately 5:3. Somehow, that has gone out of favor.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.