Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Cool, thanks again!

dsnoke Loc: North Georgia, USA

For me it's all about time and money. I can build a custom frame for an 11x22 image for about $75 and 2-3 hours work. To buy such a frame might run up to $300. I already have a collection of 11x13, 12x18 and 8x10 frames, so if I can reasonably crop to one of those, I get it framed at no additional cost. Of course, for viewing online, aspect ratio is not a factor, so the whole discussion is moot. But if one wants to display in a gallery, one usually has to frame the work, and that's where cost comes into the discussion

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I use legal size paper for some charts because it gives slightly more resolution in the x axis, but I use illegal size paper for most other things.

Capn_Dave

That is exactly what I do. Custom frames ain't cheap. I can build them for basically the price of a standard off the shelf frame. I shoot the golden hours mostly so that gives me the mid-day free to make sawdust out of wood. I make the frame to my crop size

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

So as "artists" we have to bow down and give up any creativity of presentation to some old guys in 1600 or an old dead president from 1921.
That seems pretty lame and me tooish.
It is sad that there is a fear of being different and creative outside the dictated box.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

What is the alternative?

We can shoot to our camera's aspect ratio
We can crop to the composition requirement
We can build our own frames
We can mat or margin to fit the standard frame
We can view our photos on the monitor (again, a fixed aspect ratio unless you have an array of different monitors [more expensive than frames])

We can ask manufacturers to produce a wider range of frames for sale. This option will eventually have us purchasing frames online, since retail outlets will not want to stock a complete range of sizes. Stock costs them money. And since fewer people print these days I suspect frame sales are probably over their peak.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

leftj Loc: Texas

When you crop there is a free option where you can crop to whatever dimension is right for you.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

Partly a hold over from film when paper came in set sizes, 4x5, etc.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

That just made it easier to make margins to fit available standard size frames.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Right. Unless I specifically shot with a frame size in mind, I crop it to look the way I want.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I never shoot with a frame size in mind. I shoot for the scene.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Someone tells me the cropping rules, and my reply is easy, “suck air and bark at the moon.”

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

The "rules/guides" are great, for starters.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Why are most mechanical parts made to size specifications?

Why are sports played on standardized court or field sizes?

Why can't we just have commercial chaos?

I worked in a photo lab for years. We used tens of millions of dollars' worth of automated printing equipment that was precision engineered to make certain size prints from certain size negatives. If you wanted to make a different size, it was going to be a VERY expensive change!

Our paper came in master rolls 40" wide by 5600' long. We had a slitting darkroom where it was divided into rolls:

35mm x 500'
46mm x 500'
70mm x 500'
2.5" x 500'
4" x 500'
5" x 500'
8" x 500'
10" x 500'
11" x 500'
12" x 500'
16" x 500'

Each of these rolls fit a specific optical printer that made specific products. Digital technology changed that, but we still kept to standard sizes for many reasons.

When we switched to digital mini-labs, we only needed 4", 5", 8", 10", 12", and 20" rolls of silver halide paper. Inkjet printers were used for all prints bigger than 20" wide. The lab software let us make any size we wanted, but the frame market kept us to standard sizes. Not many folks want to buy odd-sized frames at a custom framing shop. They're expensive!

In my own work, I've not found many image compositions that required a print outside the aspect ratios of:

1:1 square (6x6 cm size 120 film, 4x4 size 127 film, and 8x8, 10x10, 12x12, 20x20... print sizes)
5:4 (4x5, 8x10, 16x20, 32x40... prints)
4:3 (medium format digital, 6x4.5cm film, size 126 film, Micro 4/3, most smaller sensors and 3x4, 6x8, 9x12, etc. prints)
3:2 (35mm/full frame/APS-C, 4x6, 6x9, 8x12, 10x15, 12x18, etc.)
16:9 (HD video, recent smartphones)

The capture format requiring the least amount of cropping is 4:3. The capture formats most likely to require cropping are 1:1 and 3:2. The format most difficult to use for vertical compositions is 16:9 (vertical cell phone videos look really stupid — to me, anyway).