Aspect ratio
Nov 22, 2020 11:03:07 #
BebuLamar wrote:
OOps but why you have your subjects laying down?
But they wanted a 10x8.....
Nov 23, 2020 07:25:37 #
rustfarmer wrote:
Not sure how 8x10 can be considered 5x4? Perhaps you mean 10x8?
The size is just a factor of cropped size horizontal or vertical. 10x8 is 2 times 5x4. if you crop to 10x8 then you can print 20x16 etc. Printing vertical 8x10 is still 2 times 4x5 or 16x20.
Nov 28, 2020 09:40:23 #
Ralph Bischoff wrote:
The size is just a factor of cropped size horizontal or vertical. 10x8 is 2 times 5x4. if you crop to 10x8 then you can print 20x16 etc. Printing vertical 8x10 is still 2 times 4x5 or 16x20.
The area of a print quadruples because you are doubling both sides.
But the image is only doubled in size.
No one I know measures the area of a print, only the edge sizes.
Nov 28, 2020 14:40:02 #
Longshadow wrote:
The area of a print quadruples because you are doubling both sides.
But the image is only doubled in size.
No one I know measures the area of a print, only the edge sizes.
The area of a print quadruples because you are doubling both sides.
But the image is only doubled in size.
No one I know measures the area of a print, only the edge sizes.
In the lab business, we talk about cost per square foot of photographic paper, developer replenishment rate per square inch, silver recovered per square inch of processed paper, etc.
Consumers don’t generally think of print area.
Nov 28, 2020 14:46:02 #
burkphoto wrote:
In the lab business, we talk about cost per square foot of photographic paper, developer replenishment rate per square inch, silver recovered per square inch of processed paper, etc.
Consumers don’t generally think of print area.
Consumers don’t generally think of print area.
No they don't. They don't <normally> have to keep track of detailed process expenses like a business does.
Most people won't realize that when one prints an 8x12 instead of a 4x6, one uses four times the amount of ink. That's where the area thing comes into play. Yea, the print is only twice as large, but it takes four times the amount of ink to make it.
Nov 28, 2020 17:31:58 #
Longshadow wrote:
No they don't. They don't <normally> have to keep track of detailed process expenses like a business does.
Most people won't realize that when one prints an 8x12 instead of a 4x6, one uses four times the amount of ink. That's where the area thing comes into play. Yea, the print is only twice as large, but it takes four times the amount of ink to make it.
Most people won't realize that when one prints an 8x12 instead of a 4x6, one uses four times the amount of ink. That's where the area thing comes into play. Yea, the print is only twice as large, but it takes four times the amount of ink to make it.
Yeah, four times the ink or chemicals, plus four times the paper, water, energy and labor costs, machine wear and tear...
In any printing environment, waste is a huge factor. The school portrait labs I worked for had many different printing processes, including very high end inkjet, dye sublimation plastic ID cards, electrostatic/Xerographic proofs, electrostatic wedding books...
The largest volume process used conventional silver halide photo paper. We bought that stuff in several tractor-trailer loads of Kodak master rolls (40" wide by 5600' long!) per year, then slit it ourselves into various widths and lengths for our custom-built optical printers (and later, for 40 Noritsu digital mini-labs).
Despite volume discounts, we still had to be careful. In the film days, we usually wasted over $100,000 worth per year just in leader and trailer in our long roll printers. Mess up a whole job by setting the color wrong, and you're wasting real money. Remakes were the worst, because they slowed down job cycle time while practically quadrupling the cost of the remade portrait package.
All that ties back to aspect ratios because we always had customers who did not have a clue about them! For example, they would crop too tightly for an 8x10 and expect us to fit 8x10 paper with a 2:3 (or .67) aspect ratio 6.67"x10" image, which was once an expensive custom printing job on a hand enlarger and roller transport sheet-fed processor. This seldom satisfied, as often, they did not understand that it is impossible to fit the entire image into an 8x10 print without cropping an inch off each end, or leaving 1.33" of paper blank on one side, or leaving .67" of paper blank on two sides.
Sometimes I thought they just wanted to torture our customer service staff... Of course, I was the guy who had to sit them down and explain the concept... leading them from their concept of "right" to the reality of BEING right. MOST could comprehend, but some did not give a whit about math, science, facts, cause and effect... They just wanted to insist they were right, against all forms of logic, proportion, and reason! (That must be a personality disorder...)
Fortunately, my boss laughed and took my side when my bull$#!t alarm went off...
It's elementary school math, for goodness' sake!
Nov 28, 2020 18:38:36 #
"the aspect ratio of 5:4" prints at 8 by 10 inches. The print can orient in either portrait or landscape mode.
richmondmlr wrote:
Hey all,
I enjoy reading the post every day. I have a question about aspect ratio, I am buying a Nikon d810 and I was watching a video on the 810. In this video the statement was make that most photography studios shoot in the aspect ratio of 5:4. So my question is has anyone used this ratio and if so what size prints have you printed? What ratio do you use and why?
Thank you.
I enjoy reading the post every day. I have a question about aspect ratio, I am buying a Nikon d810 and I was watching a video on the 810. In this video the statement was make that most photography studios shoot in the aspect ratio of 5:4. So my question is has anyone used this ratio and if so what size prints have you printed? What ratio do you use and why?
Thank you.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.