Cropping (Page 5): For my Dad the size/dimensions of the photos was a matter of economics. He would buy packages of postcard sized photo printing paper for the standard "everyday"...

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

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?

For my Dad the size/dimensions of the photos was a matter of economics. He would buy packages of postcard sized photo printing paper for the standard "everyday" photos. If he printed photos for us kids, he would often print two smaller photos on one postcard size of printing paper. And occasionally, for very special photos, he would print on much larger paper, 18/24 cm comes to mind.
So the dimensions were determined by the manufacturer of the printing paper and the photographer had to work within those dimensions.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I suppose that there are people who will crop to compose and wind up with a 4-5/16 x 5-3/5 print.
Because the composition rules.
Not me, I'll crop to <best fit> whatever into a standard (4x6, 5x7,...) unless I want a square.
Then I'll crop to fit a square. I guess there might be standard square frames.....

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Longshadow wrote:

I suppose that there are people who will crop to compose and wind up with a 4-5/16 x 5-3/5 print.
Because the composition rules.
Not me, I'll crop to <best fit> whatever into a standard (4x6, 5x7,...) unless I want a square.
Then I'll crop to fit a square. I guess there might be standard square frames.....

Micheals and Hobby Lobby usually carry square frames in 8x8, 10x10, and 12x12. I've even seen 13x19" frames at one of them. That's a bit weird, because even though some inkjet photo printers can make borderless 13x19 prints, most serious print sellers make 12x18 prints with a half inch border all around. Then they frame those between two sheets of archival mat board with a (nominal) 12x18 opening in the front-facing mat. The mat is likely to be 16x20 inches to start with.

In most communities of size, there is at least one custom framing shop willing to charge an arm and a leg to let you choose size, wood, color, matting, glass... Usually, the local art supply shops know where you can go, if they don't provide that service. Hobby Lobby does custom framing in many locations.

anotherview Loc: California

Some ratios appeal strongly to the human perception. 3 by 2 and 4 by 5 come to mind. So does 9 by 16.

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?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Longshadow wrote:

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

As an old 35mm slide photographer, I got used to composing for the viewfinder frame, because the projected slide would have the same 3:2 aspect ratio. It added a useful discipline to my photography.

As a black-and-white film photographer, I usually composed a bit looser in the finder, and cropped at the enlarger to fit a standard paper size as pleasingly as possible. That is the approach I take with digital compositions, unless I'm recording video. Even with video, when recording 4K and releasing in 1080P, I know I can crop and zoom to some extent in my editing software. But the aspect ratio stays the same.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

burkphoto wrote:

Micheals and Hobby Lobby usually carry square fram... (show quote)

Thanks, good to know about the square frame availability!

Even Michael's here does in store custom framing.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

anotherview wrote:

Some ratios appeal strongly to the human perception. 3 by 2 and 4 by 5 come to mind. So does 9 by 16.

End of course review essay question:

"Which came first, the aspect ratio, or the compositional discipline to use the aspect ratio efficiently and effectively? Discuss..."

(It's a joke...)

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

burkphoto wrote:

End of course review essay question:

"Which came first, the aspect ratio, or the compositional discipline to use the aspect ratio efficiently and effectively? Discuss..."

(It's a joke...)

The chicken.... no wait......

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

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 guess I will be going to jail on some of my pano creations then!

Example: The largest reservoir in Santa Clara County, Lake Anderson, near Morgan Hill, has been drained for a 10-year project to earthquake proof the dam. Currently, it is holding just 3% of its capacity. One of the reasons that this area of California has such severe water restrictions. In fact, the city tells us that brown, crunchy grass is OK to have. This shot was many images panned together but doesn't show the whole reservoir as when it gets to the far end, there is normally water going far to the left and far to the right beyond where we can see from this vantage point. The pan looks fine when I stretch it across my 2 monitors. But to fit it to a a standard format, I would have had to pan in a whole lot of sky! You can get a sense of size by looking at a red car on top of the dam over on the left side.

(Download)

Tommg

All photos are not necessarily cropped to predetermined dimensions, not often, but sometimes I have photos printed in the dimensions that better fit the photo. Mostly metal prints that are printed by Bay Photo, they will print custom-sized photos ... just FYI.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

DirtFarmer wrote:

What is the alternative? br br We can shoot to ou... (show quote)

Make your own frames.
Cut your mats.
Dare to be different.
Wow, use your imagination, this is why the post. Fear of being outside the corporate demanded box even if it sucks.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Architect1776 wrote:

Make your own frames.
Cut your mats.
Dare to be different.
Wow, use your imagination, this is why the post. Fear of being outside the corporate demanded box even if it sucks.

This is why I still keep a Dexter Mat Cutter I bought in 1970. There are many frame companies who sell frame pieces in one inch increments, so you can assemble any size frame you like, if you don't want to cut your own.

That said, it's a weak photographer who can't compose a subject nicely within one of the standard aspect ratios.

Most of the time, people want reasonably priced standard size prints and frames. "Custom" has always been a choice. But it has usually been more expensive.

I've probably made three frames from raw wood in my life. I've assembled dozens from custom, pre-fabricated pieces. I've bought a lot of standard (pre-assembled) frames, by comparison.

I like the panoramic example shown earlier in this thread. Pans are common reasons people buy custom frames.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

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?

There is usually no reason to crop a photo to any specific dimension. The only exception would be for inclusion in a specific publication. Year book portraits need to be of uniform size for publication

It is quite possible to obtain a frame of any size online for a reasonable price. A properly matted photo can be placed in a "standard" size frame as well.

I almost never use standard sizes. Free yourself.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

mwsilvers wrote:

Standard image sizes are not arbitrary at all. Th... (show quote)

You can print any smaller size of photo on a particular piece of paper. Who says you need to fill the entire sheet.

Ed D Loc: Virginia

I'm looking at some of the comments and perhaps I misinterpreted the question but sizing a picture to a frame and cropping are two different beasts. I often crop an image to bring greater focus to the subject and since many of my shots if wildlife are from a distance cropping is necessary. How much do I crop? There is no magic formula but simply what I determine is the most pleasing perspective. As for framing the photo, I certainly will take into account what size the picture will be when I crop but I rarely find it makes a significant difference.