Format - Horizontal or Vertical? Why not Square? (Page 2): I post a new square-cropped image to Instagram every day.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I post a new square-cropped image to Instagram every day.

blackest Loc: Ireland

Delderby wrote:

That might be something to consider when choosing a camera to buy.

With the Pentax K1 there is a square crop, as well as a crop mode crop. What is interesting is that you can get a 24 by 24 square crop from a DA crop sensor format lens. Granted that loses a third of what the sensor can record but it gains a 1/3rd over what the lens was designed to cover. Makes the 18 - 55mm DA lens quite interesting at the wide end.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

blackest wrote:

With the Pentax K1 there is a square crop, as well as a crop mode crop. What is interesting is that you can get a 24 by 24 square crop from a DA crop sensor format lens. Granted that loses a third of what the sensor can record but it gains a 1/3rd over what the lens was designed to cover. Makes the 18 - 55mm DA lens quite interesting at the wide end.

One of the great cameras - it would be good to see a comparison pic between the square format as you describe and a 3/2 format. Square into a round hole must get interesting as you say.

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

I find square rather awkward for traditional portrait or landscape shots, but fine for closer detail and do use it regularly if the subject suits. Linda’s examples are typical of what I mean.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

magnetoman wrote:

I find square rather awkward for traditional portrait or landscape shots, but fine for closer detail and do use it regularly if the subject suits. Linda’s examples are typical of what I mean.

Does that mean that you're "traditional shots" have been captured as 3:2 rather than composed in-camera as 1:1? It is probably easier for me to do that with 4:3 - being closer to 1:1.
I feel that the camera's view has a lot to do with controlling our composition - and it might be worth looking at a different format for a different influence? I'm now waiting for the heavy grey cloud that is blanketing the midlands UK to go away!

magnetoman Loc: Purbeck, Dorset, UK

Delderby wrote:

Does that mean that you're "traditional shots... (show quote)

Yes, I’m an old 35mm-man. The only reason I’d change is if I could justify a Hasselblad or an old 120 film camera, but that’s unlikely. There are enough pixels in my files to chop a few off when I need to!
Think we’ve got the same cloud down here on the South Coast today!

SuperFly48 Loc: NE ILLINOIS

Nikon D850 has a 1:1 in camera crop factor available; it produces a 1:1 square image.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

SuperFly48 wrote:

Nikon D850 has a 1:1 in camera crop factor available; it produces a 1:1 square image.

Does that mean square in viewfinder prior to capture or after capture?

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Delderby wrote:

Does that mean square in viewfinder prior to capture or after capture?

The D850 has nearly opaque masks in the viewfinder which can be used when alternate aspect ratios are selected. Or you can turn that off and just display boundary lines.

I have fairly often used 1:1 with cityscapes and a few landscapes. My Terlingua Cemetery photo posted on this site was originally exposed at 3:2, but is now displayed or printed exclusively at 1:1.

My latest experiments with non-panorama (single exposure) night sky images are with 1:1 aspect ratio as a more attractive alternative to vertical. None are ready for posting yet. The disadvantage is that even at 14mm full frame, they limit the vertical range of the image. The advantage is that they don't require use of the part of the image that always retains some level of distortion at that focal length, even after PP treatment.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

larryepage wrote:

The D850 has nearly opaque masks in the viewfinder... (show quote)

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

Square (1:1) aspect ratio is used by Instagram. My cameras do not have 1:1 aspect ratio as an option. When I am shooting I will get one image that fills the frame and another image that I can have roughly the same content with enough space around what I want to show to crop into a square so I can post it on Instagram. I post to Instagram from my computer.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

chapjohn wrote:

Square (1:1) aspect ratio is used by Instagram. My cameras do not have 1:1 aspect ratio as an option. When I am shooting I will get one image that fills the frame and another image that I can have roughly the same content with enough space around what I want to show to crop into a square so I can post it on Instagram. I post to Instagram from my computer.

That must enable you to compose 1:1 in camera if you so wish?

drmike99 Loc: Fairfield Connecticut

I leave my DSLR pictures as their native 3:2 (or 2:3). In film I have 3 MF cameras and a 35mm SLR (3:2). The MFs are 6x7, 6x6 and 6x4.5. The one I use the least is the Rolleicord— I just don't like the square format.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

drmike99 wrote:

I leave my DSLR pictures as their native 3:2 (or 2:3). In film I have 3 MF cameras and a 35mm SLR (3:2). The MFs are 6x7, 6x6 and 6x4.5. The one I use the least is the Rolleicord— I just don't like the square format.

I guess we all have (different?) likes and dislikes. Whilst I intend to give square a fair trial I have a feeling that, at the end of the day, I will prefer the full 4:3 of M43 - the best of the three perhaps?

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Delderby wrote:

I guess we all have (different?) likes and dislikes. Whilst I intend to give square a fair trial I have a feeling that, at the end of the day, I will prefer the full 4:3 of M43 - the best of the three perhaps?

I'm guessing that which one is "best" might always be one of those running debates. I still remember the professor's comment when I took my photography classes nearly 30 years ago. Multiple times in class he referred to "the elegance of the long format provided by 35mm film." He did much of his work with view cameras, but was very proud of his Leicas...