Einst_Stein Posted April 17 Share #1 Posted April 17 Advertisement (gone after registration) Another way to see it is 3:2. Vs 4:3. Do you have a preference? My film MF is Hasselblad V, I like square format very much, Switching to 4:3 digital (Hasselblad CF39+ Contax 645) is an unpleasant compromise. From this regard the 4:3 is better than 3:2 as there is more to keep after cropping. I never thought I would be interested in S until I found I wanted a new MF digital that has more dynamic range thAn CF39. I tried X1D, then GFX100, but finally settled on S3 due to the robustness C645 adaptability. Now I actually prefer 3:2 to 4:3, because I like to enjoy the pictures through TV, which is 16x9. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 17 Posted April 17 Hi Einst_Stein, Take a look here 45x30 vs 44x33. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pippy Posted April 17 Share #2 Posted April 17 3:2 every time. Philip. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieter12 Posted April 17 Share #3 Posted April 17 1:1 or 1:3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans-Dieter Gülicher Posted April 17 Share #4 Posted April 17 2:1 or 3:1 or 5:1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaspart Posted April 18 Share #5 Posted April 18 For landscape orientation 3:2 is perfect but for portrait orientation I prefere 4:3 (or 5:4) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
irenedp Posted April 18 Share #6 Posted April 18 I tend to prefer 4x5 both horizontally and vertically ; or when I need a different view, larger bespoke tableaus (often panorama stitches in whatever dimension and proportion is advised by the scene, although I tend to avoid sausage shapes). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans-Dieter Gülicher Posted April 18 Share #7 Posted April 18 Advertisement (gone after registration) vor einer Stunde schrieb kaspart: For landscape orientation 3:2 is perfect but for portrait orientation I prefere 4:3 (or 5:4) Try to use about 2:1 or 3:1 in case of sea pictures or simular. I think you will find these sizes more expressive. I`m printing my own pictures over about 20 years. In case of A4 paper sheets mostly I cut 1/3 of it = 210 mm x 99 mm (picture size 200 mm x 67 mm plus addes text info) or 1/2 of it = 210 mm x 148,5 mm (picture size 200 mm x 100 mm plus added text info). Simular in case of using A3 or A3+ paper sheets. I´m creating my HDAV-presentations in the same way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted April 18 Author Share #8 Posted April 18 For pure landscape, I tend to crop to 16x9 or 16x8, but for portrait or portrait centric landscape, I am still influenced by Hasselblad V experiences to crop it to square. 16x9 is convenient to display on TV screen. To print photo album, I like square format. The square photo takes 1 page, and the 16x8 photo takes two pages. Occasionally I put two 16x8 on the same square page. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Richardson Posted April 20 Share #9 Posted April 20 4 x 5 for me, so 4x3 is closer and preferable, but I can manage with 2x3. I prefer 4x5 because it is more balanced in vertical compositions and it tends to fit better on pages in book and magazine work. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.