Digital BW, The Print

Fred,

For what it is worth....the 35mm format that you use in your Canon is  
the same as 35mm for film which came from 35mm film from the movie  
industry.
For 35mm this has been the standard for every.

Papers in the Silver Gelatin era were in a variety of formats that  
rarely matched the film.

The 8x10 format was purely esthetic.  Out of this came the 4x5 and  
8x10 film sizes.

As has been pointed out in much of this thread it is all purely  
esthectic?

Paul
On Jun 20, 2009, at 9:04 AM, fredila2 wrote:

>
>
> I've been reading this thread with great interest. I do have a  
> question.
>
> I generally shoot with Canon SLRs that have a 3x2 format. This makes  
> my preferred print size 12x18 or 16x24, neither of which is a  
> "standard" size.
>
> What format are you using? And is the simple solution to achieving  
> "standard" print sizes (e.g. 16x20) merely one of cropping the  
> image? If so, that means the composition of the shot must take into  
> account the cropping requirement and the resulting loss of the full  
> resolution of the sensor size.
>
> If my comments are accurate, why do camera makers continue to employ  
> formats that don't match the "standard"? Or am I missing something?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Fred
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark"  
> <pr_roark@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have 22 x 28 and 16 x 20 image sizes on the wall currently, with  
> mats that are larger, of course. I recently reduced the outside mat/ 
> frame size of the largest so that it would fit inside the largest  
> art shipping box the local UPS store carries. Shipping cost and  
> convenience was the main reason to do this...
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]