|
|
  | 04 July 2012 18:02 |
| kingnorman13NK Photographer Location United Kingdom London | I have set myself a series of proportions to set out and print on to A sizes, and these will then fit into my standard A4/A3 portfolios - yes I mean a real one - with a leather cover, and it's not an iPad. I don't see the logic in forcing what I see into one sensor format so I will happily use 3:2,5:4, and as a hasselblad user in the past, there will always be a place for square. If I lose a few pixels to a greater good so be it. Framing in the camera is one thing, but what of the paper you intend to print on. 16x12,12x10,10x8,8x6,7x5,6x4 were the old money, but now in the digital world it's all ISO based with A4 and A3's as standard giving a ratio of 1:1.4142! I used to order A4 Ilford RC as special, but now I guess getting inkjet in 10x8 is problematic. But despite the A size take over, frame makers are still reluctant to change - A4 is apparently a certificate frame. How they manage in the States I don't know - they had and might still do foolscap Now why can I not find A5 as standard? So is it about time we removed the acronym TFP. Is anyone out there still printing? I leave you with this quote which I found as I checked the A size ratio! 'The geometric mean of two numbers x and y is the square root of their product, (xy)1/2, whereas their arithmetic mean is half their sum, (x+y)/2. For example, the geometric mean of the numbers 2 and 8 is 4 (because 4/2 = 8/4), whereas their arithmetic mean is 5 (because 5-2 = 8-5). The arithmetic mean is half-way between two numbers by addition, whereas the geometric mean is half-way between two numbers by multiplication.' That could bring the thread to an end! P.S. I have my eye on a D800! NK |
|
