Best paper size for 35mm

[Erik van Straten]

I like that look, Eric. I will try it. My Durst has one negative carrier that is precisely the size of the negative. It won't work for this, but the other carrier is adjustable. A pain, but adjustable.

But all the negatives are different in size. In a Leica the images on film are smaller when taken with a long focus lens and bigger when taken with a wide angle lens. Also focusing the lens changes the image size.

I put the negative in the enlarger (Focomat IIc) and adapt the lower mask of printing board to the seize of the image, leaving a small border around the image. The Focomat has automatic focusing, so the change of format due to focusing is no problem for me.

Erik.

 

[David Hughes]

I find it curious that this stresses some people out. I guess they feel ripped off?

Look at the percentage wasted but paid for with digital printing, They can't say they don't know this...


Regards, David

 

[jsrockit]

Look at the percentage wasted but paid for with digital printing, They can't say they don't know this...


Regards, David

Sure, but there are plenty of people who like to print with borders and that this doesn't bother in the least. I absolutely hate prints, on paper, without borders. It looks wrong to me.

In the case of inkjet paper, let's remember that it is used for all types of digital art and not just photos made from 2:3 ratio cameras.

 

[Rob-F]

But all the negatives are different in size. In a Leica the images on film are smaller when taken with a long focus lens and bigger when taken with a wide angle lens. Also focusing the lens changes the image size.

I put the negative in the enlarger (Focomat IIc) and adapt the lower mask of printing board to the seize of the image, leaving a small border around the image. The Focomat has automatic focusing, so the change of format due to focusing is no problem for me.

Erik.

Yes, my Durst has autofocus. I will probably need to adjust the masking at the negative carrier and the easel as well. I'll give it a try!

 

[Rob-F]

I find it curious that this stresses some people out. I guess they feel ripped off?

It may not be stress, at least not for everyone who is particular about this. It could just be the perfectionism of preferring things to be just so. A consequence of obsessive-compulsive personality, for some of us!

 

[jsrockit]

It may not be stress, at least not for everyone who is particular about this. It could just be the perfectionism of preferring things to be just so. A consequence of obsessive-compulsive personality, for some of us!

I understand completely...I'm just the other side of the coin... I'd be stressed if I couldn't have the border. 😉

 

[David Hughes]

It may not be stress, at least not for everyone who is particular about this. It could just be the perfectionism of preferring things to be just so. A consequence of obsessive-compulsive personality, for some of us!

Hmmm, or making the best of a bad job for others...


Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

Sure, but there are plenty of people who like to print with borders and that this doesn't bother in the least. I absolutely hate prints, on paper, without borders. It looks wrong to me.

In the case of inkjet paper, let's remember that it is used for all types of digital art and not just photos made from 2:3 ratio cameras.

True but why not sell paper to match all these aspect ratios or rather (say) the three most common ones?

I like borders too but careful framing when taking the picture means I don't want to crop and that causes problems; probably because I like the classic arrangement of borders. That's much easier with 3:2 and A4 paper and digital... Trouble is, I like 4:3 too.



Regards, David

 

[jsrockit]

True but why not sell paper to match all these aspect ratios or rather (say) the three most common ones?

Packaging costs? They do make rolls and some people do cut exact sizes from rolls.

 

[titrisol]

LoL, this discussion has been going on since the 80s! I think it's tied to "should I print the whole negative or not?"

As a student, paper was a precious commodity and we tried to squeeze every sq..cm. out of it.
Agfa and Negra paper came in 9x12 or 18x24cm which matched the 35mm nicely.
Ilford and Kodak paper used the English standard, and the paper sizes were different.

However you'll soon learn that cropping is always your friend, and that borders are not always equal. You can use the top or right side for proof-strips as well.

 

[JohnBeeching]

I understand your frustration, no one likes to "waste" part of their negative or part of their paper. I use "A" sizes of paper as they are quite close to the 3:2 aspect ratio of 35mm film. Printing 36 x 24 cm on A3 paper gives a good size print with an small border that is perfect for framing.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I always use 18x24cm Ilford MGFB

gelatine silver print (nikkor 50mm) nikkormat

Erik.

 

[mh2000]

I like printing the negative as shot and not cropped. Maybe too anal, but what I do. For 35mm and 6x9, I like printing 8x12. The main reason because it's easy to buy 16x20 8-ply museum board precut mats to fit 16x20 frames. Cheap and easy and hang nice in a gallery.