Do you compose for the image or the print?

Disaster_Area

Disaster_Area

Gadget Monger
Local time
8:15 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
877
I'm starting to sell a decent amount of prints here and there, and the most difficult part I've found is that I compose my images for 4X6... I shoot 4X6 and I rarely crop afterwards, if I do it's only very slightly... so all my non-square images are in the 3:2 ratio. But I get a LOT of requests for 5X7's and 8X10's. Some shots can be cropped down to that ... but I find a lot of shots loose something when you have to crop them.

What do you do? Do some of you shoot with the print ratio in mind? I don't mind cropping down to 5X7... but 8X10 can be a bitch sometimes.
 
Why not print 5x7 on 8x10 paper? Those big white borders can look great when framed appropriately.
 
The aspect ratio of my prints is always what I believe the image dictates. It is never what aspect ratio Kodak once decided with that particular print size.
 
Bob Michaels said:
The aspect ratio of my prints is always what I believe the image dictates. It is never what aspect ratio Kodak once decided with that particular print size.
Click to expand...

So if you had an image that you thought only looked good at 3:2 you would refuse to print it in another ratio and crop it? I'm leaning towards this for some images.
 
Disaster_Area said:
oh.. you mean keep the 3:2 just print one size paper up... so like 6X9 on 8X10 paper?
Click to expand...

For me, some images need to be square, others need to be 4:5, some others 2:3, occasionally 1:2. Sometimes I see that aspect ratio in the camera, others images have the necessary aspect ratio become clearer in processing. But I make the aspect ratio whatever it needs to be. Then I hold whatever that is constant regardless of size.
 
Disaster_Area said:
So if you had an image that you thought only looked good at 3:2 you would refuse to print it in another ratio and crop it? I'm leaning towards this for some images.
Click to expand...

yes, I would refuse to use an aspect ratio that I did not think was the best for that particular image.
 
I find that when shooting 35mm the great majority of my images look best with the 2:3 aspect ratio of the negative. If I switch to 6 X 6 cm negs on 120 I'm either compsing for the square or a 4 X 5 aspect ratio. In any case I like to print with wide white borders.

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
 
I prefer to do my cropping in camera rather than the darkroom. While this is not always possible, I feel it makes for better composed images if I use the film format of the camera I am using rather than any preconceived idea as to final print-size. I feel the image itself will dictate the print-size. Some things look better as a small image on a large sheet while others need the 'magnification' of the larger print.

This is one reason I will carry several cameras when I go out on a "shooting day", rather than leave it to chance that one camera will deliver the image I have in mind, even though most of the time it is a 35mm, 4x4, 6x6 format with the occasional 6x9 and 4x5 camera in tow.

I also know it is a vanity but I like to print the borders of the negative whenever possible so this means I must see clearly what is happening in the viewfinder with the subject, something I think many photographers don't do well. One thing that helps with small and medium formats is to compose the image in the viewfinder and then take a step back, moving the tripod if necessary, refocus and shoot. I will do this with SLRs as well as rangefinders, in small and medium formats and I find it works very well for me.
 
I shoot the picture as I feel it should be on the negative/slide as a composition. Then if I print it, I can mess with the aspect ratio and pint size in the darkroom to my liking. That way I can print it how I want now, next year and way off into the future. It gives me more versatility in the darkroom; plus there's something satisfying about nailing a composition in camera and not needing to crop (though I do from time to time!)

Vicky
 
Shooting for publications means framing loosely. The pictures, captions, blocks of text, and ads all have to be put on the page. Often the art director will have the choice of using a less than optimal crop or no picture at all.
 
For myself I always print an image at the ratio best suited for the image... my problem is that I get requests for image purchases from people that are probably going to put them in generic walmart 8X10 or 5X7 frames and I have to make them happy in order to make the sale... I like the idea of just printing smaller than the requested images size on that size of paper and leaving a white border. If I think they'll go for it I'll probably charge them more and deliver it in a mat of their requested image size.
 
It really is a wonder that 8X10 and 5X7 are still the predominant "larger" frame sizes EVERYWHERE....almost no one's camera shoots in those ratios anymore. The compact digicam crowd shoots 4:3.. which should mean that 6X8 frames should be very popular... and almost everyone else shoots in 3:2... which should make 8X12 frames really popular. Is it just that people have gotten used to 8X10's and don't really pay attention to their shots getting hacked off at the knees when they get it printed that size?

I used to work in a 1 hour lab and people where either completely oblivious that their prints where getting cropped... or they'd argue all day that there should be no reason I can't print their whole 4X6 at 8X10 without cropping... some people just couldn't wrap their heads around the concept of aspect ratio.
 
dfoo said:
Why not print 5x7 on 8x10 paper? Those big white borders can look great when framed appropriately.
Click to expand...

I second this suggestion. Another nice thing to this approach is that you can sign your name on the print, not on the mat (matte?)

Btw, your link to your blog is invalid now, I'm curious to see your prints.
 
Holy Hell... I edited the text of the link when my site changed... but not the link.. THANK YOU!!! God knows how long that would have stayed like that :)
 
That is a shame, I can see why cropping is not an ideal situation.

Would she accept a slightly larger print size which you could cut down to 3:2 aspect?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom