Paper sizes for digital printing - European sizes?

[Pablito]

In the U.S., photo paper for digital printing is sold in sizes measured in inches, and not always conforming to the old wet process photo paper sizes. For instance 8 1/2 x 11 inches is much more common in inkjet papers than 8 x 10 inches.

Some of these new paper sizes make sense, for instance an image from a DSLR with 3:2 aspect ratio fits very nicely on 13 x 19 inch paper.

Can someone please tell me if it is possible to get, in Europe or Asia, inkjet paper in smaller sizes that conforms to the 3:2 aspect ratio without trimming? For instance 20 x 30 cm paper?

Thanks.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Well, there's always 6 x 4" but mostly we buy A4, A3 and A3+

Fitting digital images to the paper sold for digital printers has always been a problem. But then, how do you fit 3:2 to say 8x10 or 5x7" ? To add to the problem I can get 5" x 7 1/2" from my APS locally but not from my 35mm film and it's all done on the same machine...

Regards, David

 

[Pherdinand]

seems that photo papers are stuck in the view camera era (i.e. 4x5 " fits quite well on 8x10 😀 paper)
Since then, noone managed to make a set proper fitting standard sizes.
Inkjet or traditional, nothing fits neither 4:3 nor 3:2 ratio film/sensors.
It's pretty stupid, really.

 

[Pablito]

ok, just wondering if in Europe or Asia paper producers were a bit more enlightened....
I know Ilford made a 20x30cm Multigrade for wet darkroom.

 

[mfogiel]

Europe mainly sticks to the DIN standard: A5. A4, A3, A3+, A2. A1. None of them are precisely in 2:3 ratio. You start with A1, and each subsequent size is half of previous one. All I remember, is that A4 is 210x297mm.

 

[majid]

The ISO/DIN A and B series papers all have the same 21x29.7 aspect ratio that is very close to 3:2.

 

[ferider]

The ISO/DIN A and B series papers all have the same 21x29.7 aspect ratio that is very close to 3:2.

= sqrt(2)

The easiest way to remember this is:

2 x A5 = A4
2 x A4 = A3
2 x A3 = A2
etc.

I hate cropping for 8x10 ....

Roland.

 

[emjo]

Common papers are 10x15 cm, 13x18 cm, 18x24 cm, 24x30 cm 30x40 cm and 40x50 cm. 1 inch = 2.54 cm.

 

[DtheG]

= sqrt(2)

The easiest way to remember this is:

2 x A5 = A4
2 x A4 = A3
2 x A3 = A2
etc.

I hate cropping for 8x10 ....

Roland.

The sqrt(2) aspect ratio was chosen for that property, that is folding a sheet in half makes it the next size down with exactly the same aspect ratio. Hence scaling by a factor of two takes you from A5 to A4 etc. Unfortunately the aspect ratio is not a particulaly elegant one aestheticaly

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

What's really weird is that the aspect ratio of 35 mm film is 3:2 and has been since 1925: assuming that the ratio was set once Leitz went into production. But none of the classic a paper sizes really fit it, apart from 6x4. So they've had 87 years to get their act together and have failed. Or couldn't be bothered.

Then there was the 4:3 on 35mm film (?Nikon's) and again they had no paper for it and, again, crops were necessary.

Then a while back (1950's or 60's) the world, apart from the USA, accepted the standard A series of paper sizes and oddities like "Quarto", "Imperial" and "Double Elephant" were slowly abandoned.

Finally, along comes digital and - since home printers and A4 have been around then for a long time - you'd think the camera makers would make A paper (1:1.414) aspect ratio CCD's and settle the matter for once and for all time. But they didn't.

Sillier still is that many digital camera makers also made/make printers. You wonder if the people in charge know what's going on...

Regards, David

 

[Roger Hicks]

A-series = 2:2.8, pretty close to 2:3.

There's no great reason to overstate the importance of 2:3. After all, long after the introduction of the Leica, plenty of professionals and quite a few amateurs were shooting all sorts of other formats. I'm particularly fond of Linhof's 56x72mm '6x7 cm'. Blow it up 3x and it's whole plate, 6.5 x 8.5 inches. And today we have four-thirds, among other formats...

Cheers,

R.

 

[jtm6]

The sqrt(2) aspect ratio was chosen for that property, that is folding a sheet in half makes it the next size down with exactly the same aspect ratio. Hence scaling by a factor of two takes you from A5 to A4 etc. Unfortunately the aspect ratio is not a particulaly elegant one aestheticaly

IMHO the golden ratio (~1.618) is nicer than root 2 (~1.414) and gets talked about more, but the root 2 rectangle has also been used in art and design for centuries.