[BruceBanner]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I own some Canon Pro Platinum Photo Paper size A3. I am wondering if I can print some images A4 or A5 on it and separate the images via cutting perhaps with a guillotine? How do the cut edges handle? Does it look like it's been cut or is it fine?

I was thinking to perhaps cut a few A3 sheets up into A4 and A5, and for saving time I think it would be better to cut first and then put the paper in the machine at the size the sheets are and then print, vs printing A3 with multiple images on a single sheet yet to be cut?

Or is cutting just a bad idea period?

I also do not own a guillotine but I suppose the quality of the machine/slicer matters also?


TIA!

BB

[dms]

I buy larger sheets and cut to whatever custom size I want to print at. Typically 8"x12" but whatever. SImply use a cutting blade (exacto) and metal ruler. Works with luster, matte and glossy epson paper.

[UncleVanya]

Guillotin-knife or rotating-blade paper cutter for darkroom use? | Photrio.com Photography Forums

This seems to suggest rotary cutter.

[Alex645]

I own some Canon Pro Platinum Photo Paper size A3. I am wondering if I can print some images A4 or A5 on it and separate the images via cutting perhaps with a guillotine? How do the cut edges handle? Does it look like it's been cut or is it fine?

I also do not own a guillotine but I suppose the quality of the machine/slicer matters also?

Guillotin-knife or rotating-blade paper cutter for darkroom use? | Photrio.com Photography Forums

This seems to suggest rotary cutter.

+1 @UncleVanya. I'd recommend a dual rail rotary cutter, like those made by Rotatrim. Much more precise and less potential errors. They are not cheap, but it's a lifetime purchase.

[BruceBanner]

ok.. so it's a thing then, but to do it properly involves mega expense with a snazzy cutter. So I think (because I will be doing this sporadically) I will just buy some smaller photographic paper.

[veato]

I've used the knife and ruler method in the past but as has been pointed out it's not the most accurate. But then if I've been mounting in a frame with a border for personal use I guess it didn't need to be.

I've also had a rotating blade cutter which was accurate but being a cheap model it lost its sharpness quite quickly. I suppose it would be fine for the rare odd job.

[BarryE]

I've done it many, many times up to 320gsm papers with no difficulty with scalpel, steel ruler on a cutting mat.

As an alternative you could try a deckle edge ruler and surface mount on a board. Then mount in a deep frame/box, thus not using mount board. Looks great. See Deckle Edge Ripper: Amazon.co.uk: Kitchen & Home for the cutter.

[MaineNative]

I have a mat cutter, so for large sheets, I used that. I also have a cheap Carl Professional 18” rotary paper trimmer ($35 from Amazon) which works great for small photos. It is mostly plastic but I only use it a few times per month so it doesn’t get much abuse.

[murrelet]

I this the proper time to rant about US paper sizes? It take a minimum of 4 cuts to get 2 5X7's from an 8.5X11 sheet. It takes 1 cut to get 2 A5's from an A4.

[pentaxus]

The even worse part of US paper sizes is that the standard document size is 8.5X11 but the standard historical photo size is 8X10. If it runs through a printer, the standard size is 8.5X11. If it is developed in the darkroom the standard size is 8X10. Later, photo chemical printing machines made 8X12 prints from 35mm.

[UncleVanya]

Honestly frame sizes have remained relatively static while sensor format ratios have changed.

[WPRESTO]

I would definitely recommend a rotary cutter over the traditional guillotine. Had two 12" versions of the latter go bad, but a 20" rotary cutter works perfectly, and new sharp blade is cheap.

---------- Post added 11-13-19 at 01:42 PM ----------

Honestly frame sizes have remained relatively static while sensor format ratios have changed.

More exasperating than that, at least in the USA large uncut mat boards are all 30X40 inches. Try cutting that down to fit standard frame sizes without waste, and sometimes a LOT of waste.
Much of it is left over from glass plate then cut film dimensions (16X20, 11X14, 8X10, 4X5), with 11X14 being the odd size out. I suspect the mat board size comes from printing and ancient standard sheet-paper sizes ("double elephant" etc.)

[Alex645]

I would definitely recommend a rotary cutter over the traditional guillotine. Had two 12" versions of the latter go bad, but a 20" rotary cutter works perfectly, and new sharp blade is cheap.[COLOR="Silver"]

More exasperating than that, at least in the USA large, uncut mat boards are all 30X40 inches. Try cutting that down to fit standard frame sizes without waste, and sometimes a LOT of waste.

What brand makes new cheap rotary blades? I had to replace one in a Rotatrim because a student thought they could cut wire with it. $67 for the replacement. It will last a lifetime....if used as intended.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/44757-REG/Rotatrim_RC_RCM160_Cutting_Wheel.html

The standard mats I get are 32x40" which work great for making four 16x20" or (16) 8x10". I do agree that living in a world with different standards is confusing and inefficient for the consumer but probably has its reasons in manufacturing, costs, and marketing.

[StiffLegged]

I this the proper time to rant about US paper sizes? It take a minimum of 4 cuts to get 2 5X7's from an 8.5X11 sheet. It takes 1 cut to get 2 A5's from an A4.

That's because the A paper sizes are based on each other? Lay two sheets of A4 long edge to long edge and you have the size of A3 paper; A1 paper is exactly the size of 4 A3 sheets laid together. If you want 20"x16" paper instead, you'll have to cut an A2 down, wasting some of the sheet.

[BruceBanner]

Perhaps now would be the time to mention that the intention of the cuts would not be to eventually frame the images, but to deliver the prints to a client. I can imagine if the print was to be framed then a slightly harsh edge or squint cut would not be such an issue, but when hand holding the print... very much so. I just wondered if the photographic paper has a certain 'edge' to it, and once cutting you lose that finish and it can become quite apparent that (for example) an A5 cut from an original A3 or A4 can be quite apparent etc (vs an actual non cut A5 piece)...