Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-03-2021, 07:56 PM   #16
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Posts: 116
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatridger Quote
The quick crop to 1:1 is one of my favorite K-1 features. I'm disappointed that it isn't offered on the K-3lll. It may be the reason I don't buy one. I find square composition much easier than 3:2. Something between 4:3 and 4:5 is my favorite. I think it's always better to select the aspect ratio in camera, where you still have the choice of changing your viewpoint to make a composition "click."
I will try that if my K-50 will do itÖ

05-03-2021, 10:33 PM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2018
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,476
The reasons for the 3:2 are historical and thereís no reason why we must stick to it: itís rare to find a composition that fits it exactly in my experience, so cropping is a regular choice in PP. However with panos excepted itís more pleasing to stick to a limited selection of crop ratios; it lends a consistency to a body of work on display. I like the sound of your 1:1 project!
05-03-2021, 11:28 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Michail_P's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Kalymnos
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,482
Itís only beneficial to do a printed art project. If youíve decided where to print and have found your theme, then I would say the framing factor should be a separate part of the project. Since weíre talking art, different framing means different photographic approach to the theme. I usually go for 4/5, 5/7 or of course 3/2. It seems these have always worked for my themes. Iíve never cropped randomly. Square is very challenging, not to be taken lightly. You need a very strong focal point in your frame to really make it work. Works great for abstraction too.
You could definitely have decided on the frame first. Very interesting way of keeping composition important.
Personal preference: 5/7. In most cases it works perfectly between 3/2 and 4/5. And it works fine for vertical and horizontal set.
05-04-2021, 01:31 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2021
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 216
QuoteOriginally posted by Kendra59 Quote
Is it crazy to go with a 1:1 ratio, when I am using a K-50 16,3 MP camera?
IMHO, the sensor aspect ratio should not be dictating your creative output. Look at it this way, the image circle of the lens does not dictate the sensor shape either, else the sensor would be a circle ;-). it is a tool afterall. The creation need not mimic the tool used to create it; else all sculptures would look like a chisel :-P

Although 1:1 might right now (2021) getting a bad rep because of some very popular image sharing app, doesnt mean it is not suited for your creative project. Maybe 1:1 will channel you in being more creative with objects that traditionally do not fit that format. All the best.

05-04-2021, 02:26 AM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2018
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,476
QuoteOriginally posted by Michail_P Quote
Itís only beneficial to do a printed art project.
Not necessarily, a web gallery of consistently proportioned images looks better than a bunch of apparently random crops.
05-04-2021, 03:25 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,629
I find this discussion interesting, because I have several projects on the go, (I suffer a little from ADD I guess because none are finished) ranging from a collection of neon signs, to wall art (graffiti and murals), to birds and wild life (a collection of my life list of birds), and a collection of all things wild found at my in-lawís historical family farm (birds insects, flowers and wild animals)

In many cases, the question is, do I just format to a print size, to fit a photo portfolio? Or do I do it as a book, with different crops, and perhaps multiple images per page, and a much looser format and crop image by image.

While I can appreciate the OP is doing staged still life shots and as such has a much higher degree of control over his image to suit the framing, none of my subjects has the same consistent form factor, and in my opinion would look odd with any attempt to crop differently than they appear.

When I look at Kobayashi.Kís portfolio, I find some of the subjects are cut off, to force them into the square crop format and others have a wide field of background surrounding a long rectangular subject, and wonder whether the crop really does the subject justice?

In the end, I think it may be a personal choice, but as an observation, i donít have any square books in my house, they all are rectangles, ranging from loosely between 4:5 to 2:3 and every ratio in between
05-04-2021, 05:19 AM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 730
While I prefer the 645 format, you may consider how you intend to print/crop. Nobody says you need to have symmetrical borders. A few photographers made a point of framing with more white border at the bottom of the print - for signatures, titles, or just blank space to lift the image up.

Last edited by ProfessorBuzz; 05-04-2021 at 05:19 AM. Reason: lift not life.
05-04-2021, 06:05 AM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 516
QuoteOriginally posted by officiousbystander Quote
I like the wry annotations. It's an interesting collection.
Thanks. I'm still experimenting what direction to go, but this found object thing is very interesting philosophically.

---------- Post added 05-04-21 at 11:36 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kendra59 Quote
For this project, I am going into antique shops and thrift stores to find something out of the norm, so I am "finding them" and bringing them home or to an interesting location to photograph. My finds in the last week were:
A General Electric PR-1 Exposure Meter with tan case in mint condition for $10 CAD *introduced in 1948)
An old metal canteen with patterned wool covering for $5 CAD.
A Canon TX film camera with 50 mm 1.8 lens for $20 CAD ...
I think the square format is an excellent choice for static scenes, in this case found objects that are displayed formally. I'm not convinced though getting items from shops and photograph them in a table-top environment is the right way to go (notably with the obvious items you selected), that would be product photography, which is a different realm.

You can make more original and natural photos by going out on the street and pick up items you come across by chance (they are found). They don't need to be big, use a macro lens, but even better photograph them on site.

05-04-2021, 09:28 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 5,401
It seems part of the OP's concern was just losing all those pixels and therefore couldn't print as big. This is probably the biggest pet peeve of mine on photography forums -- this idea that given the MPs we have in the original, we can only make tiny prints and just mass confusion about DPI, etc. Please, people -- spend some time to really learn post-processing and print preparation/upsampling and get to know all the wonderful digital tools we have available (like Topaz Gigapixel) that allow you to go even bigger. Any of these cameras made in the last 15 years or so can make nice-looking prints that are way larger. Your square prints can easily be 40" x 40" or even larger. The bigger the print, the farther away the viewing distance after all. I've sold prints taken with a K-7 as large as 6 feet wide to fill a wall and it looks great!
05-04-2021, 09:31 AM   #25
5ks
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Southern Finland
Posts: 176
QuoteOriginally posted by shyrsio Quote
Very interesting question.
- - -
I would recommend, take a bunch of your favorite photos and try cropping them in different ratios until something clicks in you, and just stick with it!
This here is a good suggestion. Trial and error ... finally success!


Various arguments may be found both for and against the frame form 1 : 1. Somehow it is "easy" because of its simplicity. At least no need to choose between portrait and landscape. But that may also be somewhat restrictive too, depending on the subject and its eventually important surroundings.


If I think myself as a viewer of 1 : 1 images only, there may be an increased risk of getting bored (!) just because of the square form. So I would perhaps use 4 : 5 myself as a compromise - but without seeing your actual photos, hard to say which is best. - So I apologize: cannot give a straightforward suggestion or preference.
05-04-2021, 11:03 AM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,477
QuoteOriginally posted by Kendra59 Quote
Is it crazy to go with a 1:1 ratio, when I am using a K-50 16,3 MP camera?
I would select the crop ratio based on subject, orientation and frame fitting.

1) Regarding the orientation: 3:2 in portrait mode isn't ideal (in my opinion). For vertically oriented prints I prefer 4:3, 5:4, 7:6. For landscape oriented prints I prefer 16:9, 3:2 and 4:3. If the display orientation is not known, 1:1 is also suitable.

2) Regarding the fit in frames, there are two cases:

> 2.1) An addition space is need between the frame and the print to write something about the print (e.g name, author , date, place etc..), one side of the mat board is larger than the other sides, in that case 1:1 and 5:4 prints would fit well into a standard 1:1 or 5:4 frames (depending on orientation), 4:3 prints would fit well into a standard 4:3 frame.

> 2.2) If the intention is to maintain mat board borders of equal space, with not inscription on the mat window bordel, then 3:2 prints would better fit into 4:3 frames, 4:3 prints would better fit into 5:4 frames, and 1:1 prints would fit into 1:1 frame. That is because when the frame and print ratio aren't 1:1, there is a change of ration between the print and the frame in order to maintain mat dimensions.

So, the choice of image ratio may depend on the wanted end results, orientation and frame ratios.
05-04-2021, 03:02 PM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Posts: 116
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I would select the crop ratio based on subject, orientation and frame fitting.

1) Regarding the orientation: 3:2 in portrait mode isn't ideal (in my opinion). For vertically oriented prints I prefer 4:3, 5:4, 7:6. For landscape oriented prints I prefer 16:9, 3:2 and 4:3. If the display orientation is not known, 1:1 is also suitable.

2) Regarding the fit in frames, there are two cases:

> 2.1) An addition space is need between the frame and the print to write something about the print (e.g name, author , date, place etc..), one side of the mat board is larger than the other sides, in that case 1:1 and 5:4 prints would fit well into a standard 1:1 or 5:4 frames (depending on orientation), 4:3 prints would fit well into a standard 4:3 frame.

> 2.2) If the intention is to maintain mat board borders of equal space, with not inscription on the mat window bordel, then 3:2 prints would better fit into 4:3 frames, 4:3 prints would better fit into 5:4 frames, and 1:1 prints would fit into 1:1 frame. That is because when the frame and print ratio aren't 1:1, there is a change of ration between the print and the frame in order to maintain mat dimensions.

So, the choice of image ratio may depend on the wanted end results, orientation and frame ratios.
What I want to do is create a series of maybe 16 prints on 8 1/2" x 11" photo paper, add a bit of matting, and put them together into 11" x 14" frames. I would use the same frame style/size for all of them, the same matting, and the same brand/type of photo paper. I guess I could use a mix of crop factors, as long as the end result fits in the same frames. Most (if not all) found objects would be printed in B & W.
05-04-2021, 08:37 PM   #28
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Kelowna, BC, Canada
Posts: 116
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Kendra59 Quote
If you really want to focus on image composition, cropping to a 1:1 ratio will really help...
It is a good way to exercise your composition "muscles" in a new way. I learned a LOT about composition after I bought a medium format Mamiya 645 camera and used it exclusively for 4 months, while I camped out at various places along the Frazer River. Perhaps not so coincidentally, after a hiking with all that camera gear, I dropped 30 pounds, and was in really good shape!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
art, cad, creating cohesive results, crop, crop ratio, fine art prints, found, lens, paper, photograph, photography, photoshop, print, prints, project, ratio, shops
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Choices of focal length vs aspect ratios biz-engineer Pentax Medium Format 9 02-07-2021 06:41 AM
Looking for advice on canvas prints/other decor style prints Vicioustuna2012 Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 10 08-06-2017 10:36 AM
It's official! Ink jet prints equal or surpass Eastman's dye transfer prints! slackercruster Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 5 07-07-2012 10:19 PM
Do you shoot and crop in camera or shoot loose and crop in photoshop? hockmasm Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 05-02-2010 06:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:28 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top