Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing
05-11-2010, 02:06 AM
|
|
The inherent dimensions of the format is 3:2. For prints, this equals 4x6, 6x9, 8x12, and 12x18. These all correspond with standard frame and mat sizes. If you print at home, the 12x18 works great with the 13x19-in papers, in an 18x24-in frame.
I try to compose in camera so I don't have to crop down to different dimensions than these. If I do crop the image, I try to maintain the 3:2 aspect ratio.
See if your post-processing software can simulate different dimensions on screen. I have numerous print presets in Lightroom that shows how a 8x10 vs. 8x12 would look.
8x10, and 5x7 are older standard sizes that don't coordinate very well with the 3:2 dimensions of APS-C. But there are lots of frames, mats, and papers to choose from.
I also like a square format for some images such as 12x12 or 8x8. A good frame shop should have a few square precut setups available.
I do think that aesthetic values trump standard dimensions--some subjects are transformed by the right framing dimension, but it comes at a price. If you are just printing and framing a handful of images every six months, then going custom (non-standard dimensions) won't get too costly. But if you have to hang a show with a couple dozen custom mat and frame jobs or more, then it gets pricey fast (I used to frame professionally many moons ago and still do for my own art shows).
I suggest visiting photographic fine art galleries to get a feel for what subjects look best at what aspect ratios.
HTH
M
|