Dilemma. My pictures are too good.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frank Arthur
  • Start date Start date
F

Frank Arthur

Dilemma

My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid
sequence.
I'm using VR zoom lenses of high quality and autofocus instantly. I can now
compose
in the viewfinder, zoom to fill the frame and rip off 2,3, 10 images in
seconds. Hard
not to get a good well composed, well exposed, well framed image.
That's the dilemma. I finally got the "ultimate" technique down pat thanks
to the new
technologies.
I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital
image is
2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part
of the
image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5.

Until recently because of the Camera/Lens limitations we tended to shoot and
include
much more of the subject knowing we would crop later. We had to because we
simply couldn't
compose accurately enough fast enough. Now that you can achieve in camera
cropping with
frequent success we are able to make use of all the pixels we see leading to
a better
sharper overall image. Now we need to make use of Photo Paper to match our
image media
which cries out for a 8 x 12 Photo Paper size. Epson or HP do not produce
Photo Paper
with 2:3 ratio yet (except for their 4x6 size).
This will happen when customers ask for it.
Believe it or not there are anti-8 x 12 Photo Paper posters out there too.
 
Frank said:
Dilemma

My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in
rapid sequence.
Click to expand...

Please tell me you aren't considering DX lenses "good" are you? If so,
you've got a lot to learn.







Rita
 
There are no rules,,,,,, Rules were made to be broken. You'll figure
out a way to print that full frame.

Good Luck,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Slats1
 
Frank Arthur said:
Dilemma
Click to expand...
So what's new??

Paper sizes, apart from 6 x 4, have never matched up to Negative or Sensor
proportions.

Would you also suggest that paper be made available in proportions to match
all the different Med Format Film Cameras, and the 4 x 3 sensor format of P
& S Cameras.

In any case, I rarely find that images look their best in the 3 x 2 format,
it is just that little bit too long and thin. They nearly always require
some cropping.

Paper does cut quite easily, and if it is a really good picture, what the
hell if a bit of paper is wasted, by trimming, or if some is used as a nice
white margin.

When prints are going to be mounted onto standard 20 x 16 boards, in
Portrait Orientation, some trimming is essential if the bottom margin is
going to be equal or larger than the sides and top margins.

Are you also going to suggest that Exhibition Boards and Frames be changed
to the 3 x 2 format.

Roy G
 
Frank Arthur said:
I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part
of the
image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5.
Click to expand...


Sheesh. Crop the paper to 7x10.5
 
Why not use a professional lab to do your printing photographically, then
the problem is solved.

Gerald
 
Dilemma

My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid
sequence.
I'm using VR zoom lenses of high quality and autofocus instantly. I can now
compose
in the viewfinder, zoom to fill the frame and rip off 2,3, 10 images in
seconds. Hard
not to get a good well composed, well exposed, well framed image.
That's the dilemma. I finally got the "ultimate" technique down pat thanks
to the new
technologies.
I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital
image is
2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part
of the
image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5.

Until recently because of the Camera/Lens limitations we tended to shoot and
include
much more of the subject knowing we would crop later. We had to because we
simply couldn't
compose accurately enough fast enough. Now that you can achieve in camera
cropping with
frequent success we are able to make use of all the pixels we see leading to
a better
sharper overall image. Now we need to make use of Photo Paper to match our
image media
which cries out for a 8 x 12 Photo Paper size. Epson or HP do not produce
Photo Paper
with 2:3 ratio yet (except for their 4x6 size).
This will happen when customers ask for it.
Believe it or not there are anti-8 x 12 Photo Paper posters out there too.
Click to expand...


Yes, if you print 8x10 you have to crop, just the way it is, but you
can print at approx 7.4x 10.5 on 8.5x11 paper and it will give you a
full frame, or use 11x17 paper for 8x12, yes a 10x14 sheet would be
better but for some reason inkjets are locked into traditional paper
printing sizes.
Rita is opinionated, but there is generally some truth in her(?)
posts.

Tom
 
Frank said:
I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital
image is
2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part
of the
image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5.
Click to expand...

You're becoming very boring on this issue. Go to a lab. They will
print your photos on standard_ 8x12" paper.

Or for that matter pretty much any size you desire.
 
tomm42 said:
Yes, if you print 8x10 you have to crop, just the way it is, but you
can print at approx 7.4x 10.5 on 8.5x11 paper and it will give you a
full frame, or use 11x17 paper for 8x12, yes a 10x14 sheet would be
better but for some reason inkjets are locked into traditional paper
printing sizes.
Rita is opinionated, but there is generally some truth in her(?)
posts.
Click to expand...
Sure she is? Anyone who writes DX lenses are poor quality is plain wrong in
many respects.
 
Rita Ä Berkowitz said:
Please tell me you aren't considering DX lenses "good" are you? If so,
you've got a lot to learn.
Click to expand...

And you believe these Nikkor lenses are "no good"
DX Nikkor Lenses for DX Format Digital SLRs
10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor
12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor
18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor - NEW!
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor
17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
55-200mm f/4.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor - NEW!
 
Frank Arthur said:
And "sheesh" put it in a 7 x 10.5 frame? You find them everywhere:-
Click to expand...


No!

You use a matt and put them in a bigger frame.

Your record seems to have got stuck, and keeps repeating the same old
phrase. I think a K.U.T.A. is needed to get it to move on.

Roy G
 
Roy G said:
No!

You use a matt and put them in a bigger frame.

Your record seems to have got stuck, and keeps repeating the same old
phrase. I think a K.U.T.A. is needed to get it to move on.

Roy G
Click to expand...

Are you kidding? How many reasonable people will crop their image to 7 x
10.5
then make a custom mat and frame them?
 
Dilemma

My pictures are too good.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's certainly a dillema.
Where can you go when you've already reached the point where you're
just too good at what you do?
How about trying something else?
Maybe Barber College?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Hillary Clinton asked her supporters on the
Internet to select her campaign theme song.
She cheerfully promised the nation not to sing
the song herself. When Hillary Clinton sings,
she sounds like a cat on its way to the tennis
racket factory.
 
Yes, that's certainly a dillema.
Where can you go when you've already reached the point where you're
just too good at what you do?
How about trying something else?
Maybe Barber College?
Click to expand...

You either forgot about Klown Kollege or you're mellowing with
age. :)
 
Frank said:
Dilemma

My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid
sequence.
Click to expand...
[blah blah blah]

Dude, give it a rest. Just print at whatever ratio you want and trim the
paper. Or crop, or something. Going on teh interweb and whining about it
just clogs up the tubes.
 
Dilemma

My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid
sequence.
I'm using VR zoom lenses of high quality and autofocus instantly. I can now
compose
in the viewfinder, zoom to fill the frame and rip off 2,3, 10 images in
seconds. Hard
not to get a good well composed, well exposed, well framed image.
That's the dilemma. I finally got the "ultimate" technique down pat thanks
to the new
technologies.
I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital
image is
2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part
of the
image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5.

Until recently because of the Camera/Lens limitations we tended to shoot and
include
much more of the subject knowing we would crop later. We had to because we
simply couldn't
compose accurately enough fast enough. Now that you can achieve in camera
cropping with
frequent success we are able to make use of all the pixels we see leading to
a better
sharper overall image. Now we need to make use of Photo Paper to match our
image media
which cries out for a 8 x 12 Photo Paper size. Epson or HP do not produce
Photo Paper
with 2:3 ratio yet (except for their 4x6 size).
This will happen when customers ask for it.
Believe it or not there are anti-8 x 12 Photo Paper posters out there too.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I was too hasty in my previous response.
After giving this some thoiught, I am willing to put my personal
safety in jeopardy by revealing the secret committee that will address
your concern.
This Committee is secret, and very jealous of its power and control
which demands this secrecy. Thus, I am at grave risk of having my
credentials as a photographer (such as they are) being revoked with
extreme prejudice. You will understand if I don't reveal *ALL* of the
Committee's secrets.
The Committee is headquartered in Belgium, with individual Members
spread throughout the world. The Committee evaluates are questions
regarding all aspects of photography, including photographic paper
sizes, and therefore has the authority to look into your concerns.
However, first your claim to have reached the level of photography
where you can say, "My pictures are too good" will need to be
verified.
To do this, you will need to post photos (at full resolution and best
quality) at least ten (10) photos you consider to be representative of
your claim in each the following categories:

Glamour (not to be confused with porn)
Portrait
Transportation
Sports
Weather
Pets
Nature
Wildflowers
Mountains
Lakes
Happiness
Gloom
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
Stuffed Toys
Politics (no cheap shots)
Communication
Macro (1:1, not mere close-up shots)
Porn (not to be confused with Glamour)
(Other members of the Committee may require photos in other
categories, as they see fit.)

These photos must be posted to a Website available to the public at
your expense; since the members of the Committee are not known to the
public, the photographs must be available to all.

I will further endanger myself by revealing the identy of a few
Committee members:
RichA; he will disqualify any photos taken with any gear that has
plastic in it; beware that many aspherical lens elements are made of
resin, which RichA considers to be plastic.
Rita; she will disqualify any photos that are not taken with certain
"legendary" lenses. Which lenses reach that level of perfectuon are
determined by Rita alone.

If the Committee decides that you have indeed reached the level of
photography where your photos are, indeed, too good for the paper
sizes commonly available, then, and only then, will it recommend that
the various paper manufacturers alter their manufacturing process so
that photographic papers match the current sensor size ratios.
The Committee (and the world) awaits your evidentiary photos.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Hillary Clinton asked her supporters on the
Internet to select her campaign theme song.
She cheerfully promised the nation not to sing
the song herself. When Hillary Clinton sings,
she sounds like a cat on its way to the tennis
racket factory.
 
Bill Funk said:
Perhaps I was too hasty in my previous response.
After giving this some thoiught, I am willing to put my personal
safety in jeopardy by revealing the secret committee that will address
your concern.
This Committee is secret, and very jealous of its power and control
which demands this secrecy. Thus, I am at grave risk of having my
credentials as a photographer (such as they are) being revoked with
extreme prejudice. You will understand if I don't reveal *ALL* of the
Committee's secrets.
The Committee is headquartered in Belgium, with individual Members
spread throughout the world. The Committee evaluates are questions
regarding all aspects of photography, including photographic paper
sizes, and therefore has the authority to look into your concerns.
However, first your claim to have reached the level of photography
where you can say, "My pictures are too good" will need to be
verified.
To do this, you will need to post photos (at full resolution and best
quality) at least ten (10) photos you consider to be representative of
your claim in each the following categories:

Glamour (not to be confused with porn)
Portrait
Transportation
Sports
Weather
Pets
Nature
Wildflowers
Mountains
Lakes
Happiness
Gloom
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
Stuffed Toys
Politics (no cheap shots)
Communication
Macro (1:1, not mere close-up shots)
Porn (not to be confused with Glamour)
(Other members of the Committee may require photos in other
categories, as they see fit.)

These photos must be posted to a Website available to the public at
your expense; since the members of the Committee are not known to the
public, the photographs must be available to all.

I will further endanger myself by revealing the identy of a few
Committee members:
RichA; he will disqualify any photos taken with any gear that has
plastic in it; beware that many aspherical lens elements are made of
resin, which RichA considers to be plastic.
Rita; she will disqualify any photos that are not taken with certain
"legendary" lenses. Which lenses reach that level of perfectuon are
determined by Rita alone.

If the Committee decides that you have indeed reached the level of
photography where your photos are, indeed, too good for the paper
sizes commonly available, then, and only then, will it recommend that
the various paper manufacturers alter their manufacturing process so
that photographic papers match the current sensor size ratios.
The Committee (and the world) awaits your evidentiary photos.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Hillary Clinton asked her supporters on the
Internet to select her campaign theme song.
She cheerfully promised the nation not to sing
the song herself. When Hillary Clinton sings,
she sounds like a cat on its way to the tennis
racket factory.
Click to expand...

Great response Bill, but your wit is way beyond his ability to comprehend.
See his new thread.
With a lot of luck perhaps my opposite approach might make him go away and
stay away.

Roy G
 
Back
Top