View RSS Feed
Rate this Entry
Snowy Saturday so I am working on my files, looking for the next photo i will print. I am somewhat amazed by the number of members that do not print their work. I look on this somewhat like big game hunting. The hunt is not really finished until it is bagged, tagged, stuffed and hanging on the wall. But I digress....

it goes without saying that I only shoot in raw and the first thing I do when I open a photo in my editor is to deal with the crop. What will I retain and what seems to me superfluous. This is the time I decide what the ultimate photo will look like.

Next comes sizing. and a large part of that is aspect ratio. The ratio determines how the photo will display. I did not use to look closely at this, but now understand how vital it is to the photos presentation. So now I size photos at different ratios and compare them to each other to select the perfect fit. Finally,then i deal with print size. I am continually surprised how much the prints final size plays in the overall impact of a photo.

Some photos scream to be large, others actually look better say printed as 5 x7 or even 6 x 6. Others need as large a print as can be rendered with degrading of the image.
Some days I feel that this is just as hard to learn as how to take the photo itself.

I would certainly welcome any other's thoughts on this subject, but for now it's back to the files. Break time is over.
1 Thanks/Like
Thanks/Like everprentice Thanks/liked this post
Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. Ruidoso Bill's Avatar
    If I am printing for myself I don't worry so much about a given ratio or size. It's what I think looks good and I handle the "Odd" sizes with the mat, I cut my own mats so it is easy and I can still get everything into standard frames.
    0 Thanks/Like
  2. DraganDL's Avatar
    I look upon the "aspect ratio" as an arbitrary thing, that is, dependent on a specific photo. I remember that, back in "the old days", we (European photo enthusiasts, at least) had had a lots of discussions on whether the traditional "full frame" aspect(s) of (printed) photos (dictated by film frame aspects such as 35mm /24:36/ or 6cm x 6cm/1:1/ etc.) is a MUST or not (there were certain exhibition galleries that even would not accept photos that did not fit the "standard" aspects - cropped photos were immediately ruled out, based on such criteria)...

    As for the printing (must the photos be printed or not), I've got to remind my colleagues that there are a lot of good "digital picture frames", so if we want our photos be hung on the wall or stand on our cupboards, we've got options...
    0 Thanks/Like
    Updated 01-26-2014 at 10:51 AM by DraganDL
  3. everprentice's Avatar
    True. But as much as making and taking photographs is an art, printing is an art by itself. I don't print a lot but it takes a lot of work in creating a print that is close to what you visualize it to be. Print media can't replicate all colors you capture with the camera and that makes it a whole different ball game. Like developing prints in the film days, it is both a science and art.
    1 Thanks/Like
    Thanks/Like RON Thanks/liked this post

+ Post Comment


Total Trackbacks 0
Trackback URL: