If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Another source condemns 3:2 format
Bob Larter wrote:
RichA wrote: The editorial in Amateur Photographer for May 16th. Maybe condemn is too strong, but it's been clear for too long that the 3:2 or APS-C format (and the so-called, "full frame" 35mm format) is too wide. The 4/3rd ratio is more logical and results in far fewer instances of cropping an image. What good are 12-24 megapixels if you have to hack away 1/4 of them most of the time? Screw you. I happen to be very happy with the 3:2 format, & even when I crop an image (not often), I usually retain the 3:2 ratio. 4:3 reminds me too much of a TV screen, which I feel gives a certain mundane look. I've been doing some prints at 16:9, widescreen video format, I kinda like it. Part of the motivation was to get bigger than 13x19 using roll stock, so it's closer to 13x24. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another source condemns 3:2 format | Philip Homburg | Digital SLR Cameras | 22 | May 21st 09 11:19 PM |
Another source condemns 3:2 format | whisky-dave | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | May 19th 09 09:13 PM |
Another source condemns 3:2 format | Alan Browne | Digital Photography | 0 | May 19th 09 09:08 PM |
Another source condemns 3:2 format | Han Schutten[_2_] | Digital Photography | 0 | May 19th 09 04:51 PM |
Another source condemns 3:2 format | DMac | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | May 19th 09 11:25 AM |