Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Digital Printers / Inks / Papers etc

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Paper sizes for digital printing - European sizes?
Old 10-12-2012   #1
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 2,986
Paper sizes for digital printing - European sizes?

In the U.S., photo paper for digital printing is sold in sizes measured in inches, and not always conforming to the old wet process photo paper sizes. For instance 8 1/2 x 11 inches is much more common in inkjet papers than 8 x 10 inches.

Some of these new paper sizes make sense, for instance an image from a DSLR with 3:2 aspect ratio fits very nicely on 13 x 19 inch paper.

Can someone please tell me if it is possible to get, in Europe or Asia, inkjet paper in smaller sizes that conforms to the 3:2 aspect ratio without trimming? For instance 20 x 30 cm paper?

Thanks.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #2
David Hughes
Registered User
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,282
Hi,

Well, there's always 6 x 4" but mostly we buy A4, A3 and A3+

Fitting digital images to the paper sold for digital printers has always been a problem. But then, how do you fit 3:2 to say 8x10 or 5x7" ? To add to the problem I can get 5" x 7 1/2" from my APS locally but not from my 35mm film and it's all done on the same machine...

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #3
Pherdinand
5000 & call it a day!
 
Pherdinand's Avatar
 
Pherdinand is offline
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: er gaat niets boven groningen.
Age: 36
Posts: 7,073
seems that photo papers are stuck in the view camera era (i.e. 4x5 " fits quite well on 8x10 paper)
Since then, noone managed to make a set proper fitting standard sizes.
Inkjet or traditional, nothing fits neither 4:3 nor 3:2 ratio film/sensors.
It's pretty stupid, really.
__________________
Happy New Year, Happy New Continent!
eye contact eye
My RFF Foolery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #4
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 2,986
ok, just wondering if in Europe or Asia paper producers were a bit more enlightened....
I know Ilford made a 20x30cm Multigrade for wet darkroom.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #5
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 2,641
Europe mainly sticks to the DIN standard: A5. A4, A3, A3+, A2. A1. None of them are precisely in 2:3 ratio. You start with A1, and each subsequent size is half of previous one. All I remember, is that A4 is 210x297mm.
__________________
MY PORTFOLIOS


WTB: TAKUMAR 58/2.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #6
majid
Registered User
 
majid's Avatar
 
majid is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 319
The ISO/DIN A and B series papers all have the same 21x29.7 aspect ratio that is very close to 3:2.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #7
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 10,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by majid View Post
The ISO/DIN A and B series papers all have the same 21x29.7 aspect ratio that is very close to 3:2.
= sqrt(2)

The easiest way to remember this is:

2 x A5 = A4
2 x A4 = A3
2 x A3 = A2
etc.

I hate cropping for 8x10 ....

Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #8
emjo
Registered User
 
emjo is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 41
Common papers are 10x15 cm, 13x18 cm, 18x24 cm, 24x30 cm 30x40 cm and 40x50 cm. 1 inch = 2.54 cm.
__________________
http://jabcam.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-12-2012   #9
DtheG
Registered User
 
DtheG's Avatar
 
DtheG is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider View Post
= sqrt(2)

The easiest way to remember this is:

2 x A5 = A4
2 x A4 = A3
2 x A3 = A2
etc.

I hate cropping for 8x10 ....

Roland.
The sqrt(2) aspect ratio was chosen for that property, that is folding a sheet in half makes it the next size down with exactly the same aspect ratio. Hence scaling by a factor of two takes you from A5 to A4 etc. Unfortunately the aspect ratio is not a particulaly elegant one aestheticaly
__________________
--
ФЭД-3, XA2, X100
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-13-2012   #10
David Hughes
Registered User
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,282
Hi,

What's really weird is that the aspect ratio of 35 mm film is 3:2 and has been since 1925: assuming that the ratio was set once Leitz went into production. But none of the classic a paper sizes really fit it, apart from 6x4. So they've had 87 years to get their act together and have failed. Or couldn't be bothered.

Then there was the 4:3 on 35mm film (?Nikon's) and again they had no paper for it and, again, crops were necessary.

Then a while back (1950's or 60's) the world, apart from the USA, accepted the standard A series of paper sizes and oddities like "Quarto", "Imperial" and "Double Elephant" were slowly abandoned.

Finally, along comes digital and - since home printers and A4 have been around then for a long time - you'd think the camera makers would make A paper (1:1.414) aspect ratio CCD's and settle the matter for once and for all time. But they didn't.

Sillier still is that many digital camera makers also made/make printers. You wonder if the people in charge know what's going on...

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-13-2012   #11
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 18,150
A-series = 2:2.8, pretty close to 2:3.

There's no great reason to overstate the importance of 2:3. After all, long after the introduction of the Leica, plenty of professionals and quite a few amateurs were shooting all sorts of other formats. I'm particularly fond of Linhof's 56x72mm '6x7 cm'. Blow it up 3x and it's whole plate, 6.5 x 8.5 inches. And today we have four-thirds, among other formats...

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Now even more free photography information on www.rogerandfrances.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-13-2012   #12
jtm6
Registered User
 
jtm6 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by DtheG View Post
The sqrt(2) aspect ratio was chosen for that property, that is folding a sheet in half makes it the next size down with exactly the same aspect ratio. Hence scaling by a factor of two takes you from A5 to A4 etc. Unfortunately the aspect ratio is not a particulaly elegant one aestheticaly
IMHO the golden ratio (~1.618) is nicer than root 2 (~1.414) and gets talked about more, but the root 2 rectangle has also been used in art and design for centuries.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:08.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.