"Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote


Frame manufactures are not as "clueless" as you paint them to be.
4/3 ratio (or close to it) is the dominant aspect ratio of photographs now
that digital cameras have outsold film cameras. By this I mean that in the
best years of 35mm film cameras, sales never reached the level compact
digital camera sales hit last year.

Frame manufacturers are simply making products they can sell. When you want
European sized frames I.E. A4, A3, A2 etc you either need to buy from a
European frame maker or modify your composure to allow trimming to the cheap
frames available in your area.

One of my business interests is in picture framing. I know it's in Oceania
but there would still be some relevance to the subject. About 35% of
customers require custom aspect ratio frames. less than 8% ask for frames
to be made to suit A4 or A3 paper sizes.

One solution my wife has for this is to use a larger (16'x20') frame for an
A4 print. She makes a 'matt' with more area at the bottom than the top.
Sometimes equal space, depending on the picture. This looks surprisingly
correct too and in the OP's case, would save the cost of custom framing. It
also has the side effect of separating the picture from the glass to prevent
adhesion and subsequent premature decay of the photo.

Douglas

Although I appreciate the sentiment, just logically, if there is to be a
leader in waste, or overuse of a resource, it is almost always the US,
so it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the US used more paper
than the rest of the world combined. They seems to do very well in their
resource abuse of most other things, so why not paper products ;-)

If a tree falls in any forest globally, where are the products from it
likely destined to? The US...


Art


Joseph Meehan wrote:

Just how much opium is left in those poppy seeds?

No wonder you're in heaven ;-) Why not just eat the rolls and forget
the hot dogs?

Art

Andrew Rossmann wrote:

Legal is 8.5 x 14"... I figure that lawyers need an extra 27% space to
write the same thing we "normal" people would write, and that's if they
print fairly small ;-)

Art

ASAAR wrote:

"Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp (AT) mvps (DOT) org> wrote

Screw off with you anti-US sentiments.

I'm with you. I print to the size that the image looks best at, to me.
Very often that is not a standard size, because my world doesn't
quaintly fit into a specific rectangular format ratio. I no longer
worry about frame sizes, and like yourself, I customize mats as
required. Sometimes a square best represents the composition, sometimes
a skinny horizontal or vertical rectangular shape works best. I'm keen
to panoramic compositions of late, probably because of the stitching
programs my digital camera has, which allows me to produce a higher res
wide narrow image.

What does drive me a bit crazy are all those wide screen televisions
being displayed in showrooms, where you'd THINK they'd want to show
image sources that were highest quality, but instead they show grainy,
low res sources, and worse still, they stretch or crush the image so it
fills the whole screen regardless of the correct original aspect
ration... what's that about? Doesn't anyone notice that everyone is 30%
wider that they should be, or looks 8 feet tall and anorexic?

I don't get it. How does that motivate me to buy a new TV?

Art

DBLEXPOSURE wrote:

"Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp (AT) mvps (DOT) org> wrote

Roger that! The trouble is most of the people that work at Wal-mart etc no
jack about what programming to feed their expensive TV's. The other thing
that give me a laugh is the people who stare into those artifact-ridden
screens in awe and say, "Wow that looks awesome".

BTW, I have a Leica that shoot 16X9, anyone know where I can find some paper
to fit?

I am going to have to say again before the 3X4 crowd jumps all over me,
Whatever works for you is fine W/me. Photography is a form of expression
and if you want to express yourself via a 3X4 frame then I wish you well in
your seach for paper that needs no trim.


Patrick Ziegler
www.imagequest.ifp3.com

DBLEXPOSURE wrote:
I've been reading top posting Arthur's posts for some time and have seen
no pattern of anti-U.S. statements, actually, maybe not even a hint.

I've lived in California for 25 years, and have a good idea what goes on
in the rest of the country. He's right: The U.S. is the leader in per
capita waste.

--
john mcwilliams

My commercially sold stuff, which I don't consider my best or most
personal artistic statements are usually produced to current market
standards to keep things simple and cheap. My "fine art" work is done
to MY format standards, which may mean custom frames and mats, although
not always.

I have always thought that all sensors, film, monitors and viewers
should be square, with the understanding that it's square for highest
adaptability, not because every image must be square to "use up all the
pixels". For instance, what is happening with being able to view images
on monitors and televisions? Who decided that our point of view is
always horizontal, in fact, becoming more so with HD and wide screen
television. Yes, I know we have two eyes and they create a more
horizontal visual field than a vertical one, but we are not always
wishing to replicate our field of view when capturing an image. Yet if I
wish to present images on most electronic viewing screens, the
horizontals are going to have 3 or 4 times larger surface area available
to show them than the vertical versions, and that gets worse with the
wider and wider screens.

Most slide projection screens are/were square. It is movie screen that
are/were wider than higher.

Art


Mark² wrote:

"John McWilliams" <jpmcw (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote


There is a hint.

I wouldn't call it abuse, We use allot of resources, no doubt. We also
produce quite a bit and have an economy that keeps most of us fed and
gainfully employed.

Here a little research for you, give me the top ten countries with the
highest GNP?

I live in America but have traveled to the darkest regions of the planet and
have a good idea what goes on there.