 | |
Why no 8 x 12 Photo Paper
Printers Technical discussion of printers (comp.periphs.printers)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#51
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Why no 8 x 12 Photo Paper -
05-21-2007
, 10:31 PM
|
Where would you crop these photos? (Mine): http://www.pbase.com/markuson/landscapes I don't want to...because I utilize the entire frame. Who wants to waste pixels? |
approaches, so this isn't a criticism as much as a different POV. I
find many of the images you referenced overly tightly cropped as they
are. I would have photographed most wider and then cropped them into an
even longer version, since most are horizontal landscapes, which for me,
at least, are too cramped in terms of their current width. Your couple
of panoramic images allow for the kind of breath I would prefer to
represent in these kinds of landscape.
So, I'm not sure 8" x 12" paper would have worked for the way I would
have wished to represent these types of images. My versions might have
tended toward 8" x 14-16" probably. Perhaps not a "standard" but I'm
not after standards, I want my vision to me presented in a manner that
best flatters the subject matter. ;-)
Art
#52
| |||
| |||
|
|
"John McWilliams" <jpmcw (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote in message news:uf-dnY9Lm5Rr2M_bnZ2dnUVZ_tCtnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... DBLEXPOSURE wrote: "Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp (AT) mvps (DOT) org> wrote in message news:68r4i.205397$aG1.85783 (AT) pd7urf3no (DOT) .. 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... Screw off with you anti-US sentiments. 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. 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? |
stating it on usenet).
Quote:
|
I live in America but have traveled to the darkest regions of the planet and have a good idea what goes on there. |
What are you really taking issue with? Or: With what are you really
taking issue?
Please give a few specifics.
--
john mcwilliams
#53
| |||
| |||
|
|
FWIW, Red River has paper in a wide range of sizes, but no 8x12. Was the OP talking about 8.5x11? They have that. You wouldn't lose that much using 8.5x14. http://www.redrivercatalog.com/shopbypapersize.html |
8.5x14" paper to 8x12" for you.
http://www.redrivercatalog.com/CS/customsizes.htm
--
Michael Benveniste -- mhb-offer (AT) clearether (DOT) com
Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $419. Use this email
address only to submit mail for evaluation.
#54
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Sun, 20 May 2007 08:17:53 -0400, Robert Coe wrote: : prior to A4 there was Foolscap - 8½ × 13½ inches (216 × 343 mm) The metric dimensions of Foolscap are probably irrelevant. I believe it originated in England long before England went metric. How widely accepted a standard did the size of Foolscap become anyway? Foolscap originated as a proprietary product, taking its name from the watermark applied by its manufacturer. I don't know its actual dimensions, but that seems to be about the size of legal pads, 8½" x something slightly greater than 11". US legal size is 8 1/2" x 14", if that's what you're referring to. I |
TJ
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
#55
| |||
| |||
|
|
: prior to A4 there was Foolscap - 8½ × 13½ inches (216 × 343 mm) The metric dimensions of Foolscap are probably irrelevant. I believe it originated in England long before England went metric. How widely accepted a standard did the size of Foolscap become anyway? Foolscap originated as a proprietary product, taking its name from the watermark applied by its manufacturer. I don't know its actual dimensions, but that seems to be about the size of legal pads, 8½" x something slightly greater than 11". US legal size is 8 1/2" x 14", if that's what you're referring to. I don't know about non-US sizes. Never had occasion to look it up. |
Fortunately there are no cameras that take Foolscap size film plates
(forget about Fs size sensors), or there would surely be complaints
possibly leading to legal action from lawyers over not being able to
take true macro 1:1 shots of their legal pads. <g>
#56
| |||
| |||
|
|
DBLEXPOSURE wrote: "John McWilliams" <jpmcw (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote in message news:uf-dnY9Lm5Rr2M_bnZ2dnUVZ_tCtnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... DBLEXPOSURE wrote: "Arthur Entlich" <e-printerhelp (AT) mvps (DOT) org> wrote in message news:68r4i.205397$aG1.85783 (AT) pd7urf3no (DOT) .. 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... Screw off with you anti-US sentiments. 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. 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? Why should I do that? I have a good idea, but I ain't looking it up (nor stating it on usenet). I live in America but have traveled to the darkest regions of the planet and have a good idea what goes on there. Excellent. What are you really taking issue with? Or: With what are you really taking issue? Please give a few specifics. -- john mcwilliams |
The thread is about paper, frame sizes etc, not about global politics.
This guy obviously has a chip on his shoulder about America and used this
thread to take a little shot. I'm not gonna let that pass by with out
taking a shot in return and to you I will defend my right to do so. Mr.
Arthur has emailed me off-line with his particular view of America and I do
believe that my read-between-the-lines was right on target.
He has asked me not to post it in this forum, as much as would like to I
will not unless pushed to do so.
As not to get a tongue lashing for ranting on about a seriously off-topic
discussion I will make this brief, Take your political opinions elsewhere.
Patrick Ziegler
www.imagequest.ifp3.com
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.