Pixels, schmixels, and aspect ratios

NadCixelsyd wrote:
After years of point-and-shoot, I'm considering a Nikon D40 or a D90.

I found one web site that appears pretty informative. His opinion is
that six megapixels (The D40) is more than enough for all but the real
super-professional. Opinions??

My past cameras had an aspect ratio of 4:3. I don't know whether it's
standard, but the new Nikons only have 3:2, the same as film cameras.
Is 3:2 becoming a standard for digital photography?

There is no "standard" aspect ratio in photography.

But if there WERE to be one it should be:

SQRT(2):1 so that enlargements would fit ISO 216 "A" paper sizes.




The DSLR's that evolved from film cameras (Nikon, Canon, Pentax,
Minolta/Sony) are all 3:2 whether cropped or full frame. Oly went 4:3.

The more common aspect ratios a

5:4 (from the 8x10 inch film days; cuts to half size 4x5 inches -
these are the origin of the "8x10" print).

9:6 (9x6 centimeters and its half frame 6x4.5cm called "645")

1:1 (6x6 cm [56x56mm])

3:2 (35mm film (24x36mm)).

3:2 (9x6 centimeters and its half frame 6x4.5cm called "645")

4:3 (not sure where it comes from, but it is also the "standard"
for the four-thirds format).

Surely others, but I don't know them offhand.

6:7 (I don't know the origin of this other than it simply being a
more rectangular variant of the 6x6 or 6x9.)

So, there is no standard for photography aspect ratios.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

There is no "standard" aspect ratio in photography.

But if there WERE to be one it should be:

SQRT(2):1 so that enlargements would fit ISO 216 "A" paper sizes.


Sure - and you probably think that weiners should be packaged in numbers to
match that of hot dog buns.

Both would make way too much sense to be practical.



Eric Miller
www.dyesscreek.com

Eric Miller wrote:
There is no "standard" aspect ratio in photography.

But if there WERE to be one it should be:

SQRT(2):1 so that enlargements would fit ISO 216 "A" paper sizes.


Sure - and you probably think that weiners should be packaged in numbers to
match that of hot dog buns.

Both would make way too much sense to be practical.

I rarely buy them but this past summer I picked up each and marveled at
the idiocy. Seems to me a bread co. could make a good, funny and
irreverent pitch based on this ...

I would relish you spelling 'wiener' correctly otherwise you will be
plonked for not cutting the mustard.

"Get your buns a circle!" -John Wayne, famous hot-dog chef.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

NadCixelsyd wrote:
There is no "standard" aspect ratio in photography.

But if there WERE to be one it should be:

SQRT(2):1 so that enlargements would fit ISO 216 "A" paper sizes.

I disagree. It should be 1.6 (like newer computer monitors) or,
ideally, the golden ratio: 1.618

No standard paper is cut to 1.6 or the Golden Mean in various sizes.
(although legal is close - but only at that one size).

The point is that the standard "A" paper sizes are all proportional at
SQRT(2):1 regardless of size which makes re-sizing between paper sizes
much easier.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

3:2 (9x6 centimeters and its half frame 6x4.5cm called "645")

4:3 (not sure where it comes from, but it is also the "standard"
for the four-thirds format).

6x4.5 obviously is 3:4

Lourens

Lourens Smak wrote:
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

3:2 (9x6 centimeters and its half frame 6x4.5cm called "645")

4:3 (not sure where it comes from, but it is also the "standard"
for the four-thirds format).

6x4.5 obviously is 3:4

Come to the front of the class for your gold star Lourens...

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Alan Browne wrote:
Lourens Smak wrote:
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

3:2 (9x6 centimeters and its half frame 6x4.5cm called "645")

4:3 (not sure where it comes from, but it is also the
"standard" for the four-thirds format).

6x4.5 obviously is 3:4

Come to the front of the class for your gold star Lourens...

Except that's backwards....

G

David

David J Taylor wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Lourens Smak wrote:
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

3:2 (9x6 centimeters and its half frame 6x4.5cm called "645")

4:3 (not sure where it comes from, but it is also the
"standard" for the four-thirds format).

6x4.5 obviously is 3:4

Come to the front of the class for your gold star Lourens...

Except that's backwards....

Not from where I sit...

G


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Alan Browne wrote:

There is no "standard" aspect ratio in photography.

But if there WERE to be one it should be:

SQRT(2):1 so that enlargements would fit ISO 216 "A" paper sizes.

*BZZZT*
It should be the (image) circle.
Unless your lenses have rectangular front elements ...

The circle would allow you to
- correct any image tilt without the need to crop.
- choose any ratio at all and still use the largest possible area
your lens offers, from square to thin panoramic views.
- there's no difference between 'landscape' and 'portrait' during
shooting, you can choose that during development.

-Wolfgang