Hi Stan The problem you present is one of the reasons I don't agree with the "get it exact in the camera" philosophy. My theory is that a lot of that type of thinking was a result of technology limitations of historic days. There was a time when the only thing most people could make from a large format negative was a contact print. More recently, many of us shot transparency film. You exposed and framed to get it exact in the camera because the original image was the only image.
Today, especially with digital, the image you capture on the sensor is only one step in the processing chain. When you don't know the final use (and there may be many) you need to shoot pretty loose to give you freedom to crop the final image. I felt the same way when I shot B&W 35mm negative film. You might want an 8x10 enlargement, a 5x7 or Square to more easily fit a printed book page and something along a 16:9 ratio to be sent to your TV screen. None of those are the same aspect ratio as your 2x3 viewfinder or original image. When you don't know what your going to do with the final image, shoot loose and crop later. One of the cameras I use has an option to project guidelines for different aspect ratios on the viewfinder image. I seldom use the feature because I usually don't know what aspect ratio I need for the final image. I use the full image size capability of the camera and shoot loose. gs George Sinos -------------------- www.GeorgesPhotos.net www.GeorgeSinos.com On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Stan Halpin <s...@stans-photography.info> wrote: > Rick Wormer recently posted a very nice PESO: > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=17505433&size=lg > > Comments he has received so far mention the good composition. I totally agree > - it is a boffo shot as presented. > > However, viewing it quickly brought to mind some mild struggles I have been > having. The recent workshop I attended yielded several shots I have been > motivated to print, and I have started layout of a Blurb book based on that > week's shots. The problem I am having is that many of my compositions, as > seen through the viewfinder and as captured by the sensor, and as viewed on > my monitor, are just about exactly the way I want them. But the format is not > an 8x10 nor 11x14 nor 13x17. So I need to print with too wide margins top or > bottom. Same problem with Blurb layouts. Looking at Rick's image, I cannot > see how he would be able to print the image in any standard format; any > cropping on the sides would damage/destroy his composition. > > Paper can be trimmed, mats and frames can be custom cut. But it is still a > nuisance. I would love to have firmware in the camera that would show the > viewing area with an 4x5 ratio (or other selectable ratio) partial mask. Many > P&S cameras have a selectable format ratio when taking the photo; I wouldn't > want that. But if I am thinking "this shot could make a nice print", I would > like a viewfinder reminder of the area(s) that would correspond to print > format ratios. If I decide on a different presentation mode later, I would > still have the full-frame image to work with, unlike with the P&S approach. > > stan > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
