- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: Some thoughts related to my Gallery comments
> This is silly. Just because a piece of paper is 8x10
gement ."
Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Collin Brendemuehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 1:57 PM
Subject: Some thoughts related to my Gallery comments
> 24x36 is a 2:3 ratio.
> Unfortunately an 8x10 is not all
Shel,
I used the paper size as a way of conveying the extent of the problem, not as a
standard for composition.
My basic premise, more concisely stated, is: Shoot to get the content you want,
irregardless of resulting print dimensions. That's a matter I don't find shallow at
all.
Collin
-
This is silly. Just because a piece of paper is 8x10 doesn't require
that the final print fill the paper. And while 8x10 seems to be
something of a "standard", I believe that other sizes are standard in
other countries, like 8.5x11 ... iac, there's no reason that the
photographer must use standa
First, making the comments was fun. You're welcome.
One of the reasons that I mentioned cropping
for several of the shots is because of a habit
I see many photographers getting into -- shooting
for the film format, not for the result.
We try to fill the frame, letting the camera
determine what s
5 matches
Mail list logo
