Print size.

[baachitraka]

56x70mm is rather close to 6x7cm, why is it a surprise.

 

[darkosaric]

I think we are splitting hairs - but in a fun way; maybe not the most useful way - but is it raining outside here, so why not :

7/6 = 1,167
6,9/5,6 = 1,23

I just checked the wikipedia site about format sizes: and they have picture that suggest that 6x7 format is 6x7cm (in the same proportion with 35mm format).

 

[georg16nik]

Well, I am one of those it seems . I know that square are 56x56mm, but in some cameras I get 6x6 cm, so I was thinking that 6x7 are 6x7 cm.

You've heard how the 135 format is 36x24. Most of the early Leicas are ~ 38x24.
Same difference can be seen in the Voigtlander 6x9 folders (till 1950's) - the gate is larger.

 

[darkosaric]

You've heard how the 135 format is 36x24. Most of the early Leicas are ~ 38x24.

Thanks for the info, this is new to me as well . I think that there were some early nikons that were 24x34?
Also to add to confusion (totally irrelevant to initial discussion, but anyhow) - some of my cameras gives negatives some parts of mm bigger than 36mm, and some less. I notice this when I make prints 30x40cm, and negatives from M3 and F3 are not the same size. Also once I had some wide angle lens for that was giving even bigger negatives than usual (I think it was some nikkor 20mm).

 

[Roger Cole]

No, your math is good. They are not the same.

And again I post this link http://xkcd.com/386/

As posted above, the actual frame sizes are close enough to the same proportions for all practical purposes as to make no discernible difference. They both basically enlarge to 8x10 without cropping.

 

[georg16nik]

Thanks for the info, this is new to me as well . I think that there were some early nikons that were 24x34?
Also to add to confusion (totally irrelevant to initial discussion, but anyhow) - some of my cameras gives negatives some parts of mm bigger than 36mm, and some less. I notice this when I make prints 30x40cm, and negatives from M3 and F3 are not the same size. Also once I had some wide angle lens for that was giving even bigger negatives than usual (I think it was some nikkor 20mm).

Yeah, with the 20mm Russar I got less than 1mm spacing between frames in my Leica I and 1,5mm in IIIc/IIIf.
The shutter cage got remodeled in the later Barnacks and used molded aluminum. M followed this cheap design.
The early models used brass sheets + brass screws and the film gate was cut by press.

 

[MattKrull]

My 4” x 5” Riteway film holders have a format window of 95.4mm x 120.0mm for an aspect ratio to two decimal places of 1.26.

My Mamiya RZ67 format is 56mm x 69.5mm, which gives an aspect ratio to two decimal places of 1.24. Other makes or models of 6 x 7cm cameras or 6 x 7cm film backs might use slightly different dimensions. The same differences for 4” x 5” film holders might be seen among different makes or models.

For most practical purposes these two formats are close enough to each other to consider them the same.

Thank you. For some reason I expected the long edge to be shortened in proportion to the short edge (ie keeping the 6x7 ratio, so at 56mm x 65mm).

 

[mporter012]

Clearly, there are no rules here. One thing I've discovered is that the only way to get rid of the 'dirty borders' is to crop ever so slightly, even if wanting to print full frame. Correct?

 

[georg16nik]

Clearly, there are no rules here. One thing I've discovered is that the only way to get rid of the 'dirty borders' is to crop ever so slightly, even if wanting to print full frame. Correct?

'dirty borders'?
It ain't full frame if you crop - no?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I use different aspect ratios for different types of subject matter.

Portraits: 3:4 or square
Landscape: 1:1.5 or square

The 3:4 works out so well for rectangular negatives, because it leaves a NICE 1" clean white border all around the image on 8x10 and 11x14 paper, for 6x8 and 9x12 inch prints. With 16x20 paper it's technically 13.5x18 inches, so the border is a little thicker on the long dimension. Not a big deal.

Then, of course, I crop as I feel like it, and sometimes I crop rectangular negatives to square, including 35mm, and square negatives to rectangular. There really shouldn't be any rules to follow unless we personally find the results pleasing by doing so.

Just do what looks good to you, and let others worry about it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Then, of course, I crop as I feel like it, and sometimes I crop rectangular negatives to square, including 35mm, and square negatives to rectangular. There really shouldn't be any rules to follow unless we personally find the results pleasing by doing so.

Just do what looks good to you, and let others worry about it.

He gets it.

 

[scheimfluger_77]

He gets it.

I second that!

 

[baachitraka]

With 135 negative I personally go with

Paper size: 13x18cm -> Print size: 10x15(2:3) with 1.5cm borders.
Paper size: 18x24cm -> Print size: 12x18(2:3) with 3cm borders.

I can also prints to the size of 10x15cm on 20x25cm if I need 5cm borders. Often I feel this is wasting of paper so my choice is 12x18cm on 18x24cm.

and with 6x6 there are many choices but I personally print them inbetween 16x16cm - 20x20cm.