• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

What do you do about aspect ratio?

I agree with John that cutting your own mats, which is what I do, will pay for the cost of equipment pretty quickly, particularly if you were to sell the finished product. Plus you get to choose your own colors and quality of the mats to suit your taste/need. If you do not want to go that route, perhaps a floating type frame might be an option. The trimmed print can be dry-mounted on a rag board of suitably larger size and put in a frame with spacers to keep it away from the glass.

:Niranjan.
 
That's not a bad idea, Terry. I may give that a try first and then graduate to cutting real mats if all goes well.
 
One of the purposes of a proper matt is to distance the photo surface from the frame's glass. Direct contact with the glass can cause problems down the line.
 
Lots of big cities now have do-it-yourself frame centers which allow you to order appropriately sized pre-cut mats from their centralized computer-controlled centers at very reasonable prices, along with custom lengths of moulding or even entire frames at a discount. All you do is the final assembly. I prefer to make my own frames and even mill my own mouldings; but not everyone is a woodworker or has an appropriate shop. But this can itself be fun, and certainly saves a lot of money. Big art stores sometimes offer classes. Most of those discount variety store or drugstore frames are junky anyway.
 
I used to shoot weddings, using mostly 6x6 negatives.
The professional lab I used worked with a common in the industry system where the photographer was given a supply of different pre-cut standard negative masks that one chose to match the aspect ratio of a desired standard frame size and cropping that suited the image - the individual negative was taped in place on the mask, re-sleeved and then sent with instructions to the lab. High quality, inexpensive machine prints resulted, which were then sold at a healthy markup to the customer.
Why is this relevant to the OP's question? Because one quickly learned to visualize appropriate, end result cropping when one took the photograph, and to construct one's images accordingly in camera.
That being said, a mat cutter is a really wonderful investment.
In a pinch, with a terrible photo, but for $5, https://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/art/d/decatur-photography-darkroom-printing/6907428671.html
This isn't a bad deal: https://www.dickblick.com/products/logan-301-1-compact-classic-mat-cutter/
 
When I prints 35mm film in actual 2:3 ratio as I usually do, and small, onto 8x10 paper, I generally mount it on a much bigger mat with a wider margin than I allow even big prints. This isn't to make the final framed picture seem bigger than it really is, but to isolate that tiny image from surrounding visual competition and tempt people to look at it more closely. I might even mount a horizontal 5x7-ish image on a big 16X20 vertical mount, seemingly the wrong orientation - but it works visually! I always leave more mat space below an image than above it. Equilateral margins, the same on all sides, were invented by
lazy commercial framers who just didn't want to bother re-adjusting their matcutter settings.
 
I agree with your sentiment about composing in camera, and I may end up with a mat cutter. Visualizing in camera often doesn't help for subjects you can't control, though. If the best composition of the subject calls for a 3:2 ratio and another equally compelling angle cannot be obtained, you have to distort the image or compromise your composition. I would rather have it not fit than choose either of those options.

Also, some photo opportunities exist for a very brief amount of time.
 
Ariston said:
If the best composition of the subject calls for a 3:2 ratio and another equally compelling angle cannot be obtained, you have to distort the image or compromise your composition.
Click to expand...
No, you need to choose the third option - modify your presentation options.
If you are printing digitally, change your canvas size, and work toward a custom mat.
It may be the case that you can buy cheaply replacement pre-cut 3:2 mats that fit into standard frame sizes - just have a few on hand for when they are needed.
 
Are the mats cut in one piece? ie. big piece of card with a photograph sized hole in the middle.
 
+1
 
RalphLambrecht said:
never bothered me; I print full-frame onto 8x10 or 11x14 paper.
Click to expand...

MattKing said:
...
Why is this relevant to the OP's question? Because one quickly learned to visualize appropriate, end result cropping when one took the photograph, and to construct one's images accordingly in camera.
...
Click to expand...

I crop before I take the photograph and print the full frame. Sometimes I save the excess paper for test strips.
 
tezzasmall said:
Yes.

I have never heard of a mat coming in more than one piece... Has anyone?!?!?

Terry S
Click to expand...

I've seen a sort of art deco matting style where the mats were made from edge strips and corner squares, and built up with depth and overhang.
Corner squares were slightly larger than the strips were wide, so each square would project into the opening.
- One artist even tried to sell it as 'eco-friendly', as it meant the strips and squares could be cut from material without having a part from the centre that you throw away. However I suspect that guy might just not have been able to cut square edges out of a piece of mat board...
 
MattKing said:
It may be the case that you can buy cheaply replacement pre-cut 3:2 mats that fit into standard frame sizes - just have a few on hand for when they are needed.
Click to expand...
If anyone here knows a place that sells cheap 3:2 mats that are pre-cut to fit standard frames, please let me know. That would be ideal, but I haven't found it. Framing materials are pricey. I must be looking in the wrong places.
 
You could buy disassembled wood frames from a local frame shop, they will sell you the "chop" so all you have to do is glue the corners which isn't very hard. its been a while since i did it, but i believe it is sold by the foot. you can buy the glass from them too it comes in a big cardboard crate depending on the size. you could buy a framer's tool ( i think that is what they call it ) and wire "brads" to secure your print in the frame, and a spool of braided wire and some eyelits to make the hanging wire. if you do it yourself it costs peanuts compared to having someone else do it. its not very hard. and if you want to try it first to see if you want to do it on your own the "frame it yourself" sorts of places drew mentioned let you do it on your own with supervision .. again, its not hard.
 
Last edited:
Ariston said:
If anyone here knows a place that sells cheap 3:2 mats that are pre-cut to fit standard frames, please let me know. That would be ideal, but I haven't found it. Framing materials are pricey. I must be looking in the wrong places.
Click to expand...
Try Frame Destination's website. I just did a trial run of six mats with an 8"x10" outer dimension and a 5"x7.5" window (using their custom sizing option), and with shipping to your location it would be about $31.00.
Their website offers a large combination of alternatives. They used to be advertisers here.
 
Ariston said:
If anyone here knows a place that sells cheap 3:2 mats that are pre-cut to fit standard frames, please let me know. That would be ideal, but I haven't found it. Framing materials are pricey. I must be looking in the wrong places.
Click to expand...
You can try Michaels, or Blick. I've driven by a Flax in Atlanta when visiting my daughter. It's north of Ansley
park, I think. They may be worth a phone call. I use frame destination for chops but get lites as well as board locally. I wouldn't hesitate to order pre-cut mats from them if cutting my own were not so much more cost effective. Besides dressing it up, using a mat to isolate the image from even the paper border, changes it. To me it has a kind of calming effect and helps me decide if I can improve a print and how.
 
I print 35 mm at 7x5 onto 10x8 paper. That's almost full frame with a 1.5" margin all the way round which looks very balanced. Its a bit of a waste of paper but it looks nice, especially in an album.
 
With a 4-blade easel you can print a clean image with borders of your choice to the format of your choice (even off center) on any paper large enough. For prints I plan to exhibit or sell, the option of a wide border reduces the risk of damage during handling. While paper is not cheap, the time and effort to produce and present a good print is greater.

The 2x3 ratio (35mm, 6x9) is a bit hard done by in off the shelf paper and print sizes. Unless you work in 4x5 or 8x10, there is not a lot that matches. So make it a feature and either crop the image, or mat the print.
 
I find the comments about 'compose in camera' so that the aspect ratio issue goes away to be intriguing (to me, 'puzzling'). I have 55 years in photography, with film formats from 16mm to APS to 135 to 645 to 4x5, so I am well accustomed to the issue of film frame vs. enlargement aspect ratio. What I have found is that the problem never goes away!!! Consider this...

1. Every film format is not identical in aspect ratio, in fact you cannot find two brands of 645 film format camera that match!
Pentax 41.5 x 56 1.35
Bronica 42.5 x 55 1.29
Mamiya 43 x 56 1.30
4x5 92x120 1.30​

2. Depending upon the final size print which is needed for a specific situation, the aspect ratio of the final print VARIES...and if you print the same photo to different sizes for your client, you do not have a SINGLE print aspect ratio to deal with!
4x5 1.25
5x7 1.4
8x10 1.25
8x12 1.5
11x14 1.27
13x19 1.46
14x17 1.21
16x20 1.25
16x24 1.5
​
3. Can anyone find a camera format that MATCHES exactly the print format? The sole exception is 135 matching 8x12 proportions. And I dare say THAT happened in the 1960's as a result of the popularism of the 135 format and led to the popularity of the compact SLR (Canon AE-1) and public demand for prints of that aspect ratio...before then you could only order 8x10 prints from 135 format!
And you can compose so perfectly that you can precisely capture for a 1.46 vs. 1.4 aspect ratio print?!

4. Finally, even if you have a camera and a print format which are ideally matched to one another, it is NOT always that the scene itself is so cooperative! I find that I am often cropping off some distracting element in the photo so as to better focus the viewer's attention on the key subject, defeating the 'compose in camera' ... perhaps due to the inability to move the camera to a different position or perhaps the ideal compositition just does NOT fit one of standard print aspect ratios listed above.
 
Last edited:
It's too bad US stores don't sell alternative paper sizes that are available in Europe. The 7.5x9 paper was always a favourite for printing 35mm images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register