Posted by Larry Gloth on June 17, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Up to this point I haven't done much printing and mainly have processed photos for the web. In doing this, I generally crop an image without regard to final size, just what looks best to my eye. This creates images with odd dimensions. Not a problem for posting on the web but recently I've had the need to print some shots out and this creates a dilemna as I'm not real experienced with the process.
I know that I can go to an experienced printer like Mark Hudon and he can print to any size but then there are standard framing issues and people requesting the photos may not want odd sizes. Also, if I need something quick, the local photolab prints to standard sizes.
Do most people crop to certain dimensions or not at all? Case by case, or do you just not worry about it?
And then there's upsizing, etc.
Any advice to simplify things and clear up the confusion is appreciated.
Posted by Zack Schnepf on June 17, 2008 at 10:57 PM
I used to have the same issues you do, and it wasn't a problem till I started getting more print orders. Last year I went to standard sizes only for all new work, and went back and reworked old images as well. I matte my own prints so I developed my own standard print sizes, but the final matte sizes will fit standard frame sizes like 11x14, 16x20, 22x28, and 30x40.
It has greatly simplified printing, although it did take a lot of work to setup initially.
Larry, film or sensor size was never intended to fit paper sizes. No matter what aspect ratio you shoot, it will not fit all paper sizes. Mainly, I shoot, crop and frame for the photo, paper size and "common" frame size be damned.
Rick Lundh, on the other hand crops for more common frame sizes. At shows we've done together I've seen him use that as a selling point to good advantage.
All in all, I won't crop my art to fit the frame but it is a difficult problem.
But, ya know, if they want to go buy a K-Mart frame, then maybe they should go buy a K-Mart photo also.
It is a maddening problem, isn't it? Sensor size, paper size, frame size... couldn't these people have gotten together at some point....
To some extent, I agree with Mark's last statement - modifying the art to fit the frame doesn't seem right. But, when custom framing is SO much more expensive than standard framing, it comes down to what your priorities are - sticking to you artistic convictions, or appealing to the broader audience who won't often consider custom framing for a 16x20 image.
I have the same approach as Zack - it's a good compromise, and flexible. For most images, I crop to standard sizes/ratios if it makes sense for the image (and most of the times it's fine). If an image just can't work well that way, then providing your own matting gives you flexibility to customize the print size while sticking with standard frame sizes.
Posted by Marc Dilley on June 18, 2008 at 10:02 AM
I had 20 of my images matted and framed to hang in a local coffee shop. Each image was cropped the way I darned well pleased, not a standard, and framing was not a problem with the custom frame shop in Wenatchee. I have sold three copies of what's hanging in the bistro, and again, I've had no problems with the frame shop matting and framing the prints. The shop cut the frames so they were perfectly proportioned relative to the mattes. They look fine.
How do you guys compose for a 16x20 frame? If the photo file was enlarged to that size the print would be 16x24. Two inches on either side or four inches on one side. How the heck do you look through your viewfinder and compose for that aspect ratio?
I definitely don't frequently compose for a specific size or crop ratio in the field: I agree, that would be tough.
I generally try to fill the frame, and most of my images from my DSLR are an uncropped 2:3 ratio. If I do crop, I first try to crop to a standard ratio (keep it 2:3 or make it 4:5); if that doesn't work, then I crop as necessary to make the image work and reconcile myself to the fact that custom matting and/or framing would be necessary for that print.
I really don't understand why people have a big problem with this.
I have standardized my frames to 14 x 18 and 20 x 24. If my image is 12 x 18 I mat it for 20 x 24. If my image is 12 x 15 I mat it for 20 x 24. If my image is 12 x 16 I mat it for 20 x 24.
Do you sort of get the idea here? And if I printed larger the next standard would be 24 x 36.
I also never cover my image area with a matte. I use the paper border and cover the paper border with the matte allowing for 1/4 to 3/8 from the image to the matte opening. By adding a 3 pixel stroke to the outside of the image, it also provide another visual relief on top of the reliefs the double matting provides.
Really there should be no issue with cropping at all. No one ever gave the rules that the borders of the matte should be the same. In fact the way I matte and frame only two borders are ever the same dimension due to bottom weighting my mattes. It works very well for me, your mileage may very.
Mark,
It really makes the sense of frame inventory sound. It may take the actual cutting of mattes a bit longer, setting the different margin dimensions but look at the following as an example.
If you are doing a show and someone likes an image but doesn't like the frame, say okay, remove it and then place it in the frame they like. Consistency of size makes the inventory economical. By also buying the same size frames, many vendors give quantity discounts, thus adding to the bottom line.
Discussion
12 repliesI know that I can go to an experienced printer like Mark Hudon and he can print to any size but then there are standard framing issues and people requesting the photos may not want odd sizes. Also, if I need something quick, the local photolab prints to standard sizes.
Do most people crop to certain dimensions or not at all? Case by case, or do you just not worry about it?
And then there's upsizing, etc.
Any advice to simplify things and clear up the confusion is appreciated.
It has greatly simplified printing, although it did take a lot of work to setup initially.
Rick Lundh, on the other hand crops for more common frame sizes. At shows we've done together I've seen him use that as a selling point to good advantage.
All in all, I won't crop my art to fit the frame but it is a difficult problem.
But, ya know, if they want to go buy a K-Mart frame, then maybe they should go buy a K-Mart photo also.
To some extent, I agree with Mark's last statement - modifying the art to fit the frame doesn't seem right. But, when custom framing is SO much more expensive than standard framing, it comes down to what your priorities are - sticking to you artistic convictions, or appealing to the broader audience who won't often consider custom framing for a 16x20 image.
I have the same approach as Zack - it's a good compromise, and flexible. For most images, I crop to standard sizes/ratios if it makes sense for the image (and most of the times it's fine). If an image just can't work well that way, then providing your own matting gives you flexibility to customize the print size while sticking with standard frame sizes.
I generally try to fill the frame, and most of my images from my DSLR are an uncropped 2:3 ratio. If I do crop, I first try to crop to a standard ratio (keep it 2:3 or make it 4:5); if that doesn't work, then I crop as necessary to make the image work and reconcile myself to the fact that custom matting and/or framing would be necessary for that print.
I have standardized my frames to 14 x 18 and 20 x 24. If my image is 12 x 18 I mat it for 20 x 24. If my image is 12 x 15 I mat it for 20 x 24. If my image is 12 x 16 I mat it for 20 x 24.
Do you sort of get the idea here?
I also never cover my image area with a matte. I use the paper border and cover the paper border with the matte allowing for 1/4 to 3/8 from the image to the matte opening. By adding a 3 pixel stroke to the outside of the image, it also provide another visual relief on top of the reliefs the double matting provides.
Really there should be no issue with cropping at all. No one ever gave the rules that the borders of the matte should be the same. In fact the way I matte and frame only two borders are ever the same dimension due to bottom weighting my mattes. It works very well for me, your mileage may very.
It really makes the sense of frame inventory sound. It may take the actual cutting of mattes a bit longer, setting the different margin dimensions but look at the following as an example.
If you are doing a show and someone likes an image but doesn't like the frame, say okay, remove it and then place it in the frame they like. Consistency of size makes the inventory economical. By also buying the same size frames, many vendors give quantity discounts, thus adding to the bottom line.