Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Xpan vs 6x17 vs 6x12
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 10:51:58 -0700
References: <B724B3A4.E062%apbbeijing@yahoo.com>

apbbeijing wrote:
> 
> Peter
> 
> That is very interesting. I know how impressive the 6x17 images are -
> wonderful as transparencies especially. I know some agencies dupe up all the
> 35mm panoramics onto 6x17 because they sell better but of course the quality
> is not to same. Printing 6x17 is troublesome in most places.
> 
><Snip> 

I just checked the website of Panoramic Images, Ltd. (which is in Chicago)
                                                                                
         
http://www.panoramicimages.com/home.html

	their hundreds of clickable thumbnails are all in the 6x17 format horizontal.
But a cover page layout showed a 6x12 and some verticals.

A 6x12 will fit in an 4x5 enlarger.
A 6x12 to me is still a rectangle and not a strip that you read left to right.
(Or right to left)
a 6x12 is close to what you see when you go to the movies. I like that, I'm used
to that. It feels right to me.
A 6x12 gives you 6 on a roll of 120, heck you can bracket!
a 6x12 is an antiformat. It looks more original that the typical formats, 6x17
being one of them.

To print a 6x12 you can cut paper in half but if you stick to using a full sheet
it looks pretty good.
You don't have to have a second stack for a separate panoramic portfolio.
I get 1/2 (one over two) when i use the 60x30 mask with my Hasselblad which i do
often so i have some experience with it's mise en page.

When Hasselblad came out with its "medium format" 35mm panoramic point and shoot
the XPAN i was surprised that the format turned out to me 24x65. The Hasselblad
square itself is 55!
and 24x55 which is what you get when you use a mask with the Mamiya 6 is a good
step wider than 6x12!
A 2.25 aspect ration instead of 2. (6x17 is 2.83 as i figure it).
They wanted the XPAN to compete against i guess the very popular 6x17 format, a
6x17 point and shoot! What a mistake. 
When they make one which gives me more on a roll I'll think about getting one.
Like somewhere between 24x48 and 24x55!

I'd love a Hasselblad back which gives me 24 60x30's on a 120 roll!
When i shoot 630 with my 645 I'm flushing a tad more silver down the drain than
I'd care to and getting 16 on a roll. But it's not a bad deal all in all the
contacts look ok.


Mark Rabiner

Portland, Oregon
USA

http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/

In reply to: Message from apbbeijing <apbbeijing@yahoo.com> (Re: [Leica] Xpan vs 6x17)