Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/02/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Square format
From: ricc at mindspring.com (Ric Carter)
Date: Tue Feb 26 15:25:08 2008
References: <200802261007.m1QA7ZIr037742@mail.imagecraft.com> <47C3C9BB.25963.342BC6@leica.rcmckee.com>
 
I don't know, or have forgotten, the origins of our current "standard"  
formats for photos. It seems that 6X6 cm is the only "common" square  
standard.

Did this perhaps come from the difficulty of rotating cameras to go  
from horizontal to vertical?

While it might waste silver, the square could easily let you punch out  
the 2:3 ratio (4X6 or 6X4) as a vertical or horizontal without having  
to try to tip your TLR over on its side. The old folders were much  
more convenient vertical than horizontal, also.

After all, a square composition will end up wasting silver on the  
print. I don;t remember ever seeing square format printing paper. It  
certainly was not common.

Ric Carter
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/ricc/


On Feb 26, 2008, at 9:11 AM, R. Clayton McKee wrote:

> For me the decision was pragmatic - I've never 'seen' square photos
> well, so a 6x6 was a bigger heavier 645 that cost more to run. 6x7
> suits my eye better.
Replies: Reply from leica at screengang.com (Didier Ludwig) ([Leica] Square format)
Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] Square format)
Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] Square format)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Square format)
 In reply to: Message from richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Wow, are the Mamiya as cool as the HASSELbald?)
Message from leica at rcmckee.com (R. Clayton McKee) ([Leica] Wow, are the Mamiya as cool as the HASSELbald?)