Framing Pictures with Printing in Mind

[Mills]

When printing jpegs, I assume there is a size (shape) difference. You must frame the shot differently to allow for cropping. Is this eliminated with RAW? Am I just missing something stupid on the jpeg side? Don't print that much but had some perfect shots ruined when printed because they did not fit 8x10 or 16x20. Sounds dumb. I guess I was not thinking properly.

[PacAce]

May sound dumb but it really isn't. This is an issue with anybody who does prints, especially if they do prints of different sizes. Like in my case, the 10D will take pictures that are perfect for 8x12 prints without having to crop anything out. However, not too many labs offer 8x12 prints although they do offer 8x10. However, if I wanted a 4x6, then I'd be in like flint.

The thing with any camera, not just digital, is that they are fixed in their aspect ratio whereas different size print formats have different print aspect ratios. And that, no matter how hard you try to compose in-camera, will always lead to some type of cropping for one or more of those print sizes. Alas, 'tis the fact of print life. :?

The best thing to do, if you want to make sure your photo will fit on any format print size, is to leave enough cropping space around your image edges. That way, you won't be cutting into the actual image you wanted.

And this is the case whether you are shooting RAW or JPEG.

[Mills]

Makes Sense. Now I will take that into account. Better take a closer look at the output from the Mark II also. Thanks Very Much.

[robertwgross]

I work with a guy who shoots a medium format Mamiya for weddings.

When he looks through the viewfinder, he *knows* what would have to be cropped off to fit 8x10 or any other size. In other words, his eye can judge the aspect of the active subject within whatever the viewfinder shows. Of course, that comes from shooting good cameras over 25 years.

---Bob Gross---