[rollei_list] Re: S2 format
- From: Mark Rabiner <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:31:20 -0400
The golden rectangle is not commonly used but I use it often.
Its semi panoramic. Quite skinny. Half way to 612 or 1 over 2.
A 5x7 is close to 2x3 35mm film the golden rectangle is very close to 5x8.
An 8x10 cut in half.
I think its 5x8.09 exactly
When I'm cropping in Adobe Bridge often I start out with the 2x3 setting
then modify it to 2.3.236
It gives you a bit of a sweep.
The Parthenon.
mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mark William Rabiner
> From: John Wild <JWild@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:46:58 +0100
> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Conversation: [rollei_list] Re: S2 format
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: S2 format
>
> I thought the 'ideal' ratio is based on the 'Golden section' ie 1:1.618....
> Also there is another special ratio of 1:?2 or 1:1.414.... None of the formats
> conform to either of these special ratios.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:rollei_list-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Aaron Reece
> Sent: 24 September 2008 15:00
> To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: S2 format
>
>
> Personally, I detest the 3x2 aspect ratio of conventional 35mm still cameras.
> I find it unnatural to work with in comparison to 5x4 and square formats, and
> the justification that it matches the human eye's field of view falls flat
> unless you view all photographs from a distance equal to the focal length of
> the lens that took the picture, through one eye naturally. This red herring is
> even more nonsensical in reference to vertical compositions.
>
> Another a.m. rant from the desk of . . .
> Aaron Reece
>
>
>
> On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:33 AM, Jan Decher wrote:
>
>> Why not? The 24 x 36 mm format was an accident of history (based on
>> 35mm cine film) spearheaded by Leitz Wetzlar. So why not invent a new
>> standard given the freedom of digital? May be cost-saving for certain
>> optical desings too..
>
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
