You can get 3-by-5, 4-by-6, 5-by-7, and 8-by-10 prints, but none of those have the same aspect ratio, meaning all of them will crop my 2-by-3 images in a different way.
2007-02-24 04:51:43 · 3 answers · asked by Richard Crowley 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Photography
Different aspect ratios were developed based on whatever the inventor/engineers thought looked or worked best on the device they were developing. There were no standards, so they did whatever they wanted.
It started with cameras. There have been many aspect ratios used in more than a century of cameras. Then the 4:3 ratio for tv's appeared. Then computers used that. Then digital cameras used it too, but that made them different than 35mm film cameras. Now all are changing again.
It's frustrating! (But a fact of life...)
Good Luck
2007-02-25 02:04:29 · answer #1 · answered by fredshelp 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The sizes you mentioned are nominal sizes: meaning if you took out a ruler and measured a 5x7 photo, it wouldn't be 5"x7". It's incredibly annoying, but true. The reason they are called that way is because no one can remember all the different fractions. Most people use a photo-paper cutter, that has templates for the nominal sizes on it.
Recently with the wide spread use of digital SLR cameras, the aspect ratios have been simplified. Now the 35mm equivalent is a 2:3 ratio. Medium format is 3:4. And large format is 4:5.
2007-02-24 05:21:20 · answer #2 · answered by Jesse 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The pictures were sized to fit standard picture frames, made to the inch, not to conform to the golden ratio (1.61803399) or any other standard. Until recently with HDTV screens I doubt one person in a hundred could have told you the ratio for TV or 35mm film (1.33:1) . 2x3 (1:1.5) doesn't match much of anything, does it?
2007-02-24 05:03:46 · answer #3 · answered by Mike1942f 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋