Any other photo type besides portrait or landscape?
G Owen
Is there any specific photography term for an image that is neither
portrait nor landscape but perfectly square?
Please reply via email
Regards
Greg
SPECTRUM
with content. And also what this has to do with darkroom practices
which is what this group is for . Care to enlighten us ?
Regards,
John S. Douglas Photographer, webmaster & darkroom wizard !
Fine wedding and portrait photography Black & White our specialty.
Spectrum Photographic Inc. http://www.spectrumphoto.com
Bringing the fine art of photography to your wedding !
Mikko Oksalahti
<37752b95...@news.cybercomm.net>...
> Unfortunately I fail to understand what the shape has to do
>with content. And also what this has to do with darkroom practices
>which is what this group is for . Care to enlighten us ?
>
>Regards,
>
>John S. Douglas
>
><gre...@frenchdoor.co.za> wrote:
>
>>Is there any specific photography term for an image that is neither
>>portrait nor landscape but perfectly square?
>
I was fooled too at first but then I understood that portrait and landscape
don't refer to content/subject of the image, they refer to the image format.
Funny misinterpretation.
Just to be a smartarse, I cannot help myself to answer:
The perfectly square image format is sometimes called a Narrowed Golden
Rectangle (classic term) or a Semi Double Square (e.g. in Japan).
Mikko "Sorry. End of this thread." Oksalahti
William Hopkins
SPECTRUM (SPECTRUM) <spec...@spectrumphoto.com> wrote in message
news:37752b95...@news.cybercomm.net...
> Unfortunately I fail to understand what the shape has to do
> with content. And also what this has to do with darkroom practices
> which is what this group is for . Care to enlighten us ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Fine wedding and portrait photography Black & White our specialty.
> Spectrum Photographic Inc. http://www.spectrumphoto.com
> Bringing the fine art of photography to your wedding !
>
>
>
William Hopkins
selection on Epson photo printers. Wrong newsgrp.........Bill
Alan Tutt
form of art where one of two dimensions is longer than the second.
Roger Cole
"landscape" were used to refer to vertical and horizontal photo
orientations long before digital imaging. Computer use just picked up
the terms, which is by no means exclusive to Epson.
In any case, sometimes one will see round photographs. I recall an
article in PT showing some photos made by using Mamiya RB 6x7 lenses
on a 5x7 camera. Since the coverage was, intentionally, less than the
format, a round image resulted on a rectangular negative. It sounds
just a "cutesy" thing to do, but when I really looked at them the
images had an unusual impact and appeal, easier to see than describe.
At least, I found them interesting and appealing.
I see no reason why one could not do the same thing with a round mask
on the enlarging easel (making it a darkroom topic) except that you
wouldn't have the advantage of seeing the round image while composing.
Roger Cole
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 09:37:04 -0500, "William Hopkins"
<whop...@netins.net> wrote:
>Post on rec.photo digital
SPECTRUM
of people will think that the darkroom is some kind of a computer
gadget ? !
Regards,
John S. Douglas Photographer, webmaster & darkroom wizard !
Fine wedding and portrait photography Black & White our specialty.
Spectrum Photographic Inc. http://www.spectrumphoto.com
Bringing the fine art of photography to your wedding !
Glenn Stewart (Arizona)
> It isn't exclusively a digital term. The terms "portrait" and
> "landscape" were used to refer to vertical and horizontal photo
> orientations long before digital imaging. Computer use just picked up
> the terms, which is by no means exclusive to Epson.
> In any case, sometimes one will see round photographs. I recall an
> article in PT showing some photos made by using Mamiya RB 6x7 lenses
> on a 5x7 camera. Since the coverage was, intentionally, less than the
> format, a round image resulted on a rectangular negative. It sounds
> just a "cutesy" thing to do, but when I really looked at them the
> images had an unusual impact and appeal, easier to see than describe.
> At least, I found them interesting and appealing.
> I see no reason why one could not do the same thing with a round mask
> on the enlarging easel (making it a darkroom topic) except that you
> wouldn't have the advantage of seeing the round image while composing.
> Roger Cole
Roger,
Oval matt boards have been used for years on portraits.
I'm still trying to figure out why people can't compose a rectangular
image in a square viewfinder and vice-versa. I constantly see posts in
the r.p.e.medium-format group asking for advice on how to compose square
photos because the poster has recently purchased a 6x6 format camera and
can't deal with the square.
Best regards,
Stew
--
Photo Web pages: http://www.inficad.com/~gstewart
UNIX: It's not just 'User-Unfriendly', it's 'Proactively User-Hostile'!
Nothing generates so much silence as confronting a person with an
undeniable truth which is contrary to that person's beliefs.
Manual cameras, Luna-Pro's and stick shifts.
Please send e-mail responses to the following address ONLY:
gste...@inficad.com E-mail responses to my Intel address will be
cheerfully ignored (Intel policy).
The opinions expressed herein are mine, not those of Intel Corporation.
James Harrington
Portrait/landscape, as it has been pointed out, when used to indicate the
orientation of a rectangle (vertical/horizontal) is *not* a photographic
term at all. The photographer's term for such a distinction is expressed
usually in dimensions only, but is sometimes expressed as vertical or
horizontal format. The dimensions would be expressed as horizontal
dimension, then vertical dimension. 8x10 is vertical format, 10x8 is
horizontal format. Many of the terms in the computer world are poorly
chosen, but it seems that portrait/landscape might have been chosen because
the author(s) didn't know themselves what vertical/horizontal meant. To a
photographer, portrait/landscape indicate content without the vaguest
reference to format. What? All portraits are vertical? All landscapes are
horizontal? It reminds me of automobile parts catalogs that now list
"driver's side" and "passenger side" because the ability to discern left and
right was lost. Regards, Jim
SPECTRUM
<pathc...@cheshire.net> wrote:
> What? All portraits are vertical?
Well is Playboy vertical or horizontal? :>)
Whatever ! I like the "landscape" !
The photography isn't bad either.
JTI
When I shot my first B&W film, computers where even bigger than my darkroom.
Unfortunately, John, I'm afraid we are getting a bit older ;-(
Jan
SPECTRUM (SPECTRUM) heeft geschreven in bericht
<377954a6...@news.cybercomm.net>...
NJFotomakr
>with content. And also what this has to do with darkroom practices
>which is what this group is for . Care to enlighten us ?
Remember,John,it's hip to be square...........
Makepeace Lake/Weymouth Furnace
Black and White Photography
Jimfinkle1
>From: SPECTRUM <spec...@spectrumphoto.com> (SPECTRUM)
>Date: Thu, 24 June 1999 02:38 PM EDT
>Message-id: <37807ad0...@news.cybercomm.net>
Well Playboy is sometimes vertical, and some times horizontal. As an example
the model could be the centerfold stretched out on her back on the beach.
Landscape (Whorezontal?).sic
Jim
Norman Strand~
I am not sure this is what you want, but my grandmother gave me some family
pictures she had taken with a turn of the century kodak camera that had
round images. She no longer had the camera. Also I have some 19th
century carte de viste photographs that the image is round on the top.
Is a square photograph portrait or landscape? My twin lens reflexes take
square pictures.
Norman Strand
This is not the opinion of intel corp.
--
Intel, Corp.
5000 W. Chandler Blvd.
Chandler, AZ 85226
Roger Cole
or 5x4, seems almost exclusively a phenomenon of the UK, at least in
regard to photography. Most US photographers, unless they are on the
internet, have never heard of a "10x8" or "5x4". I have explained that
before to US photographers on here who were snickering at a friend
across the pond. Other Europeans seemed to find it a little strange
too, though I admit it has its advantages.
And as for "driver's side" and "passenger's side" I don't think the
use of those terms has anything whatsoever to do with an inability to
discern right from left. I use those terms and I know right from left
very well. Rather, it solves the problem of whether right or left is
referring to the car as seen from the rear or the front: Is the "right
side" the right seen from inside, which would be the passenger's side
here and the driver's side there, or as seen when looking at the car
from in front, when it would be opposite? Even if such usage is
standardized some people might not be familiar with the convention.
It's like clockwise and counterclockwise instead of referring to
circular motions as right and left - the top of the circle moves one
way, the bottom the other.
Roger Cole
On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 14:02:56 -0400, "James Harrington"
<pathc...@cheshire.net> wrote:
Roger Cole
>Roger,
>
>Oval matt boards have been used for years on portraits.
>
>I'm still trying to figure out why people can't compose a rectangular
>image in a square viewfinder and vice-versa. I constantly see posts in
>the r.p.e.medium-format group asking for advice on how to compose square
>photos because the poster has recently purchased a 6x6 format camera and
>can't deal with the square.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Stew
Yes, I am familiar with those ovals. The round images in PT were
something else, not only made round in camera but also obviously
composed with that in mind. Really nice work too.
Anyway, to digress a bit, I think a lot of the inability to compose
rectangles in a square viewfinder comes from having learned on 35mm.
In 35 there is no film to spare, and people usually and mostly rightly
try to fill the frame. (Mostly rightly because it can be overdone,
even in 35. When your slide mounts obscure your subject or you have to
file your neg carriers just to include all the subject, it is MHO that
it has been ovedone!) In MF of course that is not really so much of a
concern, and in LF even more so, but a bias against cropping seems to
persist. Another possibility is the reliance on commercial
photofinishing. Those accustomed to machine prints from 35mm may have
a hard time adjusting to the idea that they or a custom lab can crop
any way they like.
This is all conjecture, of course, but it seems to make sense to me. I
guess it doesn't occur to them that if they crop an 8x10 out of a 6x6
neg they will have used the same amount of film as if they had shot on
6x4.5 to start with.
Roger Cole
John Costello
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there any specific photography term for an image that is neither
> portrait nor landscape but perfectly square?
>
>
> Regards
> Greg
Couldn't you all have said a simple "No" instead of filling the screen
with sarcastic messages? The question was certainly clear enough.
John Costello
Jim Mowreader
<gre...@frenchdoor.co.za> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any specific photography term for an image that is neither
> portrait nor landscape but perfectly square?
"Square" seems to be about as specific as I can think of.
--
--jmowreader
SPECTRUM
birthday ! Actually at 37 I can just remember _manual_ adding machines
and mimeographs. Of course the TI-59 was my college calculator. But
what a change today ! Palm Pilots are the norm with lap tops going for
sub-$800's.
Funny thing is I didn't need a calculator most of the time.
Unlike today's grads !
Regards,
John S. Douglas Photographer, webmaster & darkroom wizard !
Fine wedding and portrait photography Black & White our specialty.
Spectrum Photographic Inc. http://www.spectrumphoto.com
Bringing the fine art of photography to your wedding !
Glenn Stewart (Arizona)
> Hi,
> Is there any specific photography term for an image that is neither
> portrait nor landscape but perfectly square?
> Please reply via email
> Regards
> Greg
Greg,
I finally found the proper name for this format: Hassie-zontal.
;) ;) ;)
Roger Cole
month. I had a TI-57 my senior year in HS and early in college,
couldn't afford the 58 or 59. However, teachers at the time hadn't
caught on to programability, which came in very handy when I had
formulae to memorize. Of couse, with only some 50 lines of coding for
that thing, I couldn't cheat on more than a very few of them, usually!
And of course it had volatile memory and no mass storage, unlike the
card reader in the 59, and used LEDs for the display. I had to
program my "cheats" before class then leave it on. Sad thing to have
die during an exam. If I could sit near an outlet, no teacher ever
minded my pluggin in the adapter/charger! ;-)
However, see the comment below for my take on the age matter...
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 01:15:46 GMT, SPECTRUM
<spec...@spectrumphoto.com> (SPECTRUM) wrote:
> Well how perceptive of you to know that I just had another
>birthday ! Actually at 37 I can just remember _manual_ adding machines
>and mimeographs. Of course the TI-59 was my college calculator. But
>what a change today ! Palm Pilots are the norm with lap tops going for
>sub-$800's.
> Funny thing is I didn't need a calculator most of the time.
>Unlike today's grads !
>
>Regards,
>
>John S. Douglas Photographer, webmaster & darkroom wizard !
>Fine wedding and portrait photography Black & White our specialty.
>Spectrum Photographic Inc. http://www.spectrumphoto.com
> Bringing the fine art of photography to your wedding !
>
>
>On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:43:36 +0200, "JTI"
><jan.t...@village.uunet.be> wrote:
>
>>Agree with this one for 1.000%.
>>When I shot my first B&W film, computers where even bigger than my darkroom.
>>
>>Unfortunately, John, I'm afraid we are getting a bit older ;-(
Afraid?? Nah, it's not getting older that I'm afraid of, its the
alternative! ;-)
Roger Cole
Unknown
on getting older -- I started working in a pro lab when you were 3 and
IT DOESN GET ANY BETTER THAN IT IS NOW!!!!!
on the darkroom statement--- Ziess thinks that they will be in
business for at least 20 to 30 years more in the same configuration
--camera-film-darkroom Hope that you get as long to enjoy it as I
have!