Some dumb questions I have been wondering about

Started Mar 28, 2013 | Discussions thread
Barrie Davis
Barrie Davis Forum Pro • Posts: 21,460
Re: Square format Superiority

Dave Luttmann wrote:

Barrie Davis wrote:

Seriously, it wasn't anything to do with photographers. And wasn't anything to do with producing SQUARE pictures either. Square pictures look horrible, and photographers know that better than anybody!

In real life Hasselblad and Rollie shots were invariably cropped to vertical or horizontal rectangles before use. Hardly any pictures were actually printed square...

Hmmm.... Perhaps you should take a look at the wedding portfolio at that address. Out of the first dozen shots, only one was SQUARE.... ( a Eurasion Bridal with lovely lighting) but that would have been better cropped a little at the sides, making in slightly upright.

Square prints can be beautiful.

Of course they can. We know it is possible to compose nicely within all sorts of ratios of sides...

But composition within a square will always be more problematical, just as other extremes, like 6x17cm, are not so easy, and work well for a much reduced percentage of subjects!

It is a myth that most pros shot square for weddings.  Of course, if some people are still stuck in the past and haven't moved on....they can always buy a Rollie or Hassey and use film again.

For a long time in the UK the majority of weddings were shot on square format rollfilm, from B/W in the days prior to the advent of colour weddings, and extending right up to the advent of digital. However, as previously stated, relatively few of those shots made it into albums without cropping to a vertical or horizontal composition...

-- hide signature --

"Ahh... But the thing is, these guys were no ORDINARY time travellers!"

 Barrie Davis's gear list:Barrie Davis's gear list
Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow