Aspect ratios: why be constrained?

[ahaslett]

Leaving aside the convenience of using commercially available paper sizes or photo frames, why do so many people feel it important, when cropping, to stick to standard, predetermined aspect ratios?

You answered your question.

Yes of course. But I was also interested in the power of convention, the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle, like 'getting it right in camera'. Of course it makes practical sense to get it right in camera, but if you can achieve a equally pleasing outcome by drastic cropping or any other means in post-processing, why not?

But obviously many people, as posts in this thread show, are using aspect ratios for a practical purpose - the ultimate destination of the print, which makes perfect sense.

If you're not going to print, I suppose another constraint might be the way things look on your iPad or iPhone, but who cares about that?

In my professional life in publishing, one constraint was that museums and galleries quite reasonably objected to you cropping works of art - reproducing them uncropped was often a condition of rights clearance. Unless you cropped drastically and captioned it as a 'detail'. 'Big name' photographers might take the same view, I suspect.

For a RAW only shooter, “getting it right in camera” often means leaving exposure headroom (sensor saturation) on the table. In high DR scenes at base ISO, it can more than negate the full well capacity advantage of a modern FF sensor over an MFT one.

Being limited by any convention is just that, being limited.

Sometimes being very limited spurs creativity, as we can see by looking at photos from rather limited phones by talented users. The Golden Gate by Vikram Seth is an example of how choosing a form can spur creativity. The poem about Samson in The Cyberiad is another, that remarkably survived translation from Polish into English.

That doesn’t make being limited for any reason other than the practical some kind of virtue. Doing woodwork with only a hammer and one chisel might be a virtuoso act, but it limits what you can make.

TLR Take pictures and process them any way that works for you.

A

 

[tbcass]

Leaving aside the convenience of using commercially available paper sizes or photo frames, why do so many people feel it important, when cropping, to stick to standard, predetermined aspect ratios?

You answered your question.

Yes of course. But I was also interested in the power of convention, the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle, like 'getting it right in camera'.

I have no reason to believe any of that is true.

 

[mujana]

Leaving aside the convenience of using commercially available paper sizes or photo frames, why do so many people feel it important, when cropping, to stick to standard, predetermined aspect ratios?

You answered your question.

Yes of course. But I was also interested in the power of convention, the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle, like 'getting it right in camera'.

I have no reason to believe any of that is true.

What do you mean?

 

[tbcass]

Leaving aside the convenience of using commercially available paper sizes or photo frames, why do so many people feel it important, when cropping, to stick to standard, predetermined aspect ratios?

You answered your question.

Yes of course. But I was also interested in the power of convention, the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle, like 'getting it right in camera'.

I have no reason to believe any of that is true.

What do you mean?

This;

"the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle,"

 

[mujana]

Leaving aside the convenience of using commercially available paper sizes or photo frames, why do so many people feel it important, when cropping, to stick to standard, predetermined aspect ratios?

You answered your question.

Yes of course. But I was also interested in the power of convention, the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle, like 'getting it right in camera'.

I have no reason to believe any of that is true.

What do you mean?

This;

"the fact that standard aspect ratios have, for some people, taken on a special status, something to be adhered to almost as a moral principle,"

Thnxs. Agree.

 

[GonnaSnap]

My absolute favorite aspect ratio is XPan 65:24. It's very close to 3:1, which may be easier to remember. When viewed at a decent size, nothing pulls me into a photographic work more. It's a feast for the eyes IMHO. Scanning the frame horizontally feels natural and gives me a sense of discovery that I don't get in a more limited aspect ratio.