Aspect ratio of 10x8 and 5x4?

[Doremus Scudder]

How does one know the height of the film or paper until after you take the picture in portrait or landscape view? wouldn't a box of unexposed film have a mixture of 8x10 and 10x8.

Actually, the sheets in a box, and later in the filmholder, are in a state of quantum flux, neither portrait or landscape until the conscious mind of the photographer decides how to insert the holder. Only then does the state of uncertainty collapse and the film become "real." Schrödinger proved this, no matter how counter-intuitive it may seem.

120 film without a camera is in an even worse state of uncertainty: 6:4.5, 6:6, 6:7, 6:9, 6:17... portrait or landscape...

And, is it really black-and-white photography? Why not white-and-black? Or Fifty Shades of Grey? Or...?



Doremus

[Alan Klein]

I believe that whether your DSLR 35mm says 4:5 or 5:4, the longer end is always the horizontal top and bottom sides with the camera in normal landscape position. So you have to consider that when shooting film in landscape or portrait mode which way to turn your DSLR.

[BrianShaw]

Actually, the sheets in a box, and later in the filmholder, are in a state of quantum flux, neither portrait or landscape until the conscious mind of the photographer decides how to insert the holder. Only then does the state of uncertainty collapse and the film become "real." Schrödinger proved this, no matter how counter-intuitive it may seem.

120 film without a camera is in an even worse state of uncertainty: 6:4.5, 6:6, 6:7, 6:9, 6:17... portrait or landscape...

And, is it really black-and-white photography? Why not white-and-black? Or Fifty Shades of Grey? Or...?



Doremus

Now I completely understanding!

[cowanw]

Actually, the sheets in a box, and later in the filmholder, are in a state of quantum flux, neither portrait or landscape until the conscious mind of the photographer decides how to insert the holder. Only then does the state of uncertainty collapse and the film become "real." Schrödinger proved this, no matter how counter-intuitive it may seem.

120 film without a camera is in an even worse state of uncertainty: 6:4.5, 6:6, 6:7, 6:9, 6:17... portrait or landscape...

And, is it really black-and-white photography? Why not white-and-black? Or Fifty Shades of Grey? Or...?



Doremus

Except Schrödinger' cat, whether alive or dead when he proposed the experiment, is absolutely certainly dead now, as cats don't live 84 years.

[Jerry Bodine]

Maybe what's needed is a new standard to define the format using two values, e.g., the length of the format short side in inches (U.S.) or cm (Europe) & the angle (degrees) that the format diagonal makes with short side. 4x5 would then be defined as 4" x 51.3deg (4" x tangent51.3 = 5"). 8x10 would be defined as 8" x 51.3deg (8" x tangent51.3 = 10").

[DonJ]

Maybe what's needed is a new standard to define the format using two values, e.g., the length of the format short side in inches (U.S.) or cm (Europe) & the angle (degrees) that the format diagonal makes with short side. 4x5 would then be defined as 4" x 51.3deg (4" x tangent51.3 = 5"). 8x10 would be defined as 8" x 51.3deg (8" x tangent51.3 = 10").

You mean 5” x 38.7deg.

[Greg]

And some industries go by width x height. It's a mess.

Attended R.I.T. in the late 1970s. 4x5 was 4x5 and 8x10 was 8x10. The nomenclature of 10x8 or 5x4 was actually criticized... but was never told why.

[Jerry Bodine]

You mean 5” x 38.7deg.

That works as well, but it would more likely be cm not inches.

[esearing]

Is Schrodinger's cat even still in the box? What if you want to crop 4x5 (1:1.25) so that the ratio mimics 5x7 (1:1.4) or that format Mr Galli likes 7x11 (1:1.57) . Would you pass on the shot or take a few steps back/forward to make sure you have the scene to work with?

[Alan Klein]

I don't develop my own film, but send it out. So, I'm wondering. How do you develop 8x10 film in a 10x8 tray? Do you do half first than the other half? Or do you rotate the tray?