Aspect Ratio for People Photos

anonymouscuban

Are there any "rules" for aspect ratios for people photos and when is OK to break them?

I ask because I always stick to the conventional aspect ratios when cropping images. However, I often will play around with different crops and sometimes I find that the image is strongest with an unconventional aspect ratio. But then I end up going back to a conventional ratio... not really sure why. Aside from making it impossible to find a frame off the shelf, is there any reason I should avoid unconventional crops? :scratch

Cygnus Studios

anonymouscuban wrote: »

Aside from making it impossible to find a frame off the shelf, is there any reason I should avoid unconventional crops?

This is exactly why you should offer the conventional size. Most clients don't want to go out of their way. You can pick up 8x10 frames everywhere, 8x12, now you have to put some more thought into it. When we eliminated the non standard sizes, our print sales more than doubled.

Qarik

if you intend to print stick with conventional aspects

anonymouscuban

So other than printing, this really isn't an issue. Just something I've developed in my twisted mind?

Toshido

While my photos are generally only used for display on screen I try to stick with conventional print sizes sizes, either a 2x3 or 4x5 aspect ratios. The reason is to simply practice my composition to make sure I leave enough room on my 2x3 sensor to crop into a 4x5 print.

The only other aspect ratios I use on a regular basis are dictated my monitor resolution when I am making computer wallpapers.

zoomer

I don't pay any attention to ratios. I crop them however my eye tells me to.

I usually keep all the originals for a couple months, so if I had to I could go back and re do the shot to whatever size a paying customer wants. Percentage wise there are so few photos that ever get printed to be put in a frame that it isn't worth worrying about.
Most of my portrait shoots are free shoots so I crop them however I want and don't worry about it.

tenoverthenose

I crop images how I see them and I want them to look. Yes, that means that my photos won't often fit into an 8x10. No loss to me, I hate 8x10s. I tell my clients to order custom frames or other products (such as a canvas). I am much more concerned about making an image look right rather than if it fits in some frame or not.

Sam

Alex,

If your looking at printing and framing then yes you should pay attention to the aspect ratio. That doesn't mean you are limited to 2X3 and 4X5.

You can buy a lot of mats online with standard outside dimensions but with a variety of inside dimensions. You can buy a variety of Pano mats and frames in 1X2, 1X3. You can buy custom mats or cut your own so the inside dimensions fit the print and the outside fits standard frames. You don't have to have the same dimension on all four sides.

With some research you can be more creative with your cropping and image sizes.

Sam

reyvee61

I only use ratios that are easily printable for that purpose but if I'm doing stuff for myself to display online I do what ever I like

jdryan3

Don't forget 5x7 scales up to 10x14 if you are looking for a slightly larger print size than 8x10. Another issue is whether you are using mats, or simply frames. You can always buy standard frames and use the photo paper as a mat, placing non-standard sizes in the center surrounded by the excess paper.

divamum

I come up against this all the time - my instinct is to go with what looks good, but for headshots I have to crop to 8x10, since that's industry standard. My "workaround" for this when needed is that I will sometimes put a non-standard crop inside borders (meaning that the final outer edge is 8x10, the border acting as a mat) - borders are standard on actor headshots anyway, and slight anomalies there aren't really obvious unless you know to look for them.

Biggest problem for me is remembering NOT to crop in camera, but to give myself enough airspace to make nice 8x10's afterwards. I have to admit, it's not as aspect ratio I terribly like, but needs must....

Great thread

anonymouscuban

divamum wrote: »

I come up against this all the time - my instinct is to go with what looks good, but for headshots I have to crop to 8x10, since that's industry standard. My "workaround" for this when needed is that I will sometimes put a non-standard crop inside borders (meaning that the final outer edge is 8x10, the border acting as a mat) - borders are standard on actor headshots anyway, and slight anomalies there aren't really obvious unless you know to look for them.

Biggest problem for me is remembering NOT to crop in camera, but to give myself enough airspace to make nice 8x10's afterwards. I have to admit, it's not as aspect ratio I terribly like, but needs must....

Great thread

Interesting. Thanks Diva.

sweet caroline

I like 5x7 for people. If I crop to 5x7 MOST images can be ordered in 4x6 or 8x10 without losing critical elements of the image.

Zanotti

It's amazing to me that this problem hasn't been solved by now.

I admit I struggle with how to crop photos - especially when giving as gifts or thinking someone wants to print them.

It would seem that the standard has moved from 8X10 to 8X12, but go to any Bed Bath and Beyond and look for anything except 8X10 frames.

My parents only want 4X6, I happen to like 5X7, and if its a shot I really love - bigger is better and I pump it up to 8X10 (and only 8X10 because I cant readily buy 8X12 frames.)

Why are 8X10's relatively cheap to print and 8X12 almost 2X in cost to print? I am sure the major houses go roll to roll prints, so paper isnt it - its supply and demand.

Goofy that this is a challenge for us photog's in the modern times!!

Z

Hackbone

Why not start with a traditional crop with the background black or some type of a complimentary color and then lay in the crop you like best. There are many types of digital mats, frames, papers etc that you can download. I'll try to post a few examples later.

r3t1awr3yd

Sam and Charles (above) already said what I was thinking: Mats.