is a landscape photo 8x10 or 10x8?

<p>This may seem like a trivial question... plus, I didn't know which forum to post it on! I did a rather serious search on photo.net but couldn't find the answer.</p>

<p>So... what is the convention? I need to know this because I'm having a show and they want to know the sizes of my photos.</p>

<p>Putting the question another way... is a portrait photo 11x14 or 14x11? 8x10 or 10x8? 5x7 or 7x5? You get the idea!</p>

<p>Looking forward to some comments, thanks to all,</p>

<p>Paul</p>

<p>Yes.</p>

<p>I think the most common usage is short dimension X long dimension, regardless of orientation. So, it would be 11X14, etc., regardless of whether the image is "portrait" or "landscape"...</p>

<p>Thanks, William, I hear you. But then how do I indicate portrait or landscape, when communicating with an art show or whatever?<br>

Maybe I'm making a mountain out of a molehill!<br>

Paul</p>

<p>Well, usually, you have to submit images to the show's producers beforehand, so I'd think they'd be able to figure it out. ;-) But, on the outside (and weird) chance that they accept your images sight unseen, you can specify "11X14 Portrait", for example.</p>

<p>An international cataloging standard for artworks nominates the vertical dimension first then the horizontal. The units of measurement are centimetres and tenths of centimetres.</p>

<p>For example a portrait oriented photograph might be described as "image area 24.7cm X 19.6cm". To put matters beyond doubt the letters H and L are sometimes used, for example "image area 24.7cm H X 19.6cm L" although in some of the snooty galleries I've been in this is considered somewhat gauche.</p>

<p>The convention in printing is to state the horizontal dimension first: x axis before y axis. Landscape thus is 10 x 8 or 20 x 16. Probably best to leave no doubt by doing as William Kahn says.</p>

<p>I liked Franks answer. ;-)</p>

<p>William Kahn is right. In photography you buy paper in a particular size, and use it in a landscape or portrait format. Look at a box of photographic paper--the dimensions given are always short side first. I've never heard or read 10x8 or 14x11, but I've seen zillions of images described as 8x10, whether in portrait or landscape format.</p>

<p>Twenty-five years ago, when I lived in the UK, the convention was opposite, and the long dimension was specified first. People would often just say 'five-four' when they meant the 4 x 5 format, or similarly 'ten-eight'. Can any UK photogs tell us if they still do that? </p>

<p>IIRC, there was a British photographic magazine in the mid-1980s that was called 10-8. I don't know if it lasted.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>People would often just say 'five-four' when they meant the 4 x 5 format</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No. They would say that when they meant 5x4 format!</p>

<p>This is still the convention in the U.K.</p>

I've always gone by box paper size no matter what the orientation is. A photo done on 8x10 paper is an 8x10 photo whether vertical or horizontal. For submission clarity of an 8x10 photo done horizontally, I would use 10'W x 8'H.

 

The convention with digital is to give the horizontal pixel dimension by the vertical pixel dimension i.e. 3000 x 2400 pixels. That makes if a bit awkward when explaining printing a digital file. Printing a 3000 x 2400 image file at 300 PPI would give a 10 x 8 inch print on 8x10 inch paper.

<p>All of the major art museums do vertical x horiz. when describing the pieces they have. My artist clients agree, so that's what I do.</p>

<p>Peter</p>

<p>Wikipedia: "Aspect ratios are mathematically expressed as x:y (pronounced "x-to-y") and x×y (pronounced "x-by-y"), with the latter particularly used for pixel dimensions, such as 640×480." As I said in my earlier post, the x axis always comes first.</p>

<p>When type was set separately from illustrations, the type-setter had to be told how much space to leave for illustrations. Describing a 3" (wide) by 2" (high) illustration as 2" x 3" would lead to disaster.</p>

<p>i always use top side first, then the other side.</p>

<p>if its a landscape image, 14x11. a portrait, 11x14.</p>

<p>always use this to talk with client when i was a graphic designer.. help me and them to understand that a open art is 17x11, but close it is a 8.5 x 11... commercial printer also *talk* like that.</p>

<p>You beat me to it Steve. Of course 5-4 is 5x4, 10-8 is 10X8. Unless of course its 11-14 or 16-20.<br>

Sometimes 6x6 is still 2 1/4 square and then there is definately 6-4-5</p>

<p>Thinking about it, when a couple of friends ask me what size neg I am using, I reply either Hass, Toyo, 35mm or HP (Hunter Penrose). It means more to them than actual measurements which are often not as they seem anyway (35mm and 6x6cm as examples)</p>

 

<p>I asked the question to the U.S. Library of Congress from their website, and their reply is...</p>

<p>"We measure items height by width in centimeters. I am not sure if there is an international standard, but I believe that is the way most art galleries give sizes."</p>

<p>Jonathan Eaker</p>

<p>*********************************<br>

Reference Section<br>

Prints and Photographs Division<br>

Library of Congress<br>

101 Independence Ave., SE<br>

Washington, D.C. 20540-4730<br>

telephone: 202-707-6394<br>

fax: 202-707-6647<br>

URL: < <a href="http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/">http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/</a> ><br>

email: < <a href="http://www.loc.gov/rr/askalib/ask-print.html">http://www.loc.gov/rr/askalib/ask-print.html</a> ><br>

***********************************</p>

<p>Peter</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Despite always saying 5x4, I do often say 8x10 when my Britishness should insist on me saying 10x8!</p>

<p>Since I started I have described a <em><strong>Photograph</strong></em> as Height X Width: in that order.<br>

I cannot remember being taught that this was correct: but it certainly was the convention at College, by our teachers.<br>

My Framers have always written out the framing specs that way on my invoices /job sheets etc. <br>

It seems from the above comments, that is the convention of Art Galleries, and my Framers do a lot of Art (painting) Works.</p>

<p>FWIW I note that technical specs on any 3 dimensional item seem always to be given: Height x Width x Depth, in that order. And usually "H" "W" and "D" are indicated.</p>

<p>Also, because of this thread I now realize why I often get momentarily jumbled when using Adobe Photoshop to Crop: as the bar line menu has: Width first, then Height - obviously Adobe is wrong!</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

<p><em>Despite always saying 5x4, I do often say 8x10 when my Britishness should insist on me saying 10x8!</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

. . . and instead of a film holder, you load it into a DDS, correct? :>)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>. . . and instead of a film holder, you load it into a DDS, correct?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>One or the other.... or both!</p>

<p>Way back in my circle it was normal to say16x12 20x16 8x6 or 6x4 but of recent times people seems to be reversing the practice to 6x8 and 8x10 though 6x4 seems to have remained :-)<br>

Just noticed Dave Sims comment and I was in England at the time which may explain everything.<br>

Somebody said about the UK and USA .. two countries separated by a common language :-)</p>

<p>If you are using plates then you do not need a cut film holder which I found in some half-plate slides. But then when I started I was using quarter plate glass negatives in an adaptor in a half-plate holder for ecconomy as a penniless student :-)<br>

I think I have always called my bigger cameras 5x4's and likewise when I cut 10x8 paper into quarters to make small prints for my '16on' Rolleiflex. As others have mentioned it must be where you were dragged up into the photo world :-)</p>

<p>Wow! What an interesting thread for such an (originally thought) simple question. It appears that the original "standards" (as standards were in the days of yor) have become un-standardised (sorry) around the world over time.<br>

Some 20 years back, in my darkroom days, the paper purchased (mainly Ilford) was graded as 5x7, 6x8, 8x10, 10x12........ obviously before metrication. What I have noticed over time is that the sizing has changed to A1, A2, A3.... and of course the ever popular A4.<br>

Before posting, I flicked through a number of my photo magazines and alas have to report that the preference today appears to favour the "A" sizing...... which for me is a little strange as the photoframe manufacturers still use the old standard of 8x10 etc. Aaah well, nothing a pair of sissors can't fix, I suppose.<br>

Oh, to get back to the original question, I think the 8x10 (Portrait) suggestions would still hold good.<br>

Thanks for an interesting thread.<br>

Regards </p>

<p>"PORTRAIT" is tall. 8" wide X 10" tall.<br />"LANDSCAPE" is wide. 10" wide X 8" tall.</p>