In-camera cropping for 8x10

[djl251]

My question is simply this. How does one compose for 8x10

printing given the 2:3 format of 35mm film and the undersized

50mm framlines of the M6. I am devising some experiments to

explore this myself, but perhaps someone here has given the

problem some thought. Thank you.

[jay_.]

Unfortunately my trick--using the eyepiece baffle as a frame while keeping my eye 1" from the eyepiece--won't accomodate a change in aspect ratio as the baffle is about the same ratio as the film. However perhaps using the upper and lower edges of the baffle but the right and left framelines would be a closer approximation. Testing by eye is easy, just tack an 8x10 to the wall and move in on it until you can see some combination of baffle and framelines etc. that comes close to bordering it.

[jerry_lehrer]

Donald

 

Fortunately, my printing service enlarges my Leica negatives, black

and white as well as color to 8x12 size. Great! I crop

from the sides, as required, to 8x10.

 

Jerry

[andy_piper2]

What - you dare to crop the 2:3 format handed down by (insert name of preferred Supreme Being)'s own apostle - Oscar Barnack?

 

8^)

 

Seriously - since the 50 frame already crops somewhat, and an 8x10 will crop off the long ends of the picture: use the 50 frame lines at the sides (in a horizontal picture) as your true cropping, and assume your picture will include things about 3 frameline-widths above and below the top and bottom of the 50 frame.

 

This is for subjects at some distance (> 4 meters/13 feet)

 

For closeups, (under 1.5 meters/4.5 feet) use the top/bottom framelines as 'correct' and then 8x10 cropping side-to-side will be about where the top/bottom lines end in space - i.e. where the gaps in the frame corners begin.

 

I don't use a 50 or crop to 8x10 proportions, so you may take this with a grain of salt - but that's how the math comes out.

[james_.1]

I just print all the negative on the 8x10, thus having borders on the paper (and it looks nice). I think you can ask a pro lab to do the same, just tell them 8x10 full negative print.

[scott_k.]

Buy a 6x4.5 camera.

[larry_kincaid1]

You must be doing all this fine tuning on a tripod with a subject that is not moving. Otherwise, shoot, print at 8 x 12, and move it around in the mat/frame to crop as desired.

[paulstenquist]

I don't think about the eventual dimensions of a phtoograph. I

compose it in the viewfinder to my likeing and shoot it. I almost

always print it full frame, whether it be a 35mm shot or a 6x 7cm

medium format pic. If I realize I made a mistake, I might rotate it

or crop it as is necessary. But I don't shoot for a size. That, to my

mind, is too limiting.

[djl251]

Thank-you to all who answered:

 

Jay - your suggestion is very good, but my problem is that I don't

have a very good idea yet how far the recorded image extends

beyond the framelines.

 

Gerald - You have probably been presenting your printing

service with worthy negatives. My problem is to keep all the

"good stuff" within 10 horizontal inches. Invariably someone's

hand or elbow gets cut off.

 

Andy - I like your suggestion to use the vertical framelines as the

horizontal limit. That would be a simple fix that I am going to

have to evaluate.

 

James - Printing the whole negative with white borders on the

top and bottom works many times but sometimes you just gotta

have a full 8x10.

 

Scott - I can't tell you how tempting this is but I have to resist the

urge to buy a cheap 4x5. Then I'd have to buy a bigger enlarger.

Not that i mind spending the cash but I havn't milked the Leica

for all its worth yet.

 

Thank you all for answering

 

Donald

[martin_shakeshaft]

Its normal to print full 35mm frame. This will leave you with three small boarders and a larger one at the bottom. This makes the print easier to handle (keeps finger prints off the picture) and from my press days leaves an area for credits and caption.

 

Cheers

 

Martin