It depends. If your first camera was a 6x6 TLR (mine was, a humble Yashica A) you have learned to compose in the square format. When I bought my first Rolleiflex it was like coming home - everything arranged itself so naturally in the square format, no wasted space at all. Now I have a Rolleiflex 3.5F - the lens is extremely sharp and contrasty - but the groundglass is not very bright. All the best! Raimo Personal photography homepage at http://www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho
-----Alkuperäinen viesti----- Lähettäjä: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Päivä: 23. joulukuuta 2002 19:25 Aihe: CropTastic (WAS: Re: Medium Format - Which one is best?) >Graywolf's comments made me think about this issue. > >If the reason why people feel that 6x6 format is a "waste of space" due to >cropping then: > >1) Do any of you shooting any of the other formats (35mm, 6x4.5, 6x7, or >6x9) ever crop? It would appear that if 6x6 is a waste of space due to >cropping that would suggest that no one or very few crop at all when using >any of the other formats. I personally crop a lot of 35 and have cropped >6x4.5 as well. I'm curious about this. > >2) If I, as a square format shooter (and some may say a "square" period >*smirk*) can compose for the square and I like the square and I can custom >frame the square plus there are lots of "consumer" frames that I can buy >currently that will allow for square format without having to crop (at >least up here in Canada) - so why would I deem the square format a waste of >space? - I mean, what's there to say that all photographs must adhere to >the 3:4 "standard" (or is that 4:3 standard)? > > >I sometimes think that these "which is the best" type questions can cause >more confusion and frustration than any other :-) but at least it gets the >list going... > >Cheers, >Dave > > >Original Message: >----------------- >From: T Rittenhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 09:08:42 -0500 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Medium Format-Which one is best? > > >The real advantage of 6x6 is doing in doing photos for CD inserts. I almost >said record jackets, but that would be showing my age. > >But, the real problem with 6x6 is croppophobia (fear of cropping). Many of >us males born in the 40's and early 50's have it. I comes from subliminal >memories of being circumcized as and infant. Often it has been passed on >from father to son to grandson, but most of the younger folk who suffer from >croppophobia do so because they have never had anything but postage stamp >sized negatives to work with and are afraid their image will be degraded if >they resort to it. It has been proven that with effort the older form of >croppophobia can be compensated for. The fear of presenting a bad image is >harder to overcome. Strangely those suffering from the latter aberation can >not bring themselves to crop even 8x10 negatives, but insist upon contact >printing thus exposing their entire negative image. > >Ciao, >Graywolf >http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto > > > > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >mail2web - Check your email from the web at >http://mail2web.com/ . > >
