Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Is 4x6 the real standard?

Subject: Re: [OM] Is 4x6 the real standard?
From: Tal Lancaster <talrmr@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 22:39:45 -0800
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 20:25:30 -0600
"Daryl Hurley" <dhurley1@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "AG Schnozz" <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 5:32 PM
> Subject: [OM] Is 4x6 the real standard?
> 
> 
> > Are 4x6 prints the real standard for comparision?  Have we
> > reduced ourselved to this point?....................
> > There's nothing like a nice 11x14 to grace the walls .............
> Frankly, I don't
> > like 8x10 prints--they're too small.
> 
> 4x6 prints?  8x10?  11x14?   Nah, shoot slides, project them to about
> 6' wide!
> 
> That'll let ya know why ya got the good glass! (and steady hands)  ;-)
> 
> Daryl Hurley
> Topeka, KS

When I use to shoot negatives, almost nearly every image stayed at
just 4x6.  Out of many years of shooting maybe 3 or 4 ever made it to 8x10
(6.5x10).

Now that I am shooting slides, I feel that anything smaller than 8x10
just doesn't do them justice (and I find even that size a little
smallish).  From shots from this year alone, I would say I have at
least 30 6.5x10s and several 16x24 and one 20x30.


Tal
-- 
Tal Lancaster
talrmr@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.renderman.org/RMR

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz