 Bob |
Photo paper size and availability I have some landscape photos that were taken back in 1997 with a camera that offered what they called 'Panoramic' image size. The originals are printed on paper that measures 3 1/2 inches x 10 inches. I need to reprint a couple of the photos now that I am able to improve them with software. I have not seen this size paper anywhere, nor do any of the photo print places offer that size. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 820 printer. Any suggestions?
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
8 1/2 x 11 available at a store near you.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Hi Bob, Back then 35mm was king, I mean “The King”. Our thinking was, The photo industry needed a shot in the arm. 35mm is a wasteful format. The film is 35mm wide but the image area is only 24mm by 36mm. The reduced image is due to 35% wasted available film width eaten up by the sprocket holes. We didn’t need sprocket holes any more to transport film. Besides film-making had progressed, a 24mm wide film could make pictures better than 35mm could only 3 years before. The industry was ready for a new and improved format. We went to PMA (Photo Marketing Association), in Los Vegas with high hopes. We planned a system – camera –film 24mm wide. The camera has three image size modes. The system was named APS for advanced photo System. Now you might need to know that the full image was always recorded on the film. The image on the film never changes away from 16.7mm by 30.2mm. Only the view through the viewfinder changed. The idea was to signal the photofinishing printer and tell it to print a or b or c above. This was accomplished by using a film that contained a magnetic layer that could be recorded upon. The camera did its talking to film like a tape recorder. Oh what possibilities!. This film was and is in use in the movie arena. The magnetic layer was transparent; it did not harm the chemistry and image quality was first rate. The sound is fantastic. Why not have the film talk to the developing and printing machines? Besides this was to be baby steps into digital world. Now we had a film and a format that recorded optically and digitally at the same time. It was a dismal failure. No one anticipated the explosion of chip logic that was to be incorporated into the 35mm camera. No one anticipated the explosion of the pure digital camera. We should have. Look at what happened to the home movie business. Even then you weren’t able to find 8mm or 16mm movie stuff at the camera shop? You need to know:
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Christopher A. Walrath |
I would call the closest store that offers photographic papers and ask for pricing on custom cut sheets. You're looking for 3.5" by 10". Now they might do this because, they cut two strips out of a sheet of 8x10 and probably charge more for the cut up sheet less on inch along one edge than for the intact sheet. If going bulk, they might be willing to do it. Definitely worth the call. If not, then get your fav 8x10 and a paper cutter. Do it yourself. ("I use seagull 8x10 but I cut the size myself . . .") Could be fun. And the 1" x 10" that's left over, don't throw it away. Test strips, wierd UBER-panoramic prints. You could do anything creative with them. Have fun. Thanks
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Bob |
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Bob |
Thank you for the suggestions. I hadn't thought about using 8x10,duh. Anyway, it does print, but due to amount of trees in the scene my printer oversaturates that portion of the photo with green. I assume I need to turn down the color saturation?, even though when I view the image it is fine.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||||||||