Blog
Does Size Really Matter?
When I get back to the computer with a new batch of image files from the camera, one aspect of the post-production that I never consider is the final image size. All the way through my workflow the focus (excuse the pun) is on what is needed to be done to make the image as good as I can possibly make it. In particular, when it comes to cropping the image I never use the tool with a constrained ratio set, i.e. the overall ratio of width to height is maintained. Neither do I check what size the actual full image is until I come to upload it to the gallery. Why? All the cropping work I do has just one aim and that is to get the image looking right; I’m not really concerned what the resulting dimensions turn out to be (within reason).
So what does this matter in the big scheme of things? Quite a lot to the customer looking to purchase a print. Wishing to buy a full sized print they will be faced with the task of getting it framed to a size that is almost certainly “non-standard” and requires a bespoke job rather than using an off-the-shelf item. That is added expense and time. There are other ways around the problem, such as just getting the print mounted but specifying the external dimensions of the mount to fit a “standard” frame. Also it is possible to specify a smaller print size, but if the original ratio is maintained a dissimilar border will be present or if the length of the smaller dimension is defined to fit a frame size then some cropping of the longer side is inevitable. All of which can complicate life for the customer and may even discourage a purchase from being made.
What is the solution? Should I ignore image size when cropping or should I work to “standard” ratios, so prints will fit pre-fabricated frames? How many prospective buyers have already been put off purchasing a print because of the extra expense required to have a bespoke frame made? I don’t know, but I’m sure it has happened already and I’m just not aware of it. I will need to try working with the crop tool set to a constrained ratio and evaluate just what restriction (if any) there is. In the longer term, I will be purchasing my own professional standard colour printer and the logical progression from that is to learn how to make mounts for the prints and then ultimately framing as well? That might well be the way ahead.
So what does this matter in the big scheme of things? Quite a lot to the customer looking to purchase a print. Wishing to buy a full sized print they will be faced with the task of getting it framed to a size that is almost certainly “non-standard” and requires a bespoke job rather than using an off-the-shelf item. That is added expense and time. There are other ways around the problem, such as just getting the print mounted but specifying the external dimensions of the mount to fit a “standard” frame. Also it is possible to specify a smaller print size, but if the original ratio is maintained a dissimilar border will be present or if the length of the smaller dimension is defined to fit a frame size then some cropping of the longer side is inevitable. All of which can complicate life for the customer and may even discourage a purchase from being made.
What is the solution? Should I ignore image size when cropping or should I work to “standard” ratios, so prints will fit pre-fabricated frames? How many prospective buyers have already been put off purchasing a print because of the extra expense required to have a bespoke frame made? I don’t know, but I’m sure it has happened already and I’m just not aware of it. I will need to try working with the crop tool set to a constrained ratio and evaluate just what restriction (if any) there is. In the longer term, I will be purchasing my own professional standard colour printer and the logical progression from that is to learn how to make mounts for the prints and then ultimately framing as well? That might well be the way ahead.
23/01/2013