On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:31:25 -0500, Larry wrote:
=>There's something I don't quite get.
=>
=>The holy grail of camera performance seems to be how well it will it's
=>pictures will print at the photo-industry standard size of 8X10.
=>
=>So why is it that most printers (yes, I know there are some that can) cannot
=>print borderless 8X10 prints?
=>
=>4X6, 5X7 and 8.5X11? No problem. 8X10? Nope.
=>
=>Most frames for 8.5X11 are document quality frames. Most high-quality Photo
=>frames I've seen are for 8X10, not 8.5X11.
=>
=>I just don't understand
=>
=>-Larry
You asked for it, so here goes
Paper sizes are a result of paper making history, and the
industrialisation of papermaking and printing in the 19th
century, which made standardisation desirable. When the
Germans invented the DIN system, they recognised five paper
formats IIRC: A, B, C, D, and E (what else?) These were
existing paper formats, and DIN simply standardised them
dimensions. The format is actually the ratio of the two
sides of a rectangular "full sheet" of paper, not any
specific size. DIN added specific sizes to the mix..
"Letter size" is the size you get when you fold the full
sheet four times, and trim it to get a bundle of sheets. I
can't remember which of the five formats gives rise to our
letter size of 8.5x11", but it's obviously not the one that
produced the 8x10 photo sheet.
Worldwide, pretty well all paper formats have disappeared
except the A format, except for the 8x10 photo format, and
the N. American 8.5x11 format.. Note that the other
"standard" photo sizes don't match up 5x7, 4x6, 3.5x5.5,
etc - none of these is an exact fraction of the 8x10. All
are in fact attempts to make full frame enlargements of
various negative formats, almost all of which have
disappeared.
This is an incomplete explanation of the history of paper
making, but it should muddy the waters enough nonetheless.
