[Leica] 24 x 36mm ?

[robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier)]

If you shoot with a wide-angle lens, the negative image will be slightly 
larger, and the wider the lens, the larger the image gets.   The reason for 
this is that the greater angle of the light striking the film with a 
wide-angle spreads the light, and thus the image, slightly under the edges 
of the film gate.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "G Hopkinson" <hoppyman@bigpond.net.au>
To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 6:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] 24 x 36mm ?


> Lew, in fact you are not going crazy. I see no problem with spending a 
> couple of minutes to satisfy curiosity either. Sorry Ted, all
> knowledge is golden!
> But then I've been told more than once by LUG folk that I am VERY detail 
> oriented ;-)
>
>>From neg samples here, widths of:
> 111c Width 36.84 mm     distinctly much tighter spacing
> M3 36.78mm      gaps visibly not quite as narrow as 111c
> M6 & M7 35.6mm
> The difference between the three is easily visible at arm's length. I 
> might speculate that the standard has altered over the long
> period to allow for ease of handling, for example. Certainly the oldest 
> camera is extremely precise.
>
> So, on these examples the range is actually more than 3.5%
> Naturally, commercial printing or scanning will crop some of the image 
> anyway. Slide mounting of course does so too.
> Traditional paper sizes vary in proportions as well.
> Imperial paper proportions vary from metric. (for example Letter vs A4)
> Standard machine prints from digital P&S cameras crop off quite a bit, 
> film based machines always cropped some anyway.
>
> Printing recently from scanned slides, I've arrived at 11" x 16" on 13" x 
> 19" paper as being very efficient use of the scanned file
> proportions. Scanners have their own constraints too, dependant on film 
> holder.
>
> Cheers
> Hoppy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org [mailto:lug- 
> Subject: RE: [Leica] 24 x 36mm ?
>
> You're right; I'm getting the peanuts and Scotch as I write this.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+lew1716=optonline.net@leica-users.org
> Subject: Re: [Leica] 24 x 36mm ?
>
> Lew said:<lew1716@optonline.net>
>> I'm just off to my darkroom to confirm something that's been bothering
>> me for a while. The standard 35mm full frame format is supposed to be
>> 24 x 36mm or 1:1.5. This should mean that I can print full frame at
>> 6x9", but (this is the part that's bugging me...) the images from my
>> Leica negatives never quite fit an opening of this size on my easel.
>> The only thing I can think of to explain this is that the Leica negs
>> just aren't exactly 24x36mm.
>> OCD acknowledged, other comments ...?<<<<<<<
>
> Hi Lew,
> My instant reaction is....... You've got way too much time on your hands 
> if you have to waste time doing this
> kind of stuff instead of out shooting or other fun things.
>
> Did it ever occur to you the easal may not be correct?
>
> I've printed hundreds of thousands of leica frames and full frame always 
> seems to be 9X6 or so damn close who
> cares!
>
> relax, have a drink and get of the house and shoot some very cool stuff!
>
> ted
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>