Forum Moderators: not2easy
So then whose idea was it to make photograph dimensions (and our childhood notecards for some reason? The ol' "3x5") go HEIGHT FIRST, WIDTH SECOND? 4x6, 5x7, 8x10... I mean, even when you're in fifth grade, the teach you "length x width x height" (obviously the length doesn't apply here, as we're talking 2D stuff.)
I really can't imagine what intelligible reason there could be for having photos measured this way. It often causes problems in design, as I recently had someone tell me "design this as a 4x6, but vertically oriented". Er, it can be oriented any way you like buddy... it's still going to be 4" wide and 6" high. Lucky for him, that double-negative of stupidity yeilded the measurements he was envisioning.
I know this delves a little deep for a forum that's more about web graphics, but I just get confronted by people with this misinformation way too often, and I would love to hear the origin of these measurements that go against all other forms of visual measurement... hopefully there is a reasonable answer for it. My guess would be that early cameras took "vertically oriented" pictures, and eventually people just started taking pictures wider than high because they liked the look better, but kept using the same measurement terminology.
Ah well, at least if no one replies, I got it off my chest. Twiddledeedee.
If you spec paper out from any paper distributer, the dimensions are always width by height - in the portrait format - regardless of the size of paper.
Hmm... upon reading your post again, I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or if you're confused by my post. So, at the risk of rambling some more...
4x6 (the photo or the paper) is correct, if the photo is in "portrait" format... but I think we can all attest to the fact that the great majority of amateur photos are taken in "landscape" format, which are 6x4; if anything, you'd think people would be overusing that phrase, rather than the 4x6 one which is much more frequently incorrect.
Obviously the content of the photo gives you a visual cue as to how it is oriented, which is why people can get away with calling everything 4x6... but if a client called up an experienced designer and said, "please take a 4x6 photo and put it on our homepage", I think 90% of such clients would expect to see an image that was 6 inches wide x 4 inches high, which is certainly not what they'd get. That's why we have a rule for the measurements, so that designers don't have to have ESP to figure out what kind of orientation a client is looking for.
We shouldn't expect our clients to be professional in their knowledge of print and Web standards. They pay *us* for that.
Jim
Because of paper company's standards, whether that be photographic, a block of legal paper, or even an entire skid of custom cut paper, It is always referred to in the portrait format.
Although we would all understand our client's wishes if they stated "I would like this on a 6" by 4" sheet", I think it is far more corrent (in the the eye of standards) to call it a 4 x 6 in landscape format.
I understand that the client is not expected to understand design concepts, and because there is often artwork supplied that makes the orientation of a piece obvious, it is not a matter of concern for a lot of people.
But the fact is that it's still incorrect. And I dare anyone to tell me that it's EASIER or MORE COMPREHENSIBLE to say "4x6 sideways" or "4x6 landscape" than to just say "6x4"... so why not use a correct terminology that wastes less breath? And god forbid that amidst all the back and forth with a client, someone "forgets" to add in the phrase "landscape" to the 4x6 measurement.
As far as paper goes Patrick, yes, it is always referred to in the portrait format (which is still width x height); but paper orientation is meaningless, because there is no artwork on the paper. It is only when artwork hits the paper that it needs to have the correct dimensions, at which point, while it would be understandable to say "I want this on a 4x6 sheet landscape", you ought not to refer to the PAPER's dimensions, but rather the ARTWORK's dimensions, as that is what carries the information, which in this case would be 6x4.
It seems that those of you who have replied are basically saying, "the general public tends to refer to things as 4x6, and then add some qualifier like "landscape" to say that the orientation should actually be 6" wide by 4" high, and because they are the people who pay us, we should listen to them". Well, that's fine, I understand that... but the point is still that before "landscape" was an option on every schmoe's printer or camera, there was a STANDARD OF MEASUREMENT for anything designed (web standards have nothing to do with it... billboards, storefront signs, etc. have always been referred to in this way), and when people rely on an unspoken understanding of what "4x6 longways" means, there is always potential for a mistake due to miscommunication... which in the case of a billboard, can cost you or the client thousands of dollars.
I know this probably seems laughably meaningless for most reading it, but let us not forget the fact that bridges, buildings, and even space craft have failed because of grade-school measurement errors and miscommunications in standards of measurement. I say that yes, let the client say what they want... but do yourself and your fellow designers a favor and let them know that "width then height" is the proper way to measure artwork, and then reiterate what they asked for in that correct measurement, so everyone's clear on what's going on.
And thanks for the replies! I really did not expect anyone to be interested in this thread.
The standard print area of an A4 page in inches for print in the UK was always 10 x 7 (10 inches high x 7 inches wide). This got decimalized to cms. BUT remains height first.
A quick Google of 'a4' will reveal that America does not use the same paper measurements the rest of the world does - and you make it worse by measuring these the wrong way round...
The standard print area of an A4 page in inches for print in the UK was always 10 x 7 (10 inches high x 7 inches wide). This got decimalized to cms. BUT remains height first.
A4 is actually defined by the decimalised system (297mm x 210mm). A3 is twice the size as A4, A2 twice that of A3 etc... until you get to A0. A0 (although not square) is the same area as 1 metre squared! The proportions are exactly 2 to (square root of 2). Note above, that the standard way of defining a piece of paper seems to be the longest side first - even though that would usually be the height (297x210mm). This seems to be a standard in the stationey business that the 'normal' height is put first. One to look for is listing paper - which also measures the height first (but can only be put one way in the printer - so by default the measurements are also height x width and not width x height). Now fax paper was always measured differently again - width x core size of roll x length of paper. Ignoring the core size, we are back to the mathametitions and scientists version where items should be measured width x height (paper length).
One measurement, two standards.
Not ususual though, the Euro method of dates is DD/MM/YY, but the American is MM/DD/YY - one measurement of time but two systems can be used to represent the same thing. When measuring car fuel consumption, this can be done by miles per gallon, or the other way around for Euroland - litres per mile. The more efficient cars in the UK have a lower figure (more miles for every gallon), but have a higher figure in Europe (less litres used for every mile).
One standard in one trade may not the same standard used in another trade or another country.
