Selling consistent print sizes and image aspect ratio

[Simon Withington]

Morning all (in UK time anyway!)

I'm not sure if this is the right area of the forums to post this question, so apols in advance if it's not....

To date, my freelance work has been through a picture agency, so obviously the library has managed my print output and sales.  I would like to move to selling more 'fine art' prints via my own website, so am going through the motions of creating the site/selecting images etc.

I could do with some advice re how to manage the 'size' of print that I offer to customers.  For example, if I offer 'standard' sizes, such as 10 x 8" and upwards, then clearly not all of my images will fit into this ratio, given the fact that they have been cropped etc from the original.  I think this leaves me with the following options?

• State the exact print size that each individual image is available in (this would be fairly resource intensive as I would need to figure this out for each image and update text in the site/pricing etc on an image by image basis)
• Offer 'small, medium and large' print prices and state the actual sizes of the print on the page with the image (better than above as only 3 prices, but still need to figure out the exact sizes that would correspond to S/M/L for each image)
• Use standard sizes and include a caveat that images will come with a small white border (less work, but customer will not know exact size of the actual image until it arrives.

Does anyone have any advice re simplifying this issue so that I am offering consistent sizes acorss the site, but within the constraints of the aspect ratio of my images?

Many thanks in advance for any comments,

Simon

[Alan Goldhammer]

I state the paper size and note that the actual print size may vary depending on the crop ratio.  I ship only unmatted prints and leave framing decisions up to the recipient.  There have been discussions elsewhere about the actual image size on the paper.  I print mainly 13x19 with an uncropped image size of 12x18 (since I take a lot of time in setting up landscape shots I find that I crop only about 20% of the time and most crops are minor).

Alan

[dchew]

This is what I say on the website in regards to crop ratios:
Proportions: 35mm film and "full-frame" digital sensors that I use have a format ratio of 2:3, so for example a full-frame, uncropped print on 13x19 paper can measure no more than 12x18. Some images have been cropped to other sizes for artistic reasons (nature doesn't always display herself in a 2:3 ratio). Prints will therefore be true to size in one dimension, but may not be in another.

I also think it is a good idea to verify the actual size of print, paper, mat, etc. with the client once they've chosen an image / size.

Dave

[Kevin Gallagher]

Hi Simon, what I used to do when selling prints at the art fairs was to use the "constrained crop" ratios in PS to give me what I wanted IE: 1 to 1.25 for an 8x10 result and so on. Of course I was selling already matted pix so YMMV.

[jgbowerman]

Keep things simple. I believe offering to matte is a service that will pay dividends. I only offer white and black for matte colors and I only offer one frame style if a buyer wants a frame. Most successful photographers offer these services. The majority of my buyers take me up on providing matting and framing, but they do have the option of purchasing a non-matted print if they choose. I don't make much money, if any, by matting or framing. I look at the additional effort as making for a more user-friendly business. An equally important benefit to doing one's own matting and framing is for doing shows. Paying someone else to matte and frame is not cost effective. Anyone seriously interested in selling photography must do shows. Having a website alone will generate little if any business.

It is a good practice to sell prints that can be matted to standard frame sizes. The 2:3 aspect ratio is not user friendly in this respect. I'll give you my work around for what it is worth. As for print sizes, I only offer three: 10x15, 15x22.5, and 20x30 (These are the actual print sizes and does not include borders and I do explain they are not necessarily exact sizes but will be close as I will do compositional cropping on some work). As for finished matte sizes, I offer 16x20, 22x28, and 24x36. I would never crop a photo to fit a standard frame or matte size, and my mattes are not equal in on all four sides, but I do not believe this detracts from the presentation. My largest prints have "under-sized mattes" if one goes by recommended standards, but I find larger prints display just fine with substandard matte borders.

Best of luck,

Greg

[PeterAit]

I offer the traditional print sizes with a notice that sizes are approximate and may vary to suit each individual image. Thus, a "16 x 20" print will be on paper that is 17" in one dimension (max for my printer) and anywhere from 18 to 24" in the other dimension.

[milt]

This is an interesting topic, and the first time I've seen it discussed in a photo forum.

I decided I really wanted to do "compositional cropping" i.e. cropping on an individual image basis, despite the complexities in production this inevitably causes.  Here's the scheme I came up with:

1) I price and sell prints by their short side length.  At the moment I have only one price for each short side length, but I will soon have
    several price categories for each short side length because I am going to be adding various widths of panos.
2) I post the aspect ratio of each image on the page from which that image is purchased, and I tell users that if they want to know the
    long side length, to multiply the short side length by the aspect ratio.
3) I sell frames only as a special order, so the variability in aspect ratios doesn't such a strong practical impact.
4) Naturally, I flog this decision for some marketing points by talking about it.

--Milt--

[JeffKohn]

My thinking is not to limit to a single aspect ratio, but rather narrow it down to a couple of ratios for simplicity's sake. I just don't see the need to have some prints with a 1.5 ratio and others with a 1.47 ratio. The thought of selling an infinitely variable number crop ratios seems like a headache for both the photographer and the customer. So I've standardized on 5:4 and 3:2 (plus the occasional square) for regular images, and 2.5:1 and 3:1 for panos. I haven't come across any images yet where I felt that I needed some in-between ratio like 4:3 to maintain the integrity of the image.

I think if you're selling bare prints, offering standard sizes, or at least sizes that can easily be matted to standard sizes without looking bad, makes sense. If you only sell fully framed works, I guess it may be less of an issue.