How do you mix MF (4:3) and 35mm (3:2) aspect ratios?

[Alan Klein]

I did the same when I was shooting 35mm film in that era and making analog prints.  You could make minor adjustments to the in-camera framing, but if you were printing at 8x10 inches or larger, there just wasn't enough resolution to crop aggressively.  I'm shooting some film again with a recently-acquired sample of the first 35mm camera I used as a teenager, but I scan at high resolution and also have the option of enlarging the pixel dimensions significantly using Adobe's Super Resolution or Topaz Gigapixel, so I have more latitude for cropping than I did with a purely analog workflow.

Wow. You used an ancient Contax as a teenager.  My, you are an old fart like me.  I've been shooting film again for a while.  I found that Tmax 100 and 400 are very fine films that you should get better crops from without picking up a lot of grain.  100 is better if you can work with a lower speed. Tmax scans really well too. Good luck with your recovered hobby. 

Tmax 400 35mm (little cropping) https://www.flickr.com/photos/alanklein2000/albums/72157716777378896

[petermfiore]

More and more of my photos are on my GFX100S, but I still take a lot of photos with my Leica Q2s and other "full-(35mm) frame" sensor cameras.

How do those of you who do both manage your aspect ratios for exhibition and printing? I have a couple of friends who shoot with Hasselblad Superwide SWCs, getting 1:1 square format prints. That's distinctive enough from the 35mm aspect ratio, but 3:2 and 4:3 are so darn close but look weird next to each other. In my own functionalist ethic, I dislike the idea of cropping.

It's an issue. I shoot street and keep it limited to 3:2 for that very reason. I have several formats, but only 3:2 for street.

Peter