Are there "Standard" photo paper sizes?

[samogitian]

I'm far from a beginner, but this seems like a beginner question so I'm going to ask it here (and yeah, I've kind of asked this before). I am going to make a gross oversimplification and say that there are two main aspect ratios in use today, 4:3 (the 4:3 format of course, but also the Pentax 645, Phase One XF, and Fuji GFX format) and 3:2 (the world of full frame 35mm sensors). Square formats are easy so I'm going to forget about those completely. 

How do we relate those to paper sizes? I come from 30 years of teaching in architecture schools so I am a strong believer in standards.
The largest prints I can print are easy because the short edge is 24', one of my favorite numbers. So I can print 24 x 36 (for my Leica gear) and 24 x 32 (for my Fuji GFX 100). Nice!
Other formats are harder, though. For 17" on the short edge, I can print on cut sheets in 17 x 22 and 17 x 25 (as far as I know only Red River makes the 17 x 25 sizes).

But what about if I upgraded from my 24" Epson 7570 to a 44" Epson 9570? I know some of you have those, what sizes do you print at? Again, 36 is a golden number that makes it easy... 36 x 27 and 36 x 24. But since (inexplicably), the 9570 is 4" short of 48" what are the bigger sizes you print at? And what about the smaller formats? 8 x 10, 8 x 11, and 8 x 11.5 don't work at all. 8 x 12 does, but who prints paper in that size?

Is it just crazycakes out there? Or are there some standards photographers or galleries adhere to that don't require mats, cropping images, or cutting paper? 

[digitaldog]

What came first, the frame (and ratios) or the print papers? 
It doesn't really matter; images have ratio's that best fit the image despite a frame or paper size. It is why we have crop tools <g>.
There is nothing right or correct about any such size without relating the image content and what you wish to convey to the audience.

[Alan Klein]

I'm surprised no camera manufacturer provides formats in the camera that matches paper print sizes.  It seems like such an easy feature to add.  That way you can format to the paper size in the camera.

For example, most digital camera today have 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 (for TVs).  Why not add 5:7, 4:5 (which could be used for 8x10 and 16x20 papers as well), 8 1/2x11, 8 1/2 x 14, etc.  Did I miss any?

[digitaldog]

I'm surprised no camera manufacturer provides formats in the camera that matches paper print sizes. 

Some do. But as is often the case, you're unaware of this fact. 
And again, the 'concept' (assumption, misunderstanding) that an image you (well some of us) create should fit some ratio of a print frame is rather silly.
“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” – Ansel Adams

[Jonathan Cross]

Come to Europe and A series paper sizes!  This is a series of sizes (A1 to A6 are usual) where the long side is 1.4141 x the shorter.  1.4141 is the square root of 2.  This means the next size up has a long side 2x that of the smaller size short side and the bigger short side is the smaller long side size. The next bigger size is 2 sheets of the smaller size.  OK?!

A4 is near US letter size and is 29.7cm x 21cm
A3 is 42cm x 29.7 cm
A2 is 59.4 cm x 42 cm
A1 is 84 cm x 59.4 cm
There is an A0 that is 2 A1 sheets side by side
A5 is 21cm x 14.85cm
A6 is 14.85cm 10.5cm, not far off 6" x 4"

The beauty of this is that you can print 4 A6 rectangles on an A4 borderless sheet.  Cut the sheet into two and fold them in half and you have 2 A6 greetings cards.   

Photopapers may come in A3+ as well which is 19" x 13".  A3 printers will often cope with A3+ paper.  I find A3+ borderless is nice as it then fits a frame 24" x 18" with the same 2.5" border all round, leaving room for a mount. 

In relation to sensor aspect ratio, I don't care.  I refuse to be ruled by the sensor aspect ratio.  Part of the joy of post processing is getting the image ratio right for the image.  I will often shoot a bit big so that I can do some selective cropping to get the result I want.  I don't do stills as 16x9 as that does not rock my boat.  For panoramas, the image will determine whether, for example it will be 2.5x1 or 3x1, or something else.

Best wishes,

Jonathan
 

[PeterAit]

Some do. But as is often the case, you're unaware of this fact. 
And again, the 'concept' (assumption, misunderstanding) that an image you (well some of us) create should fit some ratio of a print frame is rather silly.
“You don’t take a photograph, you make it.” – Ansel Adams

Agreed. Cropping is a very important part of "developing" a digital photo and has a big influence on the compositional interest of the photo. Of course for some photos it doesn't matter, but for others it does.

[samogitian]

The smugness of some of these posters is really something. I wonder if they have been involved with photography at all?

[digitaldog]

I wonder if they have been involved with photography at all?

Those posting without any transparency, difficult to know! 

[Chris Kern]

I've cited this essay by Michael Reichmann before, but it deserves another mention in the context of this thread.

My feeling is that cropping isn’t something that we do to an image. It does it itself – demanding to be constrained in certain ways. Sometimes there’s more than one way, but it eventually becomes obvious what the photograph itself wants. This isn’t metaphor. The best photographs demand to be a certain shape. The rest make no such requests, and that’s what separates the winners from the also-rans.

The idea that intrinsic characteristics of an image help determine its optimal aspect ratio strikes me as a sensible starting point for deciding how you want to crop a particular picture—at the very least—even if you don't necessarily agree that "[t]he best photographs demand to be a certain shape."  [Emphasis supplied.]

[BobShaw]

Come to Europe and A series paper sizes! 

Not just Europe but pretty much everywhere. They are International Paper sizes. We certainly use them in Australia.

The great thing about standards is that there are so many of them!

I think the most used standard is the MKS metric system of standards. It seems bizarre that any measurement based on Henry VIIIs foot is still used in any country. We haven't used it since the 70's except for babies weight for some reason

[Alan Klein]

It's cheaper to crop to standard paper and matting sizes.  So having that selection in the camera would be helpful for many people.

In my case, I create slide shows to show on my 16:9 4K TV.  So I set the crop in my camera to 16:9 forcing me to compose in camera.  Since I also add video clips to the slide show, they too fill up the TV screen as video is also shot at 16:9.  There are no black bars left on the screen to see during the show for either stills or video.  What I found surprising when I switched to 16:9, was my eye and brain took less than an hour to adapt to a different format from let's say 4:3 or 3:2 which I shot for years.   All the "rules" seem to apply regardless the format.   

[digitaldog]

In my case, I create slide shows to show on my 16:9 4K TV.  So I set the crop in my camera to 16:9 forcing me to compose in camera. 

"Objects in pictures should so be arranged as by their very position to tell their own story". -Johann von Goethe

One of the photo's shown below is a story about the sky.....

All the "rules" seem to apply regardless the format.

"Any fool can make a rule, and every fool will mind it". -Henry David Thoreau

It's amazing how cropping (and straightening) an image based on the image content, instead of some camera or frame ratio can improve it! Even a snapshot. Case in point that indeed "[t]he best photographs demand to be a certain shape." yet sadly, cropping can't fix burned out highlights:

[govindvkumar]

The aspect ratio of your shooting and the megapixels of your camera will decide the photo print size. All DSLRs and Mirrorless and other digital cameras support 3:2 aspect ratio in both portrait and landscape orientation. Some cameras alos support aspect ratios like 4:3 and 1:1. You can check some of the commonly used standard photo sizes.

If you are capturing a panoramic image or cropping the image in a custom ratio, you will have to chop off the white section on the sides of the final print.