![]() ![]() In that case 3:4 gives more economy on prints without borders. The original question was limited to A4 paper and most likely an A4 printer, in that case my first reply was adequate as there is only a portrait media feeding on A4 printers. To format your paperback cover, youll first need to calculate the spine measurements (black and white books, color books). If printing in both directions is possible the economy for both image aspect ratios changes too. But the economy of paper use may work out differently on the (wider) printers used, depends on how they handle the sheets and what is lost in the trailing edge printer margin. True the 1: 1.414 aspect ratio of A and B ISO sizes are consistent from small to large sheets and can be halved and still have that aspect ratio. The last remains a good advice anyway but there are more pleasing aspect ratios than the two mentioned. I'd pick 2 : 3 or 3 : 4 based on aesthetic considerations. 1 : 1.412 is also the same as 3 : 4.2 (very close to 3 : 4). The most efficient image-file aspect ratio will be the same.ฤก to 1.412 is the same as 2 : 2.8 (very close to 2 : 3). It doesn't matter which "A" size you print. But it's my understanding that a big advantage of the "A" sizes is that all have the same aspect ratio: 1 to 1.412. where we have our quaint local standards for paper sizes. If borders are seen as paper waste I would opt for 3:4. ![]() Anything with a smaller border would ask for more cutting and would diminish the economy of the 2:3 image on A4 sheets. If you fold a sheet of paper horizontally into two equal pieces, two pieces with the same ratio are created. The ratio of the A-standard between the long and short side is 2:1. With the A series of paper sizes, the next size is twice as large or small. A border at approx 16,5mm wide all around would deliver a 177x264 mm 2:3 print that would have enough print margin at the trailing edge and no need for any paper cut. When you fold an A4 paper, it works in a C5 envelope. If you want equal wide borders around the image then A4 is inevitably better economy though you have to find a way to get good print symmetry in the printer driver sheet settings. When the short side is 1, the long side is 1 2+5 2. If you want to print borderless and the A4 paper comes from an A4 printer with a printer margin at the trailing edge of the sheet and the rest borderless then 3:4 is more economic as the paper waste can be laid at that trailing edge + you only need to cut that side. Golden Ratio - Math is Fun WebThat rectangle above shows us a simple formula for the Golden Ratio. Both aspect ratio choices are wasting paper nearly equal if borderless printing to all sides was possible and the image not cropped. The aspect ratio of A4, 1:1.414 is near the average of 1.5 for 2:3 and 1.333 for 3:4.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |