Comments on: How can i tell the difference between 35mm and 6×6 films when i do not have the films?

By: frnkrizo

frnkrizo — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:59:43 +0000

The prints are square versus rectangular. Easy enough.

By: Bill P

Bill P — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 23:43:14 +0000

The first thing I would look for is the format of the picture. Slides have a 3:2 aspect ratio. The aspect ratio is the relationship in size of the length of the picture and the width. To give you an idea, a 4×6 photograph (whether it is horizontal or verticle) has a 3:2 ratio. A 6×6 is a square negative which in American terms is 2 1/4 x2 1/4 inches. So a picture enlarged and retaining the aspect, the square, could be envisioned as a 6×6 negative.

However all of that is not true when you take into consideration that cropping is always a possibility. I shoot 35mm, 6×6, and 6×7 and unless I ask for no cropping, all three can turn out to be 5×7 or 4×6. There is no way that you can tell from looking at the picture if they are all in the same printed format.

You could possibly tell from grain in the picture where you find two pictures taken of the same thing and enlarged to the same size. a 6×6 will have less grain than a 35mm because the neg is larger and thus would take less enlargment.

Frankly, I would get a ruler and measure the sizes and do my best to figure from there. If you can guarantee that there has been no cropping, it will be easy – 35mms are 3:2, 6×6 are 1:1.

What takes place in the enlargement process you will never know.

By: fhotoace

fhotoace — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 12:58:26 +0000

There are some tell tale signs that can differentiate images from the two formats. 6×6 film is of course square and many artists **** to waste any part of the negative space, so the images will be square, same with the 35mm, they tend to be rectangular. Combine that with the fact that there should be much more detail in the 6×6 images, you should be able to figure it out. But then again you can cheat. Look up the photographers using google and somewhere in their bio the camera they typically used should be mentioned.

By: wackywallwalker

wackywallwalker — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 03:31:08 +0000

I recall I had a similar task to accomplish when I was getting my undergraduate degree in photography many years back. Basically what the professor is trying to point out to you is that medium format film is larger than 35mm, and as a result the film is able to pick up more detail and retain more sharpness with enlargements. Furthermore in terms of tonality, medium format images will typically be more smooth and continuous with a limited amount of visible grain as compared to a 35mm that has been enlarged to the same size. Take a look at the first link I sent and scroll down to the bottom to see the difference in leaf detail. It should be more obvious now, the medium format image is sharper and displays less grain i.e, it doesnt have a salt and pepper texture to it. The more you enlarge each image the more apparent the difference becomes. As a warning though, if you aren’t a photo student don’t consider the size. If the image is square, don’t immediately assume it is a 6cmx6cm image as one could have created a mask for the image when they were printing it, and on the same note, don’t think that a 6x6cm image cant be printed on a rectangular format like 8×10.

By: mike_oxxbigg

mike_oxxbigg — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:37:41 +0000

Your best guess is as good as any depending on what you can see in the image. You’ll have to guess as to which lens was used and whether or not any cropping was done. Perhaps your instructor wants you to focus more on what’s IN the image rather than what’s not– to try and determine the things I’ve just pointed out.
As for Adams, I believe most of his work was done in large format rather than medium (6cm x6cm) format.

Check out for forums and helpful inspiration to guide you along the (properly lighted) path.

By: DGL

DGL — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:39:18 +0000

35mm film is rectangular in shape and measures 24x36mm. 6×6 film is square and measures 6cm x 6cm.

By: rdenig_male

rdenig_male — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:56:24 +0000

I should think it is fairly impossible. Maybe the trick is to look at the style of the pictures and the photographers. If it’s by Ansell Adams and a wide landscape then it will have been taken on a 6×6. If by Cartier-Bresson and a Parisien street scene, then 35mm. But tell whoever set this project, from me, that I think it is totally pointless. Does the art lecturer tell the art students to decide which brushes were used to paint a picture and the sculpture lecturer what kind of chisels cut a block or marble? Photography is bedevilled by a fixation on equipment, not the end result.