Is 4288 X 2848 pixels an unfriendly ratio for quality printing and framing or am I missing something?

Question

I have a Nikon D5000 that shoots 4288 X 2848 pixels.

When I take pictures, I'm not thinking of how I may need to crop the picture later on or add a border / matting so that it fits into a common frame size sold in stores.

I'd like to think that the original picture as a whole can fit into a common frame size without worrying about adding / removing content from the original picture or adding a border. Meaning, the original shot and everything considered in the field of view when the picture was taken will be included in my print once it is framed at it's best possible quality. By best quality, I mean printing at 300 dpi since it is known as the best quality for viewing at an arms length distance (at least this is how I understand it after reading articles online).

However, printing at 300 dpi will result in a print of 14.293 X 9.493 inches. I certainly won't find a frame this precise. In order for my photo to fit at this quality into a common frame size that I can find at a store, it seems like I have no choice but to either use matting, adding a border via photo editing software, or crop the picture - all things that I'd like to avoid. It doesn't seem right that I'd have to get a custom frame for an untouched 300 dpi print of any of my photos.

Am I missing something here? I know it may sound a little picky, but I just can't seem to come to terms with this limitation. I'm kind of a a picky guy :)

Answer 1

The native aspect-ratio of nearly every DSLR is the same. This is actually 3:2 and is available in sizes from 4" x 6" to 24" x 36" quite commonly. There is usually a few extra pixels in one dimension but this is essentially negligible. Whether you lose those pixels while printing is slight distort them would not be much visible in a final print as it would account for a 0.3% change.

ADDENDUM:

Considering you are using a D5000, I am rather surprised at your second paragraph. Your camera has a cropped viewfinder, so you cannot possibly see everything that will make it into the image. So, really, you should expect to crop each and every time if you wanted what you see when shooting. Someone who is really picky like me :) always buys cameras with a 100% coverage viewfinder.

Answer 2

The idea that you will get better prints at exactly 300dpi — where one dot is also one pixel — is a misconception. There may have been a limited time and certain circumstances where it was true, but that's not the case now.

There is no harm in having more pixels. You should be able to find 12×9" prints and frames relatively easily, and print at around 350ppi with no concern. (Or you can crop to one of other historic aspect ratios.)

If your concern is that 4288:2848 is not exactly 2:3, I urge you to relax on that a little bit as well. There's "a little picky" and then there's "not reasonable given the real world". The difference is 52 extra pixels in the long dimension — or 1%. Not only is this not noticeable, it is likely well within the tolerances of a frame that's nominally 12×8" (or similar). More so, you'll have a hard time making prints with the border that precise — you certainly won't get it with a printer that has a borderless option. You'll need to print larger and carefully trim yourself.