It's a completely consumer-minded bias. Remember when people used to buy "full-screen" DVDs and VHS tapes so that they could "see all of the movie" or it would fill the TV set? Few seemed to care that they weren't seeing all of the recorded image of these precious commercial films. And, few seem to notice or care that most commercially released Blu-Ray discs are also improperly formatted.
How many video cameras shoot a 1440 x 960 (3:2) square pixel image? Or 1280 x 960 (4:3) square pixel image? I guess HD = 16:9 HD... right? Are there any 4:3 or 3:2 HD cameras.... I think the only option is to crop your 16:9 image if you want a high resolution 4:3 or 3:2 end product. But, if it's widescreen bike trails they want -- give it to 'em. Warren On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 AM, T. Siddle <[email protected]> wrote: > My guess would be that they have gotten used to watching video on > monitors/tvs that are 16:9 and that they dislike 4:3 because it either > doesn't fit the screen (when watched in full screen mode) or has to be > warped/cut to fit. They also likely associate 4:3 with older, lower > resolution video. > > - Ts. > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Kevin Timmins <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I'm making a video for a uk bike trials video and put up a poll for the >> public to decide what ratio they want their video filming in. The youth of >> today hates 4:3! Really hates it for no reason. That is they say things like >> "4:3 is aweful" but with no explanation as to why? What's going on here? >> >> Kev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FrameWorks mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > >
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list [email protected] https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
