What is your favorite aspect ratio for video?

[budwzr]

There are quite a lot of talented editors here at VHelp. They just dont participate unless something interesting comes along. So they're less visible.

Ask a serious technical question and they'll pop out of the woodwork.

[hello_hello]

The ratio the creator(s) chose to create his/her/their creation.

Scott

You so beat me to it ... well, it's so obvious, innit?

Couldn't I have an aspect ratio I prefer myself, or do I really need to prefer 1.85:1 while I'm watching movie "A", then prefer 2.35:1 while I'm watching movie "B"?

Or what if the creator chooses to release his creation with different aspect ratios?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_matte

I guess that leads to amusing threads such as this one:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=197437

[Cornucopia]

@hello_hello, you know as well as I that "open matte" is a shooting technique that allows for multiple AR distribution options. However it then gets decided is how it should be viewed, no? Doesn't matter, really - I gave MY OPINION, which is all that was asked for. You can have your opinion which may coincide or contradict or be tangential to mine, or even a mix.

Actually, the Original Poll Question is a bit vague: is this referring to what we'd prefer to view as a consumer, or what we'd prefer to present as a producer? I answered to the former, but if the latter was the question, it would depend upon what I was trying to convey in the story/content (which would be decided on a project by project basis).

Scott

[newpball]

Actually, the Original Poll Question is a bit vague: is this referring to what we'd prefer to view as a consumer, or what we'd prefer to present as a producer?

Of course the question was for making videos, after all it was placed in the Video Editing section. Right after your initial comments I even added a clarification.

I must admit that I find some of the responses in the comments of this poll rather bizarre and why some people think it is dumb to poll people what aspect ratio they prefer for making a video is also a mystery to me.

[_Al_]

oops different thread, I thought I am in your TV thread poll., nevermind

[newpball]

Because it is idiotic. People are doing what is most effective and tolerable. Not what they want.

Really, so there is no art involved whatsoever?

I wonder, did you ever make a video?
And when you did you never thought about aspect, ratio, framing, frame speed, shutter speed, color grading?

[_Al_]

I wonder, did you ever make a video?
And when you did you never thought about aspect, ratio, framing, frame speed, shutter speed, color grading?

You should stop thinking for the others. They do what is necessary and compromise all the time. You do not want to change them. They WILL change you, wait for it.

[newpball]

Who is talking about changing people?
For crying out loud this is a simple poll!

I am interested in people's opinion about aspect ratios, in addition I would have thought we could have an intelligent discussion about it. What is strange about that?

Frankly the only thing weird is the weird reactions of some people.

[_Al_]

I would have thought we could have an intelligent discussion about it.

Intelligent discussion about favorite aspect ratio? How about this.
If you catch the burglar with 4:3 security video footage, are you going to dislike it because it does not fit on your TV?
If you record your son to ride the bike first time with 4:3 camcorder, it is not going to be your favorite because you have 16:9TV in your living room?
Or, looking in the past, should I ran to the store then and getting latest 16:9 HDV hot thing at that time because 4:3 was leaving the video stage?
If I watch some stupid movie 2.4:1 is it going to be better because 2.4:1 is my "favourite"? OK this is not the topic.
Am I going to record 4:3, having 16:9 camcorder already, because 4:3 is easy to frame?
I would shoot 4:3 with 4000x3000 pixels, wide angle. Is it garbage because my "favorite" is 16:9?

[Cornucopia]

Here is an example of a seasoned professional, who decides on the AR based on what he feels is appropriate for the presentation of the content, and doesn't get bogged down in infantile one-upsmanship or the oversimplistic assumption that only wider is more visceral:

Stanley Kubrick, well known for fairly powerful and "epic" films. His most recent films...

• 1957 Paths of Glory - 1.66:1 (5:3)
• 1960 Spartacus - 2.20:1
• 1962 Lolita - 1.37:1 (~4:3)
• 1964 Dr. Strangelove - 1.66:1
• 1968 2001: A Space Odyssey - 2.20:1
• 1971 A Clockwork Orange - 1.66:1
• 1975 Barry Lyndon - 1.66:1
• 1980 The Shining - 1.37:1
• 1987 Full Metal Jacket - 1.37:1
• 1999 Eyes Wide Shut - 1.66:1

As you can see, some were wide (1.66:1), some were very wide (2.20:1), and some were old academy ratio (1.37:1), including even some of his more recent.

While this probably isn't indicative of the majority of modern movies (which clearly favors 1.85:1 overall), nobody with sense can discount the impact of these movies. Kind of makes the whole WIDER=COOLER mantra moot. It's all about the quality of the story/directing/acting/shooting/editing...AR is just one of many good tools.

Well, you know. lt's a toolbox. You put the tools in for the job.

Of course, now we'll hear some more BS about "well that's not what your future/up-and-coming guys are/will be doing". Yeah, yeah, cry me a river. Stop whining about what you think the best should be and MAKE something that people consider the best.
People shoot what they can afford and what's convenient. Once they can afford more, they have more choices to make and make choices based on the art or on commerce (or both).

BTW, people who actually want to have "intelligent conversations" don't go around regularly spouting phrases like "idiocy", "obviously" and "stuffy".

Scott

[newpball]

Here is an example of a seasoned professional, who decides on the AR based on what he feels is appropriate for the presentation of the content, and doesn't get bogged down in infantile one-upsmanship or the oversimplistic assumption that only wider is more visceral:

Stanley Kubrick, well known for fairly powerful and "epic" films. His most recent films...

• 1957 Paths of Glory - 1.66:1 (5:3)
• 1960 Spartacus - 2.20:1
• 1962 Lolita - 1.37:1 (~4:3)
• 1964 Dr. Strangelove - 1.66:1
• 1968 2001: A Space Odyssey - 2.20:1
• 1971 A Clockwork Orange - 1.66:1
• 1975 Barry Lyndon - 1.66:1
• 1980 The Shining - 1.37:1
• 1987 Full Metal Jacket - 1.37:1
• 1999 Eyes Wide Shut - 1.66:1

As you can see, some were wide (1.66:1), some were very wide (2.20:1), and some were old academy ratio (1.37:1), including even some of his more recent.

Indeed, Kubric is all over the place when it comes to ARs.

Great contribution to the discussion!

While this probably isn't indicative of the majority of modern movies (which clearly favors 1.85:1 overall), nobody with sense can discount the impact of these movies. Kind of makes the whole WIDER=COOLER mantra moot. It's all about the quality of the story/directing/acting/shooting/editing...AR is just one of many good tools.

Well, you know. lt's a toolbox. You put the tools in for the job.

I tend to agree with this sentiment, AR is certainly not a tier one element of the art.

Of course, now we'll hear some more BS about "well that's not what your future/up-and-coming guys are/will be doing". Yeah, yeah, cry me a river. Stop whining about what you think the best should be and MAKE something that people consider the best.

Is this a polemic against the invisible man?

[hello_hello]

Is this a polemic against the invisible man?

Coming from you, that's comedy gold.

[budwzr]

What's your favorite drink proof?

a) 100
b) 90
c) All of the above
d) Yes