Check out People Photography section of our forum.
Aspect Ratio: Which Should You Choose?
Sep 8, 2015 00:57:14 #
Sep 8, 2015 01:50:12 #
Sep 9, 2015 07:30:53 #
Thanks Steve, very interesting.
I was stuck in thinking
the divine ratio, about
1.62 to 1 was where "it"
was at.
It had occurred to me to
user wider ratios to give
a feeling of scope,
but never thought about
using old film ratios
to take viewers down
memory lane.
The popular and contemporary
16:9 (1.78 to 1) is a compromise of "scope"
and the Divine Ratio of 1.62 to 1.
I was stuck in thinking
the divine ratio, about
1.62 to 1 was where "it"
was at.
It had occurred to me to
user wider ratios to give
a feeling of scope,
but never thought about
using old film ratios
to take viewers down
memory lane.
The popular and contemporary
16:9 (1.78 to 1) is a compromise of "scope"
and the Divine Ratio of 1.62 to 1.
Check out Travel Photography - Tips and More section of our forum.
Sep 9, 2015 08:02:01 #
Sep 9, 2015 10:03:27 #
How about cropping the image however you think works best for that particular image, rather than to some predetermined ratio? I admit to not always doing this more out of convenience than anything.
Sep 9, 2015 10:28:34 #
By cropping without using a formula, the image becomes my work of art. It is how my mines eye sees the finial product. I believe that this process starts before I capture the image and goes on by the plate, the matt, the frame and the position that it is hung.
J. R.
J. R.
Sep 9, 2015 11:23:51 #
jackm1943 wrote:
How about cropping the image however you think works best for that particular image, rather than to some predetermined ratio? I admit to not always doing this more out of convenience than anything.
That works for me too, but you should try fitting a subject
into the "divine ratio": 1.62 to 1... and even using the rule
of thirds and or the rule of triangles as well. For the right
photo, those protocols can work great. You don't have to
use them all in the same image. It can be fun and even
rewarding trying to do that at times though.
Rule of triangles: Right lower triangle being the camera man left upper being contrasting background
This is the divine ratio: long side 393 divided by short 244 = 1.62 or so close it doesnt matter. It also complies with the rule of thirds, both horizontal and vertical: Body on the vert, and eyes on hori.
(Download)
Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
Sep 9, 2015 11:30:39 #
Shutter Bugger wrote:
That works for me too, but you should try fitting a subject
into the "divine ratio": 1.62 to 1... and even using the rule
of thirds and or the rule of triangles as well. For the right
photo, those protocols can work great. You don't have to
use them all in the same image. It can be fun and even
rewarding trying to do that at times though.
into the "divine ratio": 1.62 to 1... and even using the rule
of thirds and or the rule of triangles as well. For the right
photo, those protocols can work great. You don't have to
use them all in the same image. It can be fun and even
rewarding trying to do that at times though.
I am very fond of the square or near square (eg 11x14) ratios, but not so much wide ratios unless the image just demands it. Just personal preference.
JackM
Sep 9, 2015 11:50:54 #
jackm1943 wrote:
I am very fond of the square or near square (eg 11x14) ratios, but not so much wide ratios unless the image just demands it. Just personal preference.
JackM
JackM
Best to please yourself bro.
:thumbup:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.