pics you took that you're pleased with

[Freak of the week]

silver demon

[Rubin Farr]

dispensary line in a pouring storm 

[xox]

[xox]

[Freak of the week]

[cruising for burgers]

does this shit happens with your phones or cameras? I took 3 pictures, 4:3, 16:9 and full screen… if you notice in the left and right sides the pictures have the same horizontal dimensions and it simple gets cut vertically less and less when I change its dimensions… is this how its supposed to be on a real camera? isn't it supposed to get more horizontal dimensions when changing from 4:3 to 16:9 ???

it's just cutting the 4:3, horizontal dimensions are the same...

4:3

 

16:9

 

full screen

Edited December 20, 2023 by cruising for burgers

[oscillik]

Yes

[auxien]

unedited & b&w/light edits

[cruising for burgers]

Just now, oscillik said:

Yes

extremely helpful...

the difference between 4:3 and 16:9 is that 16:9 captures the same vertical range of 4:3 while capturing more horizontal range… isn't that right? at least that's the difference in the movies I've watched in 4:3 vs 16:9… 16:9 captures the same height as 4:3 but with a wider length…

 

nvrmnd I got my answer... my phone is just a newbie trickster... of course 16:9 should capture a wider field preserving the same height as 4:3... shitty phone camera...

Edited December 20, 2023 by cruising for burgers

[oscillik]

1 hour ago, cruising for burgers said:

the difference between 4:3 and 16:9 is that 16:9 captures the same vertical range of 4:3 while capturing more horizontal range… isn't that right? at least that's the difference in the movies I've watched in 4:3 vs 16:9… 16:9 captures the same height as 4:3 but with a wider length…

The largest aspect ratio you can capture is dependent on the physical aspect ratio of the sensor in your camera or mobile phone. The vast majority of consumer mobile phones use a sensor that has a 4:3 ratio, so the only way to get a 16:9 image from a sensor that is 4:3 is to crop the image. So yeah you're going to lose information. This isn't any different from how movies are made.

What you see in movies isn't the full sensor readout (generally speaking), as you seem to understand. That's why there's such a thing as open matte. Of course with the advent of digital cinema cameras, you can shoot footage with the aspect ratio "baked" into the footage if you wanted to (depending on the physical size of the sensor, as already mentioned, and also workflow preference of the director). Personally I would prefer to capture a full sensor readout and then crop that image in post-production.

You don't have a shitty phone camera; you have a perfectly normal and average one.

[oscillik]

To further illustrate, here you can see the framing guidelines in white, but the image you see outside of those guidelines is the full sensor readout

[cruising for burgers]

6 hours ago, oscillik said:

The largest aspect ratio you can capture is dependent on the physical aspect ratio of the sensor in your camera or mobile phone. The vast majority of consumer mobile phones use a sensor that has a 4:3 ratio, so the only way to get a 16:9 image from a sensor that is 4:3 is to crop the image. So yeah you're going to lose information. This isn't any different from how movies are made.

What you see in movies isn't the full sensor readout (generally speaking), as you seem to understand. That's why there's such a thing as open matte. Of course with the advent of digital cinema cameras, you can shoot footage with the aspect ratio "baked" into the footage if you wanted to (depending on the physical size of the sensor, as already mentioned, and also workflow preference of the director). Personally I would prefer to capture a full sensor readout and then crop that image in post-production.

You don't have a shitty phone camera; you have a perfectly normal and average one.

oh yeah I just got schooled… thanks… but I'm still confused, why film @4:3 and then cut it into 16:9? I genualy thought 16:9 film/digital movie cameras captured a wider length preserving the height… and yes I agree it should be done in editing so that u can center vertically what you recorded…

[oscillik]

Have fun. I'm out of this conversation.

[cichlisuite]

12 hours ago, oscillik said:

To further illustrate, here you can see the framing guidelines in white, but the image you see outside of those guidelines is the full sensor readout

i thought you were sorry because it was a bad show

Edited December 20, 2023 by cichlisuite

[cruising for burgers]

Just now, oscillik said:

Have fun. I'm out of this conversation.

you only come here to post your own pictures anyway so...

[hma]

[cruising for burgers]

Just now, hma said:

is that Bruce Lee air kicking in the back of the trees? lol

Edited December 21, 2023 by cruising for burgers

[YEK]

1 hour ago, cruising for burgers said:

is that Bruce Lee air kicking in the back of the trees? lol

Cannot be unseen 

[Rubin Farr]

Not mine, but what a great photo. Icelandic volcanic eruption.

[hma]

16 hours ago, cruising for burgers said:

is that Bruce Lee air kicking in the back of the trees? lol

Hehe, yes.  But actually it`s a WW2 monument near my town, supposedly depicting a mother and her two sons who fought on opposite sides of the war. 

[YEK]

7 hours ago, Rubin Farr said:

Not mine, but what a great photo. Icelandic volcanic eruption.

It looks like a Christmas tree.  
 

Spoiler

 

[Freak of the week]

one of my all time favs

[cruising for burgers]

[Zooluus]

On 12/17/2023 at 11:20 AM, xox said:

that looks fun to explore

[xox]

9 hours ago, Zooluus said:

that looks fun to explore

Yes! On daylight it looks like a Fallout gameplay and overnight like you’re in a Lynch’s movie (like a combo of tp3 and eraserhead)