Jump to content

16.9 or 3.2?


Recommended Posts

On my NEX cameras these are the shapes I get to choose from. Simply put, I have no opinion as to which shape I should prefer . . . or why. Which way do most people jump? I've already Googled and read the long, involved technical explanation. There is nothing useful there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would go with the native format. So on some cameras I have used 4:3 even though I "see" in 3:2 (40+years of 35mm film etc) to get max number of pixels. After all many of the wider formats are effectively crops, I would sooner make that decision after the fact.

 

For stock stills (and much other client work) I would go with max pixels and let the client decide on the crop; the more crop options the more saleable. As DK has often advised elsewhere the mistake many inexperienced photographers make is cropping too tight (to get the nicest pic) and not allowing the client to get the best  crop for THEIR usage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 16:9 is just a crop from 3:2. It's to match the full widescreen TV (in the UK we use 14:9, about 1.55:1) and cinema AR of 1.75.

The sensor is APS-C like the rest of them.

I'm no Stanley Kubrick so I stay with 3:2 (although after '2001' he never shot wider that 1.66:1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter what you select, the raw file is always 3:2 - even if it appears to be 16:9. If you shoot a JPEG though in 16:9 with no file you have lost the cropped area for good. Reasons for not using 16:9 are pretty compelling unless you only intend to show landscape format TV slide shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.