Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aspect Ratio.. Time For Change?  
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5743 posts, RR: 44
Posted (9 years 5 months 2 days ago) and read 3239 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all,
This is something I have raised in other threads but it tends to get buried in the originating topic(rightly so).

Is it perhaps, time for A.net to consider accepting photos that have different aspect ratios to what have been tradiitionally considered correct. I am not saying A.net or the criteria are wrong, just asking for feedback.

*Our subject matter in many cases naturally fits into a wide format.

*The viewers, the general public, are increasingly purchasing widescreen televisions and becoming comfortable with that format.

*Increasingly shots, especially ground shots, are being rejected(or not submitted) because of the continued encroachment of fences etc into the airport environment.

A couple of examples....
Traditional 3x2 e.g. 1024x683 (these examples are 800x533)

http://www.pbase.com/chrisg/image/46556127.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/chrisg/image/46556129.jpg

Widescreen 16x9 eg 1024x576 (these examples are 800x459)

http://www.pbase.com/chrisg/image/46556128.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/chrisg/image/46556130.jpg

Just my thoughts, interested in hearing what others think.

Oh.. and before I get flamed for plugging my own shots, at this moment I have no intention of uploading these photographs.

Regards

Chris


If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3211 times:

For avoiding fences it's good but don't really like this format. I even dislike it for Television.

Georg.


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5743 posts, RR: 44
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3207 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Oh and something I omtted from original post, this should not be seen as a way of avoiding good composition or motiv, just another point of view.

Regards

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3147 times:

I prefer to use the native format of the sensor/film in my camera. 3:2 is wide enough for me. I dislike the 4:3 ratio. But I agree that if someone was to shoot 6x6 for instance, they should be able to submit photos (without altering their original composition). But hardly anyone does I suppose so.  Smile


what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineMalandan From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 380 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3139 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Thread starter):
Is it perhaps, time for A.net to consider accepting photos that have different aspect ratios

A.net have done so in the past and I have quite a few in the database.

For example


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Malcolm Clarke



The ratio in this case is 6 x 3.5 but one problem may be that non standard ratio's don't fit standard print sizes should you wish to offer prints for sale.
I certainly intend to re-upload some of mine at standard ratios with hopefully quality improvements at some future date.

Malcolm.



My interest lies in the future as I am going to spend the rest of my life there!
User currently offlineSean377 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1225 posts, RR: 40
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

An interesting debate and one that had crossed my mind. Widescreen formats are probably going to be around for a while, certainly in TV, where it is probably here to stay and 4:3 is dead and buried. It's taking a bit longer to catch on in the PC fraternity though, possibly because most PC applications would benefit from more depth than width. But I would welcome the format on this site.

Sean



Flying is the second greatest thrill known to man... Landing is the first!
User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 41
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3119 times:

You might want to read this:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072003panasonic_lx1.asp

 Wink

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2822 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3064 times:

To further restrict submissions only to "accepted" aspect ratios does a grave dis-service to aircraft photography.

Images should be cropped for maximum visual impact. Good and knowledgeable cropping is the hallmark of a thinking photographer.

I use a "widescreen" 1440 x 900 pixel laptop as my primary computer. None of the conventional 1024x768 images fill my monitor frame. So I ask you rhetorically, in light of new technology and visual display mediums, just what is now considered "normal"?

Crop for impact. Crop for what is visually appealing. To do less is a disservice to photography.

my dos centavos.

Steve

p.s. These were both shot with a Hasselblad at 6 x 6. If I was told to crop them to "fit" a preconceived norm, I'd simply pull the photos from the DB.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stephen Liard
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stephen Liard



User currently offlineDendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1689 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3048 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 7):
To further restrict submissions only to "accepted" aspect ratios does a grave dis-service to aircraft photography.

I totally agree and see that photos do sometimes get onto the database outside the 'normal' format.
Square photos rarely work well for aviation photos but they can as photopilot demostrates so admirably with the example on the right.
If rules are applied too rigidly, they stifle creativity.
Rather than such a rigid application of the rules, this should be left to a screeners decision...if it looks right let it on no matter what the format
Mick Bajcar


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5743 posts, RR: 44
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3014 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks all for the feedback,

A question for the screening team, would quality submissions in a wider format, 1024x576 or 1200x675 etc be rejected for badsize?

Regards

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Time For A Change? posted Thu May 22 2003 15:19:47 by EGBB
Time For Change posted Sun Jan 13 2002 11:17:34 by LGW
Time For A Check-up? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 04:47:01 by Notar520AC
Time For A Game. Guess The Rejections. posted Thu Aug 17 2006 16:08:53 by Fiveholer
For A Change! Acceptable Motive? posted Thu Jul 6 2006 22:04:42 by PipoA380
Any Good 1:1 Aspect Ratio Printing Companies? posted Wed Jun 14 2006 00:59:28 by DLKAPA
Aspect Ratio? posted Mon Mar 27 2006 17:46:15 by Meister808
Finding Time For Photography posted Fri Aug 12 2005 17:58:29 by Waketurbulence
Sensor And Aspect Ratio posted Thu May 5 2005 02:34:23 by Senorcarnival
Aspect Ratio posted Fri Feb 11 2005 21:08:24 by Vzlet