I agree 100% about the distortion forcing 4:3 to 16:9. Drives me
absolutely nuts every time I see it. But most people don't even seem to
notice. Apparently the eye/brain system is a bit too pliable. :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 5/12/2011 7:43 AM, Brian Swale wrote:
> Bob W wrote
>> I wonder if
>> the 16:9 aspect ration will begin to emerge as a preferred ratio for
>> photographic prints? I've done a couple that way, and I have to admit
>> they're rather pleasing to the eye.
>
> So long as they don't include the distortion I see all too often when I
> (rarely)
> see TV here on the new wide screens; every body and face is squidged out
> to fat/wide and correct horizontal proportions are totally lost..
> It's amazing; regular viewers don't seem to notice/care, but. (To incorporate
> some Australian slang which puts the word "but" at the end of many
> sentences).
>
> Brian Swale.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|