What do you think about aspect ratios? In what ratio should all movies be shot in?
>>67146165
The one that's fits my tv screen
>>67146165
1:1
2.39:1
16:9 and 1.85:1 are just gay
>>67146165
Golden ratio to be honest
2.39:1 makes my dick hard
16:1
>>67146268
>watch movie on a /tv/
>Anon, could you quit those black bars at the top and bottom?
>>67146165
Aspect ratio is not something that should be a definitive "all movies should be" thing.
Different frame sizes are appropriate for different projects and needs. Fuck off with your absolutist nonsense.
1:1
2.35-2.39 is perfect.
>>67146165
Behead all those who insult 2:39:1
>>67146165
2.39 obviously, our eyes aren't placed vertically
If I had to choose one, it'd have to be based 4:3. It looks so homely and natural, plus it's the perfect ratio to capture faces.
>>67146462
>>67146500
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaHIFAZ8fz8
>>67146650
Well, it's the Academy's official AR. But call it 1.33:1, sounds fancier.
>>67146387
>Fuck off with your absolutist nonsense.
Did you just get upset over screen proportions?
>>67146165
16:9 ofc
Tired of seeing fucking black bars
I paid for a 55 inch TV, not a 37 inch!
>>67146165
mlg 360 for VR
>watch action flick
>obligatory cringy romance scene comes up
>do a 360 and walk away
finally we have the technology
sure is full of leddit wannabe contrarians trying to fit in here
>>67146945
lel
but seriously though, imagine how VR will change "film" by giving you the choice of what you'll experience inside that particular world. and people are still saying there'll be no more important innovation in film
>>67146165 literally 1:999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 because I want to look at a line
I want to watch movies in 16:9:8 because I'm ready for the fourth dimension
Who cares as long as the movie isn't Nolan tier bullshit jumping back and forth between 16:9 and 2.39:1?
>>67147048
>this will probably happen in our lifetime
what a time to be alive
They're all good, it depends on what you do with them.
16:9 is shit though.
>>67148014
>4:3
>Good
The only reason it even exists is because of the technical bottlenecks at the time.
>>67148090
4:3 is literally the best tho
Does anyone have that image of some French film director talking about ratios? I think he's talking about the different levels of truth that different aspects imply to the audience. The text is translated and there are loads of pics of Bosnian war (?) war crimes
Thanks in advance
>>67148090
You're right, I'm sorry. 4:3 is literal cancer.
All the rest are perfectly fine though.
Doesn't matter, I just push the button that stretches it out to fit my screen right.
>>67146387
>has a trip
>makes terrible posts
as expected. kys faggot
>>67148468
God I am glad I anonymize trips.
>>67148090
Well every format is a result of a technical or physical limitation in some sense. 4:3 is pretty close to Academy Ratio.
>>67148630
I agree, though it doesn't mean it is "good" half a century later.
1.85:1 is perfect for TV
2:39:1 is perfect for theaters
/thread
>>67148769
I disagree
/4chan
Depends on the movie. Coen brothers NEVER do 2.35 for example, except No Country for Old Men. It just doesn't suit their style, it's too mechanical and cold. You're further away from the subject, more of an observer. Think 2001, again another 2.35 movie, by a director who never shoots at that aspect ratio (Kubrick).
Paul Thomas Anderson on the other hand, he used to always used 2.35 because you simply have more space to utilize. Once he matured, he realized he didn't need that much filling the screen as long as the performances are on point. So he switched to 1.85 on the Master, and hasn't gone back since.
I'm not even going to mention Xavier Dolan or Wes Anderson because this comment is long enough
>>67146868
You can buy 21:9 screens you dungus
>all those old shows shot in 4:3 that we'll never get in Blu-Ray quality due to people not wanting it because "IT ISN'T HD IF IT DOESN'T FILL THE WHOLE SCREEN"
>>67148769
No
4:3 is perfect for TV
1.85:1 is perfect for your iPhone you faggot
anything but 16:9 is contrarian hipster tier
>>67146387
>Fuck off with your absolutist nonsense.
the fuckin directors should fuck off and stop widening their shit
>>67149706
They can release it in 16:9 (although they have to crop and sometimes the sides are more visible which can lead to showing stuff that shouldn't be appearing like the crew or mics or something)
Or they just release it on 4:3 and fuck you if you don't like it
4:3 is the superior ratio to all the others because human vision is 4:3.
>>67146165
4;3 is glorious for Video Games
2.39:1 is patrician tier
1.85 is my personal favorite.
16:10
