On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:11:28 -0900, "mr.art" <mr.### [at] gcinet> wrote:

>1) it is the letterbox ratio used in movies.

Just for trivia's sake, I thought I would mention a few things I
learned while researching film formats for the IMP:

Most new movies are actually filmed in "Academy Format" which has an
aspect ratio of about 1.37:1 Movies made on 16mm film also share this
aspect ratio. There are also some movies being filmed in Panavision,
which has an aspect ratio of about 2.35:1 I won't even get into the
various IMAX formats, as most people consider those special cases.

The 16x9 letterbox format was chosen as a compromise format for wide
screen TV's. Movies aren't really shot in this format, they just get
cropped to it.

Personally, I render many of my images with a 3:2 aspect ratio, which
is the same aspect ratio used in 35mm film, for still photography. I
also use other ratios, including various vertical formats, square
images, and different horizontal formats. The POV-Ray default ratio of
4:3 happens to be one of my least favorite ratios to work with.

for what it's worth...
Glen Berry

Post a reply to this message

What I haven't seen anyone say yet is that with WinMegaPOV,
you can use a camera like 
camera	{
	location -z 
	right image_width/image_height*x //<---------<<< important
	look_at 0
	}
 and no mater what you set the width or height of the image to,
it is like looking through a window, just shaped differently. The
image doesn't distort. Without the right image_width/image_height*x
part, the image just gets squashed one way or another. I keep several
ini files that are each contain one aspect ratio at various sizes.
All I need do is select the ini file I want and then the image size.
The camera statement keeps it looking proper. My personal feelings is 
that this should be the default action with the use of right in the 
camera statement as a means of overriding the default. i.e.. you only 
use right if you want to distort the image.

Oh, thanks for the different aspect ratios. New ini's are on the way.
Glen Berry wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:11:28 -0900, "mr.art" <mr.### [at] gcinet> wrote:
> 
> >1) it is the letterbox ratio used in movies.
> 
> Just for trivia's sake, I thought I would mention a few things I
> learned while researching film formats for the IMP:
> 
> Most new movies are actually filmed in "Academy Format" which has an
> aspect ratio of about 1.37:1 Movies made on 16mm film also share this
> aspect ratio. There are also some movies being filmed in Panavision,
> which has an aspect ratio of about 2.35:1 I won't even get into the
> various IMAX formats, as most people consider those special cases.
> 
> The 16x9 letterbox format was chosen as a compromise format for wide
> screen TV's. Movies aren't really shot in this format, they just get
> cropped to it.
> 
> Personally, I render many of my images with a 3:2 aspect ratio, which
> is the same aspect ratio used in 35mm film, for still photography. I
> also use other ratios, including various vertical formats, square
> images, and different horizontal formats. The POV-Ray default ratio of
> 4:3 happens to be one of my least favorite ratios to work with.
> 
> for what it's worth...
> Glen Berry

-- 
Mr. Art

"Often the appearance of reality is more important 
than the reality of the appearance."
Bill DeWitt 2000

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 16 Feb 2000 03:04:28 -0800, "Peter Warren"
<int### [at] halcyoncom> wrote:

>You know what is so annoying about you Matt?
>
>It is that you never come out and say what you want to say.
>
>I mean, really.

That's what I really enjoy about his posts. They make me think and dig
around. And I have learned a few spicey slang words in the process :)


Peter Popov
pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

> Matt Giwer wrote:
> >
> >     If I may comment, that is becoming a much more
> > common aspect ratio in the last few months.
>
> I have never seen a monitor with that aspect ratio. It will never fly.

    It is called HDTV. Patience.


> --

Whatever happened to the Kerbs and the Sosovars?

Post a reply to this message

Anton Raves wrote:

> A normal computer sized image could be 640 x 480 (format 4:3), a 16 x 9
> image would then be 640 x 360, this you'd have to render less :-)

    But if using windows 98 and with background programs (and maybe X-Windows)
your actual usuable screen ratio is closer t0 16:9 than 4:3. I'm looking at an
atguard line on the top, there 98 lines on the bottom and to look at an image
from POV a separate window with a line at its top.

--
Whatever happened to the Kerbs and the Sosovars?

Post a reply to this message