I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

  • crashoverride@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why can’t the software have an option to hold your phone vertically but shoot horizontally? How is this not fixed yet?

    • IndefiniteBen@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because the sensors are landscape 4:3 and you would lose resolution when doing so.

      AFAIK there’s no other reason other than that and giving people the option might confuse people.

      • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Many camera sensors in phones are so high resolution nowadays, you could fit 4K video in any orientation

        • IndefiniteBen@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree! I wonder if there’s already camera apps that do this?

          In any case, unless it’s in the default camera app and a default option, it will likely do nothing to reduce the plague of vertical video. I would guess that most people filming something that would be better in landscape didn’t even think about it, so won’t think about turning an option on.

      • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’d figure it out real quick if manufacturers could ask agree to build sensors turned 90 degrees and disable recording in portrait. Obviously keep the possibility to take photos, but disable video recording.

        Then I sit back and watch to see what happens next. I see a few possibilities.

        1- Highly unlikely, but newer phone sales go in the toilet, while the second market goes crazy with people trying to get phones that still have the portrait camera. People will be confused at first, but most people tend to pick it up quick and just incorporate it as the new normal. It would have to be coordinated as a big launch at once, to force quick adoption.

        2- People just kind of shrug and move on with it, like they did with changes like headphone jack removal, or charger non-inclusion. Except this time, it’s a good thing.

        3- TikTok dies a horrible death, and YouTube shorts jumps on the market, finally becoming an actual thing that’s not just a backup copy of TikTok content. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a short that was made for YouTube, not for TikTok.

        • IndefiniteBen@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think someone will make an app that overrides the IMU measurements so the phone thinks it’s in landscape when it’s portrait, then use another app to rotate the video to be vertical.

      • wischi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Many sensor are 3:2 or non trivial ratios because of how the color filter pattern is aligned. Why do you think the sensors are 4:3?

        • IndefiniteBen@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I realise sensors come in other aspect ratios, but I didn’t want to spend the time researching and listing them all. Some sensors are 4:3 (like the IMX363).

          But that’s irrelevant to my point that the sensor is not square which means you lose more resolution cropping to 16:9 in one orientation (usually portrait) than the other.

  • StarManta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ironically, the text on this meme is so small that I had to zoom in on it on my vertical phone to be able to read it

    • Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      How is that ironic? It’s exactly what we expect when you hold your phone in the wrong orientation for the aspect ratio of the image displayed.

  • XEAL@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Then you have the opposite.

    Fucking dimwits uploading stretched 19:6 gameplays to YouTube of videogames that were designed for a 4:3 aspect ratio.

    No, you idiot; Gran Turismo 2 wasn’t designed for widescreen.

    • Piers@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just can’t understand how people can notice and be bothered by black bars but not a horribly distorted picture (or even having half the image cropped away.)

  • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I will say, I frame based on the subject & purpose of the video. Leaving aside platform requirements (TikTok’s vertical-only format), I don’t mind shooting vertical if it’s a 1-person eye-level video, especially if I need to get their whole figure in the shot. More than 1 person and it’s horizontal.

    What I seethe with rage at are the idiots who shoot historical events (tsunamis, daring rescues, sporting events or any fast action) vertically and then firehouse the camera back & forth trying to capture the action. Those people should be smacked and their phones taken away.

  • bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Vertical video is for teens. You sign an agreement never to do that again when you turn 18. Those who film vertical after the age of 18 are forever forbidden from leaving Facebook

  • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I like 4:3 aspect ratio, gives video a better sense of height. Grand Budapest Hotel looked amazing, and it’s mostly in 4:3.

    3:2 is my favourite aspect ratio though, shame moves and TV never adopted it.

    • serial@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right. I like 16:9 too but also enjoy 4:3 a lot. Content can be improved using either depending on the shots. I don’t get how ones better than the other though I’ll admit widescreen does seem more versatile. I don’t like how these things are viewed as linear upgrades. Reminds me of when 3D games started coming out. We’ve come back around to 2D but for awhile many people viewed these things as a linear progression.

  • ZephrC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Overall 16:9 is mostly better than 4:3 if you aren’t scaling up the size and price of your screen with the cube of the diagonal length, and I’m glad we’ve moved on to 16:9, but 4:3 wasn’t actually ever that bad. It’s fine. Not great, but fine. There’s no need to be melodramatic about it.

    • TQuid@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hell yeah ISO 216 forever babyyyyyyy

      I believe one of the overpriced Google tablets actually did use 1: √2 ratio, but they didn’t stick with it. Of course, google has the attention span of a lobotomized gerbil so they don’t stick with anything.