Go to bottom

Widescreen (bass seal and kitten bucket free)

category: general [glöplog]
Seems like widescreen monitors are becoming more standard now. So, demos.... wide, 4:3, or options for both? More work of course if you do it right. So do the artists think it's OK to do a quick + dirty wide version, with either a bit of the top and bottom lost or a bit extra at the sides? Or is it better to have the evil black bars, but keep the original screen layout?

And why is it that black bars look all right at the top and bottom but crap at the sides?
added on the 2007-03-15 18:14:53 by psonice psonice
Make 16:9-demos, letterbox them to 16:10 and/or 4:3 (or whatever aspect ratio the screen is). Widescreen is more comfortable for the human eye, and letterboxing only on the top/bottom is easier ;)

added on the 2007-03-15 18:30:19 by kusma kusma
eh, good point, forgot the fucked up 16:10 on PC monitors.. why not stick with just one widescreen ratio? Anyway, how noticable is it if you stretch between 16:10 and 16:9?
added on the 2007-03-15 18:32:43 by psonice psonice
It's noticeable ;)
added on the 2007-03-15 18:38:47 by kusma kusma
BB Image
added on the 2007-03-15 19:49:24 by alien^PDX alien^PDX
And why is it that black bars look all right at the top and bottom but crap at the sides?

bars at the sides catch focus because they are seen different to two eyes. just a theory.
black bars look all right at the top

Since when?
added on the 2007-03-15 22:01:18 by Hatikvah Hatikvah
i hate blacks
added on the 2007-03-15 22:02:49 by waffle waffle
i hate waffles
added on the 2007-03-15 22:05:12 by psenough psenough
i haet asparagus
16:10 is close to the golden ratio. i have a feeling this is why it is being used - and the "original" 16:9 ratio is probably just alive because of a typo :D
added on the 2007-03-16 01:55:54 by leb00ster leb00ster
I always presumed 16:9 was so because it's 4^2:3^2 - maybe not.
added on the 2007-03-16 02:32:21 by dotwaffle dotwaffle
Widescreen is more comfortable for the human eye

Lies, unless you're comfortable thinking the human eye considers everything in a pre-defined framework without moving a muscle. Ever.
added on the 2007-03-16 04:30:22 by Shifter Shifter
I agree with Kusma. 16:9 and letterbox for all the rest.
added on the 2007-03-16 07:42:32 by Hyde Hyde
i've heard they are working on a new 13:37 aspect ratio.
added on the 2007-03-16 10:43:09 by LiraNuna LiraNuna
they chose 13 and 37 cause they are both prime numbers, not because something eles that happended 3 days ago
added on the 2007-03-16 10:44:12 by LiraNuna LiraNuna
Hm... maybe 16:9 is still around because nearly all new TVs are 16:9? I always thought 16:9 was the 'proper' wide ratio, and 16:10 was made for PCs because it made the number of pixels better for computers (i.e. divisible by 16). That was a guess though... maybe it's just cheaper to make.

The golden mean theory is interesting though... 16:10 is very close to 55:34. Is the golden mean better to look at, as well as making interesting vegetables?
added on the 2007-03-16 11:32:40 by psonice psonice
psionice : There's never been much of a point in having screen height as a multiple of 16. Width is another matter.
added on the 2007-03-16 11:43:47 by kusma kusma
i dont care so much for widescreen
but its the wave of the future, or so i see
added on the 2007-03-16 11:46:12 by superplek superplek
i care only for treasure!
added on the 2007-03-16 12:08:46 by kusma kusma
I agree with Kusma, but add that if the treasure is contained in buckets, BONUS.
Parapete : check your emails, pal... :)
added on the 2007-03-16 12:49:17 by TomS4wy3R TomS4wy3R


Go to top