4:3, 3:2 or 16:9?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
MustangJoe
Regular MemberPosts: 111
Like?
Re: 4:3, 3:2 or 16:9?
In reply to Florida Nature Photographer, 5 months ago

Florida Nature Photographer wrote:

...what is the easiest way to get the width, height, and pixel counts?

I use Adobe Camera Raw 7.2 to do the crop as you can specify the aspect ratio you'd like.  ACR displays the image dimensions at the bottom of its window.

I am wondering whether you would see a reduction in pixel count if you crop from 3:2 to 16:9 vs shooting in 16:9 since you are only cutting off the top and bottom.

--
Florida

When you crop 3:2 to 16:9 you end up with an image which is 3776 x 2124, giving a total pixel count of 8,020,224.  That's about 10% less than what you'd get if you originally shot in 16:9.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mustangjoe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow