2119: Video Orientation

|< < Prev Comic #2119 (March 4, 2019) Next > >|

Video Orientation

Title text: CIRCULAR VIDEO - PROS: Solves aspect ratio problem. CONS: Never trust anyone who talks to you from inside a circle.

Explanation

This explanation may be incomplete or incorrect: This was created by a TRUSTWORTHY CIRCULAR VIDEO. Nothing about Bold and Dynamic. Bad dubious template. Better explanation on horizontal and vertical needed. DO NOT DELETE THIS TOO SOON (It already was once. If you can address this issue, please edit the page! Thanks.

This comic compares different pros and cons of 3 video angles.

Horizontal angling 1. Good for people not used to phones and has been used for centuries. (True) 2. Humans can’t be captured as well. (True if a full body shot is desired) 3. Can be uncomfortable to hold the smartphone when recording and viewing. (True) 4. It more accurately displays the way humans view the world: we view approximately 150 degrees horizontally and only 50 degrees vertically. (not stated in the comic)

Vertical angling 1. Is normal for most smartphone users. (True) 2. Can’t capture the background well. (True, when not used in panoramic view) 3. When the subject of the video is a human, it captures more of their body. (True) 4. Is less stressful on the hands of the one holding the mobile recording device. (True)

(((Randall))) does love a good compromise, so he suggests the following angle:

Diagonal angling 1. Not a standard format of video ^{[citation needed]} (True) 2. Equally annoying to all viewers (Almost certainly true) 3. Diagonal angling has no flaws, and is perfect in every way ^[dubious]. (False)

Transcript

This transcript is incomplete. Please help editing it! Thanks.

Video Orientation

Video Orientation	PROs	CONs
Horizontal	Looks normal to old people Format used by a century of cinema	Humans are taller than are wide I'm not turning my phone sideways
Vertical	How most normal people shoot and watch video now so we may as well accept it	Human world is mostly a horizontal plane
Diagonal	Bold and dynamic Equally annoying to all viewers Good compromise	None

Title text: CIRCULAR VIDEO - PROS: Solves aspect ratio problem. CONS: Never trust anyone who talks to you from inside a circle.

 add a comment! ⋅  add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅  refresh comments!

Discussion

[IMG]http://i64.tinypic.com/2co1zio.png[/IMG] More readable:I think this could be done with text too. 172.68.154.64 13:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Obligatory prior art in this commentary space: Glove and Boots: Vertical Video Syndrome (apparently they decamped from Youtube to Vimeo last month, the original c. 2013 video was Bt9zSfinwFA). JohnHawkinson (talk) 14:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The title text seems to be a reference to AL, the A.I in 2001 : A Space Odyssey which cause a few problems to the crew and mainly communicate through a round lens. 172.69.226.171 14:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Or 2002 movie The Ring 141.101.96.221 14:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I presumed it was a reference to summoning circles. 172.69.62.160 15:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

My first thought was a reference to Matt Parker of standupmaths and his spherical camera: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgyI8aPctaI 162.158.62.67 18:17, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I think the same... Isn't it some Terry Pratchett quote? or may be from other fantasy? --162.158.94.2 18:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

It was HAL, not AL in Space Odyssey. Move the letters forward one, and it's IBM. Deliberate Easter egg. 162.158.38.94 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I thought it was something that wasn't planned by the author? But yeah, still makes for an interesting Easter egg. Herobrine (talk) 13:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

You are correct. Clarke has always insisted that the letter-shift from IBM was coincidence and that he would've picked a different name had they known at the time. HAL has always stood for "Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer". (source). Shamino (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Nonsense. The title text is clearly stating that Randall sees Family Circus [1] as his nemesis. JamesCurran (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

A circular screen is great for that retro-look, like a 1950's Zenith Porthole TV. I seem to remember seeing circular screens on some really old sci-fi shows as well. As well as one use of a triangular screen. Shamino (talk) 14:37, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I thought the circular format was a reference to SnapChat's camera glasses and people's mistrust of "surveillance glasses". I am probably wrong. RIIW - Ponder it (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Fails in the obvious- Horizontal is better because you can send the video in to the TV news for your 15 seconds of fame without looking like a douche who doesn't know how to rotate their phone. And why isn't there a setting for "always landscape" anyway?Seebert (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I have to agree... the fact that most non-mobile screens are oriented horizontally being left out was kind of a big miss. A vertical video looks like crap on a TV or Computer Monitor (Ironically unless it's an old 3:4 one, where the difference is a lot more minor.) -Graptor 172.69.62.220 15:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I assume that inside your phone camera there's a "retina" chip in the same dimensions as your screen, so if your phone is upright (portrait) then the picture is portrait shape too. But, sure, they could make the camera rotate inside the phone... that would work for switching between selfie / other people modes, too. But no, then your selfies would be upside down... or... can I get back to you?  :-) Robert Carnegie [email protected] 162.158.155.200 11:14, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

No, usually the sensor of the camera(s) doesn't match the screen resolution. For instance, in my previous smartphone (the current one has 3 cameras so it might be more complicated) the camera has a sensor with a 4:3 aspect ratio (this is usual format for small sensors) and ~13 MegaPixels (4160 * 3120). When I selected the 16:9 ratio the image was cropped to ~10 MP (4096 * 2304). The manufacturer could have made the camera software to have an option to take landscape images while holding the phone vertically by cropping to 3120 * 2340 (4:3 format) or 3120 * 1755 (16:9). This would not be enough for 4K video, but it would be plenty for Full-HD (which is only 1920 * 1080). Rps (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Ironically, when I first read the comic on my phone (portrait), I did not realise there was a third "CONS" column. ColinHogben (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

that never would have happened with a circular screen ~ ocæon 01:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Not that good of an explanation, even if I wrote some of it. Actually, especially since I wrote some of it. Netherin5 (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks 90.10 Netherin5 (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I have never had problems holding my smartphone in landscape, or my camera in portrait. I just can't understand the use of portrait to film anything but one for two people's faces just because you hold the device that way to make a phone call (on the v rare occasion they do). Hey but I was born in the 50's RIIW - Ponder it (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't think the 50x150 view comment is right. I'd suggest removing it or backing it up with a source. 162.158.146.16 23:14, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I feel like there's an awesome joke to be made about Battlefield Earth here... Glassvein (talk) 02:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Table

may the pro con table be replicated and expanded upon? the realworld aplications of horizontal, vertical, diagonal, and circular screens would be comparable the same way. ocæon 01:54, 5 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

so my first contibution and i screwed up formatting, heh, i have no clues to fixing that.. anyway angular filming with cameras goes well beyond dutchy, nobody else remember early handheld rap music videos? and circular screens also gave a pro which is not yet noted at all please don't make me add it! ocæon 18:34, 5 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

You did start your first line with a space which formats the text as a quote. And please sign your comments with at least ~~~~ or use the sign button at the top of the editor. --Dgbrt (talk) 19:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"I'm not turning my phone sideways" -- seems like someone never plays any games on his phone. Heck, even docs and sheets are better in horizontal orientation than vertical orientation. As for the "don't trust anyone speaking from inside a circle," it made me think of (1) the little peepholes on doorways to see who's out there and (2) The Oval Office. While that's not technically a circle, it's somewhat related... 162.158.74.153 08:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"The title text quip about circular video would be a reference to having a demon trapped inside a summoning circle" Oh really? You know this how? Google certainly didn't show anything like that; indeed, there was a lot about "circle of trust" and I don't trust this comment. I'd say [citation needed] or change it to "circle of trust". ( DON'T CENSOR ME, MAN! ;^) 162.158.214.70 11:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Circle of trust seems to be a clothing brand? I do not see any relevance on that. Nevertheless I think the demon thing should, if at all, be one of few alternative explanations. It might just be a nonsense statement, or could be related to a fisheye objective, binoculars, or to the looking holes in appartment doors. --Lupo (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

wow this circle is sure disliked alot considering randall says it solves the aspect ratio problem. if it's a trust issue then what happens in the case that two people hold a conversation via circular televideophones? ocæon 22:14, 6 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Maybe Randal and someone he knows have those Alexa video things that are circular and people talk out of... RIIW - Ponder it (talk) 22:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Randalls favorite video orientation

What makes people think he likes the horizontal orientation more? Looking at the comic it seems to me he likes the vertical orientation more. --172.69.54.87 10:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

the pro for vertical suggests it has reached a tipping point for widespread social acceptance, but whether it's pro status is an assertion or a path of least resistance remains unclear. it leaves us free to project on the issue. ocæon 22:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Pro/Contra Vertical Video

The explanation so far seems to suggest that he thinks vertical video is obviously bad, and even compares it to the "Norm" type file comic. "claiming that an obviously bad idea keeps being done by accident 'so we might as well just accept it'". However, I think this is not true at all, and the comic aligns much more to the comics which talked about common misconceptions (Frankenstein) or commonly used bad grammar ("could care less"). On many of these comics, he seems to have the opinion that the people who insist on the "correct" way should stop insisting and just accept the change. I think this one relates much more to those, and he is pro vertical video [which I'm not, so this is not an interpretation based on personal preference], instead of relating to the "Norm" comic where he obviously is just joking. The point of the comic is "stop fighting it". And nowhere in the comic he claims that horizontal video is obviously better, like the explanation says so far. 162.158.89.223 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Another con with circular video is that it can get distorted because of Mercator Projection.