Aspect Ratio 4:3 crop to 3:2
- Thread starter chifineart
- Start date
- Status
If you crop a 4:3 into a 3:2 box you will have to cut off a small bit from each side. If you want to fit a 4:3 image into a 3:2 box it will have an empty border at the top and bottom. The resolution needn't change in either case, you just get to decide if you want to lose a bit from the sides or fit it into a box that will leave a gap.
As a related aside, I used to shoot with my drone at...maybe it's 4:3...because I wanted all the image captured but then realized all my video is 16:9 and I would end up with a border at the top and bottom so now I shoot at 16:9 which is available as a selection. Maybe that's my Mavic 3 but I could be remembering this from one of my other drones.
Shoot full frame 4:3 and create your custom crop to 3:2 in post. Otherwise, DJI will be using a default crop frame and throwing away an equal part of your original image from each side, and megapixels in the process. One of those sides may contain information you want to use in your 3:2 drop, so crop it in post, so you can still have the choice to take more off one side than the other, or keep both sides, and perhaps content-aware fill the top and bottom, to achieve the 3:2 aspect.
That's what I used to do and then I found myself filling the frame with my subject and when I wanted to put the still image into a video I was forced to have black bars above and below the image which don't like. I am invariably shooting still with the intent of adding them to the storyline of a video so now I shoot the 16:9 crop. If one is planning on selling pics or printing them then shooting the full frame is for sure the way to go. If I was smart I'd shoot full frame and keep my desired area within the 16:9 area but I'm not. I would like an overlay for the cropped area in my viewfinder showing me the 16:9 crop but it's not there yet.
Why is it you want to maintain a predetermined aspect ratio? Why would you want less than everything the camera can give you, and then deal with the final crop, if any, in post? Are you a landscape, architectural or other experienced photographer? Cropping is your most powerful compositional tool, when used properly. Every image will tell you how it should be cropped for maximum impact to the viewer and best comp artistically. Many folks here will have no idea what I'm talking about because they never studied photography and are not pros. They just bought a drone one day.
Hear! Hear! Everyone with a drone is now a photographer because it comes with a camera! Everyone with a smartphone is now a photographer! Unfortunately, the tool does not make the craftsman.
So, I was out with another couple in a cool natural area, and I was making some images with my camera. They were using a smartphone. Later that evening, after seeing my images at their house for dinner, she says "wow, those are great! You must have a really good camera". I said "yes, I do. And this meal is good. You must have a really good stove!".
I started shooting with an SLR in 1969 and along the way have had occasion to teach many classes on Photoshop,darkroom technique, Fina Cut, composition and such. I shot professionally for about 12 years and I understand exactly what you’re saying and I generally agree with your point. However, as I tried to say, I'm just not real bright so I often found my self composing a nice image in a 4:3 ratio filling the frame so I do -not- have to crop later and then when I wanted to insert it into a video I was forced to fit it into a 16:9 frame, leaving black sides left and right. I am not adverse to cropping at all and do it often even when shooting 16:9 if it makes the compositon better. Were I smart I would give myself room to do that cropping from a 4:3 but all too often I revert to my long standing methods and that doesn't involve keeping in mind the final image will end up in a 16:9. If you shoot 4:3 and fill your frame with the subject it ends up with unsightly (to me) borders when placed in a 16:9 video. So now I shoot in a 16:9 frame and make that the final image. I shoot much more video footage than still images and the stills I do are invariable meant to be part of the video story.
Shoot with the ratio that gives you the most pixels. Compose as best you can on that ratio to allow whatever use you have in mind at the end, and perform the final result in post.
hah..I'd heard "you must have really good pots and pans" but I never used it...
So please answer this simple question. I want my M3 to shoot video so that I get a full frame when uploading to Premiere Pro. What should my setting be...4x3 or 6x9? I am trying to avoid black bars. Please answer the same question for still camera images. Of course I cannot switch back and forth easily while in flight so what is the best setting that will give me full frame image in Premiere Pro. 4 x 3 or 6 x 9
Geez! Enough with the "black bars" already. ANY image shot at 9;16 can be cropped into a 3:4 and ANY image shot at 3:4 can be cropped into a 9:16 with no 'black bars'. But in either case you will lose a bit of the image along the edges. Yes, if you cannot grasp the concept of cropping, you will have some voids at the edges, but you can make them any color you want. I shoot as large as I can and put the subject in the center - away from any potential cropping. But I often crop to improve the image. I often think of a comment made by a judge in a photographic competition that "what does not add to the impact of the image often detracts from it. - the junk around the edge. Crop it out.
I understand your frustration but it was a not an answer to my question. What aspect ratio gives you a "native" full frame image filling the screen without bars for video 9 x 16 or 4x 3? before any cropping is done?
If you shoot 16:9 then upon importing to Premiere Pro you could just drop the file into a timeline (set to HD, 2K, or 4K) and you would be good to go. If you shoot in 4:3 then you have the option to crop some off the top or bottom and you will still have no black bars. (that's the short answer) BUT...if you shoot 4:3 and put that into the timeline you will have black bars unless you crop something off top or bottom and reposition it. The sensor is 4:3 so by shooting at 4:3 you get everything the camera sees and you get to decide what part of the image you want to use while in Premiere. If you shoot 16:9 you are "pre-cropping" and you miss some of what you could have recorded but you can drop it into Premiere and not worry about cropping. I used to shoot 4:3 all the time for the reasons JimSteadman has put forth. However, too often I found that I had recorded footage and left no area to crop away. Since I failed to leave any area around the subject to crop away I was forced to fit the 4:3 image into a 16:9 4K screen which leaves large black borders. I find that visually unappealing so I have stopped shooting 4:3. If you are really good about ensuring that the area you want will fit into a 16:9 crop, go for it. Otherwise just shoot 16:9. That's it for me on this subject that has strayed a bit. Message me if you want to discuss this any further.
I apologize to anyone offended by my last response. I asked the same question (sort of) on this forum a couple of years because I thought 9:16 was giving me bigger photos. Not so.
Think of it this way: The 9:16 and 3:4 are not sizes; they are ratios of height to width. The pixels per inch will be the same regardless of ratio.
So if you put these ratios into effect on images of the same width and you want to print or see the image 16 inches wide, then the 9:16 ratio produces an image that is 9 inches high. But if you want to print or see the image shot in 3:4 ratio, you have an image that is 12 inches high. (Multiply both factors by 4 to get to the 16 inches wide size).
The same image at 100px/in shot at 9:16 has 14,400 pixels. But if shot at 3:4 it has 19,200 pixels.
I used to shoot at 9:16 until someone pointed this out. Now I shoot at 3:4 because when I crop I have more pixels to work with.
Think of it this way: The 9:16 and 3:4 are not sizes; they are ratios of height to width. The pixels per inch will be the same regardless of ratio.
So if you put these ratios into effect on images of the same width and you want to print or see the image 16 inches wide, then the 9:16 ratio produces an image that is 9 inches high. But if you want to print or see the image shot in 3:4 ratio, you have an image that is 12 inches high. (Multiply both factors by 4 to get to the 16 inches wide size).
The same image at 100px/in shot at 9:16 has 14,400 pixels. But if shot at 3:4 it has 19,200 pixels.
I used to shoot at 9:16 until someone pointed this out. Now I shoot at 3:4 because when I crop I have more pixels to work with.
This discussion makes me realize how vastly different member base this forum comprises.
To me, a seasoned professional photographer of over 25 years some of the topics or questions presented bring a little giggle to my dial. Not trying to be disrespectful here but as with many things in life the level of knowledge or expertise varies greatly among people. Someone can be a MD, an expert in his field but could have no idea about photography, cameras, sensor aspect ratios etc. Like I know a lot about everything related to photography but I know little about viruses, bacterias, blood cells, bone structure etc.
So I could be asking a trivial questions on a medical forum and might be ridiculed for looking stupid in eyes of knowledgable people in their field of expertise.
So, where I am heading with this is to remind everyone here, myself including to be respectful and kind with our responses and not to be too guick judging others through optics of our own level of knowledge.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
3 Manastirska river near abandoned tunnels- Started by alex_markov
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Forum statistics
