No, I think Curious Guy understood.
You're exactly right about aspect ratio -- and the problem with these
photos is that the aspect ratio is messed up. Which means that
decreasing the width AND height by the same percentage would not solve
anything. It would only preserve the incorrect aspect ratio while
changing the size of the image.
To adapt your example, let say the correct aspect ratio of one of these
photos is 4:3. (The numbers reflect width to height or W:H.) But as
uploaded, the photo has an aspect ratio of 8:3.
To correct this, Curious Guy reduced the width by 50 percent, while
keeping the height constant. This corrects the problem -- it changes
the 8 to 4. The 3 remains the same.
This is exactly equivalent to giving a command -- if your software
provides one -- like "Aspect ratio > 4:3"
But the other problem, as I noted, is that the CORRECT aspect ratio is
different in each of the photos, and it seldom appears to be something
easy like 4:3 or 16:9. So you need the greater flexibility of
fine-tuning by percentage, or pixel size, or something like that.
On 2009-02-20 11:19:47 -0500, shounen-ai <shounen-ai@shounen-ai.com> said:
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:48:46 -0800, curious guy <curious_guy@hush.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 4s00th <4s00th@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If I might, there were a group of pix that were captured from video
>>> with the wrong aspect ratio. There were loud complaints that I'm not
>>> certain constitute "discussion."
>>
>> I have loaded one picture (DSC00655.jpg) into PhotoImpact 4.2. It had
>> dimensions of 1,680 by 1,050. I tried reducing the width by several
>> different amounts. A 50 percent reduction makes it looks about right.
>> Do you know if 50 percent is the correct correction factor? Do you
>> want me to upload the 50 percent picture?
>
> The problem is a matter of aspect ratio, not percentage. In fact, if
> you were attempting to reduce by a percentage, then it should have
> turned out okay as a the same percentage should have been applied to
> both of the dimensions keeping them in the same ratio.
>
> Let me see if I can make this easy -- the aspect ratio refers to the
> ratio between the height of a picture and the width of the picture.
> (Or perhaps they express the ratio the other way around, width to
> height -- that part confuses me some!) So if you reduce the height by
> 50% then you have to reduce the width by 50% to maintain the correct
> ratio. If you change one and not the other, or if you change them in
> different amounts, the picture ends up looking stretched.
>
> We see this problem in video conversions often. This is because movie
> screens have an aspect ratio of 16:9 while TV screens (and older
> monitors!) have an aspect ratio of 4:3. And different types of video
> also use different aspect ratios -- for example, there is a different
> aspect ratio used for VCD files and SVCD files. Go Figure! The
> letterbox format is an attempt to reconcile some of these differences
> as opposed to the pan-and-scan method that was normally used to
> convert movies to the older TV standard, which basically just crops
> the picture to fit on the screen, removing stuff from the sides.
>
> I hope this helps you understand. As I said, I would have thought that
> if you used a percentage method of reducing or enlarging a picture
> that it would have kept the proper aspect ratio -- but apparently your
> program does not work that way!
>
> Remember, sexy cartoons or stories depicting children are illegal in
> Canada, and now in Austrailia since a judge there declared:
>
> Just because they aren't real doesn't mean they aren't real.
>
> Shounen-Ai
|
|