4:3 > 16:9

4:3 > 16:9
You literally CANNOT refute this.

Attached: standard-vs-widescreen1[1].jpg (560x374, 24.43K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=SotdCmhFRQU
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Deppends of the show. You can have better panoramic shots in 16:9

You can only do a 4 person split screen with 4:3, but you can do a 6 person split screen with 16:9. So you are wrong OP, and as usual, a faggot.

Ultra wide screen is even better to me. Though I don't know if any show was made in ultra wide.

For me, it's shows that were aired in 4:3 getting a 16:9 re-release. All the staging and action happens directly in the center of the screen, occasionally you'll see bits of characters not completely colored in, etc.

Attached: vlcsnap-2020-06-26-23h35m47s801.png (1920x1080, 1.42M)

Except I can by simply saying: You. Are. Wrong.

For cinema absolutely not. Animation I can go either way but a lot of american/korean pupeteer style hacks stage their scenes in a way that would work better in 4:3

They both divide into even quarters.

Too bad fucking nobody does splitscreen anymore.
But seriously, I miss splitscreen multiplayer.

GOLDEN RATIO

4:3 is better for cartoons, movies and the like
16:9 is better for vidya

For me it's 16:10, the best of both worlds.

Just make an entire wall a screen and you can alter the resolution to whatever makes a given piece of media pop more.

I still don't know what that means and refuse to learn.

youtube.com/watch?v=SotdCmhFRQU
I'm sure you can at least spare 3 minutes.

Chowder has similar problems being up-resed to 1080p
Background drawings and lineart are a lot more obviously sloppy and scratchy.

21:9 master race

Literally no difference
4:3 equals 16:9 if you multiply it by 3

holy shit...

>4:3 equals 16:9 if you multiply it by 3

You, uh, you sure about that math there, chief?

Attached: What.png (268x341, 111.78K)

16:9 > 4:3 because 4:3 is too small and 16:9 allows more dynamic shots
16:9 > 18:9 because in 18:9, squeezing the shot for an even wider view is ridiculously stupid looking while in 16:9 it's a great way to engage the audience with tension or panoramic stills (panning shots stay in 16:9 because it's redundant otherwise). Also squeezing back a perspective to 4:3 could work in 16:9 shows quite well (flashbacks, time travel shenanigans, 4th wall breaks, computer screenshots, etc.) In 18:9 it looks ugly (both reverting to 16:9 and 4:3) and doesn't work due to 16:9 being considered still a modern standard and 4:3 leaving too large a gap.
I so want Samurai Jack in 16:9 (with 18:9 cuts) I was watching through the first four seasons 2 weeks ago and I don't think there's a single shot that couldn't be done well. Genndy will probably not touch it with Primal and his other projects going on.

Also
4:3 = Horse blinders
16:9 = Helmet

18:9 is closest you could get to simulating human perspective on a 2D medium so it should only be reserved for home cinemas or screens big enough to cover the entire view of a human.

This has been my weekly autistic ramble.

He may have met by themselves, 3x3=9 and 4x4=16, respectively. Or it's too late for proper multiplication.

Also is another argument for 16:9

i can see why Metalocalypse season 1 is only in SD on DVD despite being produced in 16:9 but cropped on TV Broadcast and Adult Swim website.

16:10 is how I roll

I always thought having the aspect ratio be wider than 4:3 was better since we have two eyes and stereo vision.
Also, are there other instances of shows (outside of South Park) being completely re-rendered to accommodate HD/16:9 ?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 77.5K)

I miss them too, some Xbox games still do it, except Halo 5. Gears 5 is the most recent one that I know.

Turok 2 catch the monkey 4 player mode was fucking epic when drinking.

4/3 > 16/9
4*9 > 16*3
36 > 48
QED. Disproof by counterexample.

>things from my childhood are the best
>prove me wrong
We had this thread yesterday. We are having this thread today. We will have this thread tomorrow.