Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Rotate 90 loses aspect ratio?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 12:51:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
the subject. How can I fix that please?

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
September 15, 2005 2:31:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Terry Pinnell" <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:bovgi1haq43t1d4to6ekhfe1ltnrum9cba@4ax.com...
> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
> the subject. How can I fix that please?
>
> --
> Terry, West Sussex, UK

I have never heard of, or seen, any movie shot in anything but Landsacape
Format.

If you do succeed in getting it on your screen in Portrait Format, you will
only be using half the screen. would it not just be easier to turn the
screen on its side?

Roy G
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 2:38:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Terry Pinnell wrote:
>
> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
> the subject. How can I fix that please?
>
> --
> Terry, West Sussex, UK

Your monitor is not set up properly for aspect ratio. It appears it's
too wide for the height. If you have a wide-screen laptop you might
have to live with it, but I've never set one of those up so that could
be wrong.

Colin D.
Related resources
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 2:38:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote:

>
>
>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>>
>> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
>> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
>> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
>> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
>> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
>> the subject. How can I fix that please?
>>
>> --
>> Terry, West Sussex, UK
>
>Your monitor is not set up properly for aspect ratio. It appears it's
>too wide for the height. If you have a wide-screen laptop you might
>have to live with it, but I've never set one of those up so that could
>be wrong.
>
>Colin D.

Eh? You've lost me there! This is just a standard PC monitor...

As I said, MPG is a standard format from digicam (Sony DSC1
Cybershot). A movie taken in landscape mode looks fine. A movie taken
in portrait mode looks fine too, if you're prepared to get neck-ache
viewing it! But after rotating the latter to vertical, its proportions
are changed.

Can others confirm this behaviour with MM please?

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK





--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 4:20:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Roy" <royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote:

>"Terry Pinnell" <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message
>news:bovgi1haq43t1d4to6ekhfe1ltnrum9cba@4ax.com...
>> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
>> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
>> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
>> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
>> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
>> the subject. How can I fix that please?
>>
>> --
>> Terry, West Sussex, UK
>
>I have never heard of, or seen, any movie shot in anything but Landsacape
>Format.

Hmm - narrow life you must have led! Have you never used or heard of
anyone who uses a DIGICAM? If so, have you never heard of anyone
taking a movie with one, with the camera orientated vertically in
order to accommodate the vertical subject and eliminate unwanted
background?

>If you do succeed in getting it on your screen in Portrait Format, you will
>only be using half the screen. would it not just be easier to turn the
>screen on its side?

Sure, ask the intended viewers to turn their PC monitor on its side...

FWIW, for anyone else with a similar query, I've now downloaded and
installed a program that solved the problem. It's VirtualDubMod,
and I used its Rotate feature which *preserves* the aspect ratio.

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 12:27:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Terry Pinnell wrote:
>
> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Terry Pinnell wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
> >> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
> >> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
> >> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
> >> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
> >> the subject. How can I fix that please?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Terry, West Sussex, UK
> >
> >Your monitor is not set up properly for aspect ratio. It appears it's
> >too wide for the height. If you have a wide-screen laptop you might
> >have to live with it, but I've never set one of those up so that could
> >be wrong.
> >
> >Colin D.
>
> Eh? You've lost me there! This is just a standard PC monitor...
>
Width and height controls on monitors are independent - you can wind the
width in or out, and the height up or down. If they are set up wrongly,
the picture is out of shape, probably not noticeable until you rotate an
image. If you know the aspect ratio for the digicam image you can
actually measure the height and width of the image on-screen and
calculate the displayed ratio. If it differs from the camera image
ratio, then your screen width and/or height needs adjusting.

Colin D.
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 12:27:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote:

>
>
>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>>
>> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Terry Pinnell wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
>> >> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
>> >> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
>> >> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
>> >> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
>> >> the subject. How can I fix that please?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Terry, West Sussex, UK
>> >
>> >Your monitor is not set up properly for aspect ratio. It appears it's
>> >too wide for the height. If you have a wide-screen laptop you might
>> >have to live with it, but I've never set one of those up so that could
>> >be wrong.
>> >
>> >Colin D.
>>
>> Eh? You've lost me there! This is just a standard PC monitor...
>>
>Width and height controls on monitors are independent - you can wind the
>width in or out, and the height up or down. If they are set up wrongly,
>the picture is out of shape, probably not noticeable until you rotate an
>image. If you know the aspect ratio for the digicam image you can
>actually measure the height and width of the image on-screen and
>calculate the displayed ratio. If it differs from the camera image
>ratio, then your screen width and/or height needs adjusting.
>
>Colin D.

I repeat: there is nothing significantly wrong with the width and
height settings of my monitor. I did say "...noticeably stretched the
picture sideways...". We're not talking a few mm here, in case that's
your point!

My Sony DSC-1's aspect ratio is 1.5 (2048/1360), and my PC monitor,
like I'd guess 95% of monitors, is 1.33 (1024/768). How does that
affect the issue? I'm not trying to FILL the screen! I just want to
show a movie without asking the viewers to risk breaking their necks!
Obviously, the price I pay for taking the original in vertical mode
(and hence eliminating extraneous background) is that I will have
black space on either side in the finished result.

Anyway, I've now solved the problem from advice elsewhere. I've found,
downloaded, installed and used the Rotate facility in VirtualDubMod,
which (unlike MM) preserves the aspect ratio. Although most of it
looks dauntingly complex to my novice eye, it's done exactly the job I
was seeking.

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 6:23:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> writes:

>>I have never heard of, or seen, any movie shot in anything but Landsacape
>>Format.

>Hmm - narrow life you must have led! Have you never used or heard of
>anyone who uses a DIGICAM? If so, have you never heard of anyone
>taking a movie with one, with the camera orientated vertically in
>order to accommodate the vertical subject and eliminate unwanted
>background?

You can rotate a video camera into portrait orientation too, if you
want. But the problem is in displaying it - except in very special
circumstances, the display will still be in landscape orientation.
Even if you have the tools to rotate the video, you either end up with
black side bars, or you end up discarding most of the pixels of the
original and zoom in too much on the remainder, or some combination of
these.

That's why people generally shoot video in landscape orientation, even
if they're doing the shooting with a digicam.

>FWIW, for anyone else with a similar query, I've now downloaded and
>installed a program that solved the problem. It's VirtualDubMod,
>and I used its Rotate feature which *preserves* the aspect ratio.

But you still have the black bar-or-excessive-magnification problem.

Dave
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 1:14:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

davem@cs.ubc.ca (Dave Martindale) wrote:

>Terry Pinnell <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> writes:
>
>>>I have never heard of, or seen, any movie shot in anything but Landsacape
>>>Format.
>
>>Hmm - narrow life you must have led! Have you never used or heard of
>>anyone who uses a DIGICAM? If so, have you never heard of anyone
>>taking a movie with one, with the camera orientated vertically in
>>order to accommodate the vertical subject and eliminate unwanted
>>background?
>
>You can rotate a video camera into portrait orientation too, if you
>want. But the problem is in displaying it - except in very special
>circumstances, the display will still be in landscape orientation.
>Even if you have the tools to rotate the video, you either end up with
>black side bars, or you end up discarding most of the pixels of the
>original and zoom in too much on the remainder, or some combination of
>these.
>
>That's why people generally shoot video in landscape orientation, even
>if they're doing the shooting with a digicam.
>
>>FWIW, for anyone else with a similar query, I've now downloaded and
>>installed a program that solved the problem. It's VirtualDubMod,
>>and I used its Rotate feature which *preserves* the aspect ratio.
>
>But you still have the black bar-or-excessive-magnification problem.

Thanks for that constructive reply.

I understand the issue and agree portrait mode recording is a
trade-off. In this case (a child on a swing) there were clear
advantages. But, had I known the difficulty I'd have in rotating it
90°, I might well have settled for landscape. Then again, probably
not. It was just *one* child's smile I wanted to capture, not the
others playing close by around the edges. On balance I'll settle for
the wasted pixels and black space <g>.

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Anonymous
September 16, 2005 3:39:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Terry Pinnell wrote:
>
> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Terry Pinnell wrote:
> >>
> >> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Terry Pinnell wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
> >> >> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
> >> >> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
> >> >> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
> >> >> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
> >> >> the subject. How can I fix that please?
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Terry, West Sussex, UK
> >> >
> >> >Your monitor is not set up properly for aspect ratio. It appears it's
> >> >too wide for the height. If you have a wide-screen laptop you might
> >> >have to live with it, but I've never set one of those up so that could
> >> >be wrong.
> >> >
> >> >Colin D.
> >>
> >> Eh? You've lost me there! This is just a standard PC monitor...
> >>
> >Width and height controls on monitors are independent - you can wind the
> >width in or out, and the height up or down. If they are set up wrongly,
> >the picture is out of shape, probably not noticeable until you rotate an
> >image. If you know the aspect ratio for the digicam image you can
> >actually measure the height and width of the image on-screen and
> >calculate the displayed ratio. If it differs from the camera image
> >ratio, then your screen width and/or height needs adjusting.
> >
> >Colin D.
>
> I repeat: there is nothing significantly wrong with the width and
> height settings of my monitor. I did say "...noticeably stretched the
> picture sideways...". We're not talking a few mm here, in case that's
> your point!
>
> My Sony DSC-1's aspect ratio is 1.5 (2048/1360), and my PC monitor,
> like I'd guess 95% of monitors, is 1.33 (1024/768). How does that
> affect the issue? I'm not trying to FILL the screen! I just want to
> show a movie without asking the viewers to risk breaking their necks!
> Obviously, the price I pay for taking the original in vertical mode
> (and hence eliminating extraneous background) is that I will have
> black space on either side in the finished result.
>
> Anyway, I've now solved the problem from advice elsewhere. I've found,
> downloaded, installed and used the Rotate facility in VirtualDubMod,
> which (unlike MM) preserves the aspect ratio. Although most of it
> looks dauntingly complex to my novice eye, it's done exactly the job I
> was seeking.
>
> --
> Terry, West Sussex, UK

Great. I make the point that I was offering a *possible* answer to your
problem, not a definitive one. In the circumstances I find your replies
to be somewhat testy, leaving me feeling that I wouldn't care if your
pictures turned out octagonal.

Colin D.
September 17, 2005 1:47:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Terry Pinnell" <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:1qkii19eh6v6mcc2j23bjflodoaai88kbo@4ax.com...
> "Roy" <royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>"Terry Pinnell" <terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote in message
>>news:bovgi1haq43t1d4to6ekhfe1ltnrum9cba@4ax.com...
>>> I'm a novice user. Just installed MM 2.0 (on XP SP1). One of the first
>>> features I took advantage of was the Rotate 90, from Video Effects, on
>>> an MPG from my digicam. It was taken in portrait mode but displayed in
>>> landscape mode, so I've used Rotate 90 to get it back to portrait. But
>>> that has now noticeably stretched the picture sideways, 'fattening up'
>>> the subject. How can I fix that please?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Terry, West Sussex, UK
>>
>>I have never heard of, or seen, any movie shot in anything but Landsacape
>>Format.
>
> Hmm - narrow life you must have led! Have you never used or heard of
> anyone who uses a DIGICAM? If so, have you never heard of anyone
> taking a movie with one, with the camera orientated vertically in
> order to accommodate the vertical subject and eliminate unwanted
> background?
>
>>If you do succeed in getting it on your screen in Portrait Format, you
>>will
>>only be using half the screen. would it not just be easier to turn the
>>screen on its side?
>
> Sure, ask the intended viewers to turn their PC monitor on its side...
>
> FWIW, for anyone else with a similar query, I've now downloaded and
> installed a program that solved the problem. It's VirtualDubMod,
> and I used its Rotate feature which *preserves* the aspect ratio.
>
> --
> Terry, West Sussex, UK


No. I am pretty sure I have not led a narrow life.

The next time I see a Portrait Mode Movie at the Cinema or on the TV, I will
post and offer my abject apologies.

If you think that way of shooting is practical, it seems strange to me that
Wedding Videographers don't shoot in Portrait Mode. Most of their stuff
would be framed best in an Upright Mode.

But hey what do I know, I am only a stills photographer, who happens to have
been on a course for 16mm Sound Projection some 40 years ago.

Roy G
!