Photography question

You know how it is. You spend all evening relaxing at home with only a sick wife, a chicken madras and the Arctic Monkeys for company (more on them soon) and then it (not the wife, this time) suddenly strikes you that you haven’t blogged today.
And today is one of those days when I’d actually rather not, but I feel I probably should anyway. So, with more lengthy posts planned for tomorrow and (possibly) the weekend, it seems entirely reasonable to post a quota photo and a question.

Herewith the photo:

And herewith the question:

Should I be taking photos in 16:9 format, rather than the 4:3 I’m using at the moment?

In my opinion, landscape photos – of which I take lots – look much better in 16:9, but portrait photos – of which I take relatively few – look awful. So is it worth the  horrific implications on some photos for the mild improvement on the majority of the stuff I take?

Answers on a postcard (2.5:1.3), please. Or, better still, as a comment below, which can be formatted as you wish.

7 thoughts on “Photography question

  1. Delboy > I did consider this option, but in order to get the best from it, it would require some foresight at the time of taking the photo.
    I’m not sure I’m up to that.

  2. I hate to ask what may be an obviously stupid question in the world of the photog but is there any particular reason you can’t change the formatting from picture to picture?

  3. My thoughts would be to keep it in 4:3 and then crop in Photoshop, or whatever you use, later if you feel the need. The reason I would do it that way instead of the other way around is because you are more likely to have stuff that you don’t mind being cropped out in a landscape than in a portrait, right?

  4. I have to agree with Delboy, croping in photoshop later on is the best option… you should give it a try and see how well it goes maybe.

    Leave a Reply