History behind camera aspect ratio

Most cameras today have a 3:2 aspect ratio digital sensors inside of them🤭 Have you ever wondered why is that so?🤔 It's not like the perfect ratio for your photographs, that must be 4:3😁 I bet most of your shots are cropped, so is there any reason behind 3:2 sensors?🤌 I'll try to explain that in todays new episode!🤩 We'll dig into history behind that, from Barnak's Ur-Leica to 35mm and medium format film, from first digital cameras to completely new camera imaging systems👍

If you like this video, you can buy me a coffee ☕️

My filming gear:

Some of the insides:

0:00 Intro
1:00 How it all started
3:07 Oskar Barnack’s first camera
4:35 The win of 3:2 and failure of others
5:26 Leica’s post war dominance
5:58 Last tries to make it right
7:12 From film to digital
7:54 Common sense over tradition
8:30 Conclusion
9:55 Outro

Value the aperture! 🤙

Instagram:

Music:

[Gallery]

1. In the early days, the 24 x 36 was referred to as "double frame".
2. This fretting about cropping is something that has grown out of people looking at images they see on their monitors. If you ever worked in a darkroom, cropping is just a thing you did. Those with a formal education in photography were taught to crop to the subject -- cropping to support what you were trying to communicate. In news photography, there were other things driving cropping, such as editor giving you an area into which you were to fit a meaningful photo -- and for magazine photographers, the need to always include verticals that might be the cover shot. If you look at one of the classics of political photo reportage, David Douglas Duncan's "Self-Portrait U.S.A.", you'll see that DDD cropped to the subject. The book is the end product of his shooting B&W stills for NBC News that were show nightly during the 1968 Republican and Democratic national conventions . (His "big gun" was a Leica SLR with a prototypeTelyt 400 f/6.8 as well as Nikon Fs with lens 24mm to 105mm, a couple of Leicas, and a lot of Tri-X.)

To a competent photographer, the aspect ratio of the film or sensor should never be considered to be the defining ratio of the final image (imagine every shot from a Rollei TLR or Hasselblad SLR printed as a square). Rather, the aspect ratio suggests a starting point as either horizontal or vertical, and as an area that will accommodate the final artistic vision or communications objective of the photographer. Bottom line: If you can't handle cropping, you aint much of a photographer.

BTW...Micro 4/3 was not the original. It was the second 4/3 digital format and m4/3 really refers to the lens mount and optical formulae, since the original 4/3 was intended for DSLRs.

[mjodr]

3:04 and jump into the rabbit hole I did! Years ago and I still haven't found the bottom! I don't know why this topic consumes so much of my time.

[stroudswebs]

In the digital age now could have circular outputs to maximize what the lens produces now that would be cool with circle sensors and circle monitors. Just thinking outside of the box. Great video

[kennethscott]

While I don't share your disdain for 3:2 i think its ridiculous that camera companies limit our built in crop options to 1:1, 16:9 or 3:2. Im a fan of your xpan project and would love to be able to shoot natively at 2.35:1 but not about to shell out for a gfx in order to do it. I had a lumix lx100 that you could select what crop of the sensor was used which was kinda cool but still only gave you the above listed options in addition to the 4:3.

[jesseyules]

I love how simple the production of your channel is. One nice talking head portrait + slides. Relaxing watch. :)

[RustyGuy]

you have such a soothing voice and your production value is out of the world. can't wait to make videos like you one day

[paceyombex]

I never thought about that before, amazing mini-docu!

[CyricFTW]

loved the simplistic production and subtlety of presentation. subbed. thanks.

[Dennis]

i think companies should be thinking of designing 4:3 (24mmx18mm) apsc sensors since it has a more square ratio compared to 3:2, which helps since most content is cropped to a square/ 5:4 ratio.

[Pedromchlkg]

Since lenses are round, sensors should be 1:1 with size options in settings. A button to change landscape/ portrait modes, so we wouldn’t need to take portrait pictures in an awkward position or to have a heavy vertical grip.

[landscapefilmmakeragnius]

Incredible content, I love these concept videos. A new subscriber is on your list!!

[legoEndeavourStudios]

This video was very interesting and insightful! I'd love to see a square sensor full frame camera that fully uses the image circle. We need interesting cameras again

[lxhk]

I use to crop my images to an aspect ratio that fits best to my composition, choosing between square, 5:4, 3:2 or in very rare cases even more panoramic. Most of the time my choice is 5:4. In maybe 20% square or 3:2 fits better.

[venomk]

This was interesting to watch. I never know I would be interested in this topic but you made such a cool and informative video. Well done!

[dennisng]

AV, love your witty history lesson 🤣. I hope all’s well where you are. Am looking forward to seeing more of your traveling &, of course, your evocative images. ✌🏼& 📸

[LeoSavantt]

A 4:3 camera held in portrait position gives a 3:4 aspect ratio, which provides a very natural framing guide for portrait photography, much easier to compose than 3:2 held in portrait mode to give 2:3, which tends to "imprison" a portrait subject. It can be awkward to hold camera in portrait mode, but there are two solutions, a battery grip (heavy and expensive) or if cropping in camera isn't a problem, set the aspect ratio to 3:4 and hold the camera normally.

[Alexrocks]

That’s why I see micro four thirds as more social media friendly. The 4:3 aspect ratio really helps for different print aspects and the 1:1 look too

[olivial]

This explains why I ended up cropping 90% of photos from my x100 lol. Most of my photography is with m43 so I've gotten really used to 4x3, it's 100% the superior aspect ratio. The most frustrating thing is not being able to compose with 4x3 on most cameras... I'm happy throwing away those pixels but friction while composing is such a pain. Honestly just give me way more aspect ratio options, I'd love 4x5 in camera too and maybe 3x1 for panoramas (resolution would be a struggle for that one but would help to compose things still)

The history here is fascinating, thanks for teaching me something!

[Gj_frames]

4:3 would be lovely, I really like that with the GFX-series!

[darioncolbert]

Very interesting video I definitely didn’t know that history. I personally used smartphones before getting an interchangeable lens camera and I did find the 3:2 aspect ratio a bit wide when I made the switch. Every smartphone I have owned or used has a 4:3 sensor.