It is difficult to deny anyone a positive effect that digital transition from the film has been on photography. The sheer number of photographs taken each year has increased rapidly in the digital age, especially now when the cameras are included on almost every cell phone. But we have lost one aspect of photography: Photo album.
Digital capture has many benefits on the film. They are from the ability to preview the image captured in real -time, from the ability to develop waiting Days for film and print, for the fact that a complete collection of digital family photos can now be held in the palm of your hand, as opposed to filling the bookshell with heavy photo albums.
Despite all areas of photography where digital imaging has improved photographic experience, there is still an area that requires improvement, and it is in such a way that digital photos should be seen. From the first digital photograph captured in December 1975, digital photos are displayed mainly on the screen designed to accommodate video content.
Most of today’s digital displays fall into one of two aspects of two aspects: 4: 3 full screen or 16: 9 widescreen. Not surprisingly, the labels refer to two video broadcasting standards, for which they were originally designed. Since the video content is historically captured only in horizontal/landscape orientation, the odd, rectangular shape for the video was the only logical option.
Unfortunately, when used to display vertical/portrait-oriented still photos, images must be lowered for approximately half size of their horizontal counterparts to fit on one of these screen formats. This is particularly annoying when a slideshow presentation is seen which contains different types of different types of composed photos.
Special use of rectangular display since digital photographs long ago has delayed the development of a tablet-style, portable digital photo album for about 50 years. I could have understood reluctance to change if there was so much simple solution to the problem yet.
We know that when the television broadcasting standard was converted to digital and the display format was converted into widcreen, the industry had no problem adding 25% to the width of the existing 4: 3 format screen to achieve the new 16: 9 screen format. To meet the needs of the photographic community, they can only add 25% to the height of 4: 3 displays to create a square display, which can be used mainly to display photos. The additional headroom will allow individual photos to fit on-screen in the same size regardless of their orientation. Not only the screen will allow for slideshows of the same, similar size pictures and landscape photos, but, as symmetrical, the square screen can be equally divided equally for the choice of options to see photo album style options in images of 4, 9, 16, 36, or 144 similar size.
If the industry is very timid to jump directly in creating a digital photo album, perhaps it may begin by offering a class digital photo frame to test the water. I am sure that the sale of a digital frame that provides a better slide show experience than receiving on any other existing device will be a welcome addition, if not the final replacement, for the current line of the frame. Once the concept proves itself popular with consumers, it is sure to follow a long -awaited digital photo album.
There are two pictures below. The first indicates how the four common aspect ratio images will fit on a square display screen in any direction. I chose to use a 12 × 12-inch screen in my example, but until all the sides remained equal.
The second illustration depicts how the photo should be reduced to fit on-screen. I used a 16 × 9-inch screen, with a 12 × 12-inch screen, 144 square inch similar surface area. Compare the volume of the screen surface that resides on each photo aspect ratio on both screen, and the difference in image sizes on two screens, and the problem should be clear. It should also be noted that size inequality between images is not better if the 4: 3 ratio is used instead of the display. The nearest proportional 4: 3 screens are a 12 × 9-inch screen, and although not as in vain of the small and screen surface, because its nine-inch height is the same, the photo size is exactly the same as on a broad screen.
There should be no doubt that, if it is still the primary purpose of a device to see electronically, then the best screen format is 1: 1 square.
The opinion expressed above is only by the author.
Image Credit: Licensed through header photo Amount deposited,
