"16:9" and "4:3" - Just HOW Do You Say It?! (1 Viewer)

[Arthur W]

ok, this is what I don't get. The ratio is written as 16:9 (Width to Height). However, screen manufactures such as Draper label their screen size as 9x16 (Height by width). So it seems like I could have a 16:9 ratioed, 9x16 ft screen. That annoys me.

 

[Dave Nibeck]

"16 BY 9" would require specifying some sort of measuring unit (a parsec is probably a tad too large when describing a TV screen)

Says who?

 

[Rick Radford]

I guess it depends on your viewing distance.

 

[MitchellC]

I say 16:9 as Sixteen to nine and 4:3 as four-three. 5.1 is five-point-one.

 

[Cees Alons]

Actually, you would have to pronounce 16:9 as 16 to 9 and 16x9 as 16 by 9. The first tells you what the ratio of width and height is, the second describes the surface of the screen.
As simple as that
Cees

 

[Robert Cook]

Jed M wrote:

Quote:

It's true that many DVDs are exactly 16:9, but soft-matted films might have more picture at the top and bottom, instead of being cropped at the sides. DVDs that actually have 1.85 ratios probably contain films which are hard-matted to 1.85, and in many cases, I don't think that producers would bother to zoom and crop at the sides. These are just my guesses, though, based on what is probably easier to do (a criterion which is rather compatible with human nature, if I may say ).

 

[MikeEckman]

If you go to any lumber store, and you ask for a 2 by 4, they will give you a piece of wood that has dimension of 2 foot tall and 4 foot wide and whatever length you want. This is represented by 2x4.

So when talking about aspect ratios, I think that 16x9 can be said as 16 by 9 correctly. I agree that the more correct pronunciation is 16 to 9, but in my opinion, both are correct.

 

[Denward]

A 2x4 is not 2x4 anymore. I think that a long time ago, 2x4's had a cross section of 2" x 4", but now they're actually about 1.75" x 4". But in the context of this discussion, 2x4 is okay with me because it has an actual dimension (inches) and it's more convenient to say than the actual size.

I know this is all nit picking, but I still think that 16:9 (16 to 9) describes the aspect ratio for a screen of any size, while 16x9 (16 by 9) specifies the aspect ratio but should also require a unit of measurement.

 

[Rick Radford]

Ah yes, picking nits.. well, a 2x4 actually measures 1.5 x 3.5 according to my tape measure. Still, that's a pretty fur piece from a parsec.
But your point is valid. I agree that 2 x 4 is 2 BY 4 and represents a unit of measure while 16:9 is an aspect ratio. Although I prefer 16 TO 9 I have a 4:3 HDTV set.