Why do people write ratios wrong?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Jeff Kleist, Jun 24, 2002.

  1. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Things like it's 1:1.85, 2:3 pulldown

    For one thing, the screen aspect ratios look horribly lopsided that way, and width x height is the established way to write a ratio in this case.

    And it's 3:2 pulldown because it's 3 repeated frames, then 2, so 2:3 pulldown is just outright wrong
     
  2. NickSo

    NickSo Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2000
    Messages:
    4,260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Nick So
    ive never seen anybody write 2:3 pulldown, or 1:1.85 AR [​IMG]
     
  3. Thik Nongyow

    Thik Nongyow Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    189
    Likes Received:
    0
    It may show how ignorant these people may be regarding aspect ratios. I think it is strange for some people to write "4:3" (standard TV aspect ratio) or "16:9" (widescreen TV aspect ratio) as "4x3" and "16x9" respectively.
     
  4. DaveF

    DaveF Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2001
    Messages:
    17,626
    Likes Received:
    1,434
    Location:
    One Loudoun, Ashburn, VA
    Real Name:
    David Fischer
     
  5. TheoGB

    TheoGB Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,744
    Likes Received:
    0
    Columbia Tristar continually put 1:1.85 and 1:2.35 on the backs of their boxes and it is wrong!!!!! [​IMG]
    DaveF: If you talk about a ratio then it is across and down (or up) - map reading gets very hard if you don't obey this method of grid reference. I can't believe you've never noticed this? [​IMG]
    Thik: 4x3 and 16x9 comes from referring to multiplication of (say) 2 x 3 as "multiplying 2 by 3...", hence 4x3 is literally read by me as "four by three"...
     
  6. ken thompson

    ken thompson Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2000
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly. kinda like how you would refer to a 2x4 piece of lumber when writing it. It wouldn't be a 2:4 The ":" sign infers the word "to". the "x" symbol infers the word "by".
     
  7. David Susilo

    David Susilo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 8, 1999
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, the pronounciation being used is wrong.

    The ratio is written as 16:9 but people mispronounced it by saying "16 by 9". It's supposed to be "16 to 9"

    3:2 pulldown, even by the industry standard, also called 2:3 pulldown. It's because of the sequence 3 - 2 - 3 - 2 and there is no telling whether the '3' or the '2' that comes first. So either writing (3:2 or 2:3) are acceptable.
     
  8. Glenn Overholt

    Glenn Overholt Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok, but who's the wise guy that came up with 16? When referring to a ratio, shouldn't the base unit be one (1)?

    This would make a 16:9 - 1:.5625, or a 4:3 1:.75. That makes a lot more sense to me!

    Glenn
     
  9. David Susilo

    David Susilo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 8, 1999
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with you, Glenn. AFAIK, from every single one of my math classes, the base ratio should be 1, not 9 or 3.

    Mathematically speaking, though, there are two 'groups' in defining ratio. One is basing all ratio to 1, the other is basing the ratio to whatever number as long as both numbers are round number (no decimal point).
     
  10. Holadem

    Holadem Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2000
    Messages:
    8,967
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  11. Joseph DeMartino

    Joseph DeMartino Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    8,311
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Florida
    Real Name:
    Joseph DeMartino
     
  12. ken thompson

    ken thompson Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2000
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    0
    I infer that you are implying something here. Is my inferrence of your implication correct?
     
  13. TheoGB

    TheoGB Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,744
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  14. Joseph DeMartino

    Joseph DeMartino Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    8,311
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Florida
    Real Name:
    Joseph DeMartino
     
  15. Henry Carmona

    Henry Carmona Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2000
    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Antonio
    Real Name:
    Henry Carmona
    Dayum! Are people afraid to talk to you guys? [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  16. Mark Larson

    Mark Larson Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    0
    My 2 cents...
    4 by 3 is 4 divided by 3. (which is 1.33:1), and 16 by 9 the same way is 16 divided by 9.
    1.85:1 is pronounced as 1.85 is to 1. This is just the way i was taught, and that's the way i pronounce it.

    Thus, 16:9::1.78:1 (or something - i'm confusing myself here! :p) )
     

Share This Page