Time Markers: 0:00 - The Difference Between 16:9 and 2:1 0:45 - Creative Preference vs. Platform Performance 2:01 - Aspect Ratios on Phones & Mobile (iPhone XR example) 2:54 - Editing 2:1 in Final Cut Pro 4:38 - Upscaling Video Resolutions 5:45 - The Only Downside I've Found 6:54 - How to Do More With What You Already Have
Great vid... I have a little Final Cut tip for you: instead of manually adjusting the scale of each clip to 115%, there is a setting called "Spatial Conform" at the very bottom of the video inspector pane. It defaults to "Fit", meaning it *fits* the clip within whatever aspect ratio you are using for the project. If you change that to "Fill", it will automatically scale the clip up to *fill* the aspect ratio. You can then still manually adjust the Y position to move the clip up or down. The other setting choice is "None" which turns off spatial conforming where you can see how big a 1080 clip actually is within a 4k project. It's very quick to multi-select your entire timeline and change the Spatial Conform from Fit to Fill (although if you've already scaled clips they'll now be too big since they'll be scaled to fill first, then scaled bigger by the Scale setting). If you edit by putting all your footage on the timeline and cutting it down, this is an easy way to do it before you start the edit and you can adjust the vertical position as needed while you edit. Interestingly, while I can't find a setting to set Spatial Conform to always default to Fill, you CAN set the Spatial Conform of a clip BEFORE you bring it into a timeline. That's what I usually do... in the clip browser window multi-select ALL of the clips. When a clip or clips are selected in the clip browser, the only option in the inspector is Spatial Conform. Set them all to "Fill" and when you bring them into the timeline, they'll be the right size. Again, you can adjust the Y position as needed while you're editing. Completely agree that upscaling 1080 to 4k looks remarkably good, particularly with the EOS R. I think it's because even at 1080 23.98fps the camera captures 90Mbps of data (ALL-I), compared to a camera like the Sony A7iii, where 1080 at 23.98fps footage is 50mbps. This comment turned into an essay. Maybe I should have just made a video about it!!
For me personally, most of the time, the subject dictates the Aspect Ratio. A few examples: • I always snap a document with the Aspect Ratio that best fits the relevant parts of the document with as little of the non-relevant parts as possible. • Or if I make a video about a video game, I always use the same Aspect Ratio as the video game. • A single-person selfie from me has an aspect ratio of 3:4 if it's all about the face, but I make it wider if it's also about the background. • And a family selfie will always have the widest possible Aspect Ratio of my phone's camera, with wide-angle lens mode.
I think this is a smart way to approach the decision, thanks for the breakdown! 2:1 right now on TH-cam is very popular and looks really good, but it might not suit everything all the time.
@@tombuck My music album ,,Supa Aᵣcordéon Collection" is a great example of this: I recorded the screen, but in production, I cropped the recording to remove the distracting parts of the Beepboxco Song Player UI and leave only the music visualization, which is much more immersive. th-cam.com/play/PLzXfdSXyopfbHYROFOvnK_YTYSjJ_rnnZ.html
True, I always hate it when i watch 16:9 youtube videos on modern 20:9 phone displays, it looks so zoomed out but the second you zoom in you loose a ton of content from the top and bottom, and i think the 18:9 looks better for PC monitors and TVs too, as when pausing the video, the title at the top and the "player bar" at the bottom still don't interfere with the video's content so now it's easier to pause and read something or taking a screenshot.
I did a video explaining this..... So, here is the problem that I see with this.... the 2:1 I like it I started to use it... the problem that I see is that you are stretching the video image 115% BUT is only a 115% because the "Spatial Conform" it was set by default to "FIT" when you dragged the clip to the project timeline. So, in reality, FCPX already stretched more than 115% to fit the video in the project then you stretched even more to fill the gaps that is the same as you move the clip to the project while having the "Spatial Conform" set to FILL (50% STRETCHING). You can see what I am saying by setting the "Spatial Conform" to NONE then move the clip to the project, you will see that in reality, you are stretching the image 50%. the correct way of doing this for a 1080p video is by having the "Spatial Conform" set to NONE and the project dimensions set to 1920x960 that is the correct 2:1 aspect ratio for 1080p. ALSO, youtube re-encode the video AGAIN to 1920x960 when you upload the video as 3840x1920.
You’re 100% correct- there are a lot of factors to consider. But fortunately, especially with the EOS R’s high bitrate, the image still looks good despite having been scaled and stretched to oblivion 😬
@@tombuck Lucky you because I'm still filming with a Canon 80D. Tom thank you for the videos you do a great job. I hesitated to write the comment because I did not want it to be taken as a critic, I just wanted to contribute. see you in the next video.
i have a feature on my BMPCC4K, that give the ability to shot in real cinemascope with a 2.35 preview windows on a regular 4K 1.88 aspect ratio shot it give me a " Safe Zone " to recrop in any kind of ultrawide format, im probably shoot more in scope even if the export was 16/9 or Univisium, they use to do that in super 35 mm square image to make scope movie without the use of anamorphic lense and the good thing was it works with 4/3 or 16/9 and even IMAX aspect ratio.
@@tombuck if you buy any of there hardware like the edit control keyboard or a camera, you have a full da Vinci resolve pro licence , thats a very good deal.
Also I think it's a little bit of a bias to consider just iPhone as an example. Although recents iPhones (except SE 2020) is the best example to show the benefit of a 2:1 aspect ratio as it avoids the content in hitting the notch on that side of the device but creators must also understand that notch is not the standards of all cutouts and that majority of android phones (which is the main smartphone platform in the world) had started using cutouts/holes and some are even all screen thanks to the development of popup/rotating/flipping camera modules. Those are also things that creators must consider in terms of aspect ratio. But honestly I'd rather use 16:9/21:9 aspect ratio rather than 18:9/2:1 aspect ratios if I am a creator myself.
Hola Tom! Que pasa? I came to your channel because of Peter Londgren and wasn’t lying! After watching a couple of videos, all I could say was: ORALE!! So I’m subscribing and activating the bell! Watch my ORALE video to get the meaning of the word! Órale Tom!
Personally i love when my tv have a full picture. 16:10 is a terribIe resolution, too thin and to much streched. I wish everything was in 16:9. Thx for this. 🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳
Video making has definitely needed to undergo some serious learning curves with the implementation of new techs all the time. This is an awesome idea though (didn't know thats how you zoom in on videos).
I've been thinking about exporting 2:1 in my new videos. Unrelated, what do you use for the RGB lights in the back? (sorry if I missed this in the description)
Heya! The lights are just 30w rgb panels from Amazon (there’s a video about my studio on the channel), and a few Philips Hue bulbs. The Amazon lights are pretty affordable, but they do flicker at certain shutter speeds.
Very cool tip. I immediately thought "I wonder if I can just shoot in 2:1 from my iPhone." So, I looked at Filmic Pro's aspect ratio options. 2:1 is not offered. Instead they offer several other similar ratios that (I have since learned) are other common standards... For example, 2.39:1 (intl widescreen movie) or 2.2:1 (70mm film). Filmic also offers 17:9 (no idea what standard that is) which is halfway between 16:9 and 2:1... My question (as a film/video neophyte)... Would there be any advantage to choosing one of these "standards" rather than 2:1? On the plus side, I could just choose a preset in Filmic and shoot (no post adjustment needed). On the downside, the math is much easier if I'm fiddling with something in 2:1.
The other possible pro would be that, as an unskilled videographer, not having to think about leaving some wiggle room for resizing when I'm shooting would be a plus. Losing WYSIWYG framing is not particularly appealing to a novice like me.
Great questions- "wiggle room" is always nice to have. Otherwise it's mostly a matter of personal preference. If you're uploading to TH-cam, the site is really good at optimizing for just about any format/aspect ratio. If you're viewing somewhere else, it could just depend on what looks best in that location.
Thanks, Tom! Not sure what route I will take (will just try some things out And see what feels right, I guess). Your video on Final Cut presets may make this a fairly unimportant consideration anyway. Regardless, I appreciate the advice. Great channel overall, btw. I'm a college prof - I teach entrepreneurship and strategy in a b-school. I was forced into TH-cam/Podcasting/live-streaming over the past 18mo, and your channel was incredibly helpful throughout that journey. Now I'm finding that video/audio content creation is likely a permanent part of my teaching work, so I'll definitely stay tuned. TLDR: thank you!
New subscriber here. Awesome content. I have a question, I have recently uploaded a video in 2:1 however, TH-cam says that I cannot add end screen content unless my ratio is 16:9. How can I make this work?
Hmm, that’s strange. I’ve been uploading 2:1 videos with 3840x1920 resolution since last summer with no issues. I wish I had a more specific answer for you. 😕 Glad you’re here!
The Enthusiasm Project Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I can’t find an answer anywhere. This is what it tells me in creator studio when I try “The end screen tool currently only supports videos with an aspect ratio of approximately 16:9.”
Awesome video... When you export from FCP, do you keep as a master file or the one that FCPX deliver natively apple 1080 ? What is the best for TH-cam ? Thank you BTW +1 subscriber Your channel is very helpful 👌🏽🙏🏽
The Enthusiasm Project but there is no direct settings to h.264, or you choose master file or apple file 1080, 720p and so... I don’t know if my question is clear... sorry for my bad English I m just french 🤪
I have a question, do you know any mobile editing apps that allow a 2:1 ratio? Because the apps I use don’t allow that such as KineMaster. I tried searching up apps that have it but no answers were found.
It really depends on the app, but most will let you select a project size when you create a new project, or they'll allow you to enter custom dimensions (in this case 3840 x 1920).
The biggest reason is that there are so many different phone resolutions out there, that it's almost impossible to accomodate them all, whereas 2:1 is somewhat standardized.
Would 2048 × 1080 (17:9) be good for TH-cam videos? It fills up more of the screen on a 2:1 smartphone than 16:9 videos. Also, alot of the 2:1 smartphones have a camera hole which cuts into a 2:1 video but if I'm correct I dont think it cuts through a 17:9 video. And 17:9 videos also fill up more of the screen on devices with a ratio of 16:10, 16:9, 4:3 etc than a 2:1 video.
That's a good question. TH-cam is amazing with different horizontal aspect ratios, but I don't think they do "unusual" vertical aspect ratios quite yet.
I upload my videos in a 2:1 aspect ratio, but nothing seems to change. I’ve set the settings to 4096:2048 in Final Cut Pro X, which is 2:1, but still no change. Am I overlooking something?
TH-cam is constantly changing their interfaces and it is a bit different on desktop vs mobile (and even then, between tablets and phones there’s a difference too).
@@tombuck Yes, but other users upload their videos so that the entire screen is filled. I’ve tried 18:9, 19:9, and 16:9, and nothing changes. What could be the reason for this?
2:1 aspect ratio SUCKS especially when not all computing nor mobile devices supports this weird aspect ratio. I would still pick 16:9 as my aspect ratio in videos instead of a 2:1 simply because you have the option to zoom videos if you like to or not to zoom it if you want to. Having such versatility is just amazing and I still don't understand why some creators is throwing shade against 16:9 which is still the most proper and perfect aspect ratio for High Definition contents unless it's a movie which is better in 21:9.
I don't think it's about throwing any shade, it's jut a cool way to adapt to changing tech. For me personally, I've always liked wider formats, but I don't want to just add black bard in editing to mimic that. The reason I like it is because of how it allows you to compose shots in a slightly different way (and this comes from watching wide format movies as a kid and wishing I could mimic that on my old Sony Handycam). There's no right or wrong, it all comes down to what works best for each person and their needs/preferences. 👍
It’s all started when some movies in 80’s start using 16:9 in some movies. Then, TV follow and after that phone like IP6 and other android phone started using 16:9 aspect ratio. So TH-camrs also started using 16:9 aspect ratio, until larger screen phone come out and phone companies are no longer using 16:9 aspect ratio to their new phone…
Time Markers:
0:00 - The Difference Between 16:9 and 2:1
0:45 - Creative Preference vs. Platform Performance
2:01 - Aspect Ratios on Phones & Mobile (iPhone XR example)
2:54 - Editing 2:1 in Final Cut Pro
4:38 - Upscaling Video Resolutions
5:45 - The Only Downside I've Found
6:54 - How to Do More With What You Already Have
Great vid... I have a little Final Cut tip for you: instead of manually adjusting the scale of each clip to 115%, there is a setting called "Spatial Conform" at the very bottom of the video inspector pane. It defaults to "Fit", meaning it *fits* the clip within whatever aspect ratio you are using for the project. If you change that to "Fill", it will automatically scale the clip up to *fill* the aspect ratio. You can then still manually adjust the Y position to move the clip up or down. The other setting choice is "None" which turns off spatial conforming where you can see how big a 1080 clip actually is within a 4k project.
It's very quick to multi-select your entire timeline and change the Spatial Conform from Fit to Fill (although if you've already scaled clips they'll now be too big since they'll be scaled to fill first, then scaled bigger by the Scale setting). If you edit by putting all your footage on the timeline and cutting it down, this is an easy way to do it before you start the edit and you can adjust the vertical position as needed while you edit.
Interestingly, while I can't find a setting to set Spatial Conform to always default to Fill, you CAN set the Spatial Conform of a clip BEFORE you bring it into a timeline. That's what I usually do... in the clip browser window multi-select ALL of the clips. When a clip or clips are selected in the clip browser, the only option in the inspector is Spatial Conform. Set them all to "Fill" and when you bring them into the timeline, they'll be the right size. Again, you can adjust the Y position as needed while you're editing.
Completely agree that upscaling 1080 to 4k looks remarkably good, particularly with the EOS R. I think it's because even at 1080 23.98fps the camera captures 90Mbps of data (ALL-I), compared to a camera like the Sony A7iii, where 1080 at 23.98fps footage is 50mbps.
This comment turned into an essay. Maybe I should have just made a video about it!!
You should definitely make a video about this! You just saved me a lot of time in my workflow, thank you!
Thank you for this! It’s incredibly helpful for indie filmmakers looking to enhance the visual impact of their work.
Glad it was helpful!
if you want native 1080, use 1920x960, You're welcome.
No thank you.
For me personally, most of the time, the subject dictates the Aspect Ratio.
A few examples:
• I always snap a document with the Aspect Ratio that best fits the relevant parts of the document with as little of the non-relevant parts as possible.
• Or if I make a video about a video game, I always use the same Aspect Ratio as the video game.
• A single-person selfie from me has an aspect ratio of 3:4 if it's all about the face, but I make it wider if it's also about the background.
• And a family selfie will always have the widest possible Aspect Ratio of my phone's camera, with wide-angle lens mode.
I think this is a smart way to approach the decision, thanks for the breakdown! 2:1 right now on TH-cam is very popular and looks really good, but it might not suit everything all the time.
@@tombuck My music album ,,Supa Aᵣcordéon Collection" is a great example of this:
I recorded the screen, but in production, I cropped the recording to remove the distracting parts of the Beepboxco Song Player UI and leave only the music visualization, which is much more immersive.
th-cam.com/play/PLzXfdSXyopfbHYROFOvnK_YTYSjJ_rnnZ.html
Ahh, I see what you’re saying. Very cool work!
I have not seen this discussed elsewhere and I do think you make an excellent case for publishing 2:1. Another polished and professional video Tom!
Thank you! It’s an interesting thing, and I didn’t care about it for the longest time, but after playing around, I became a big fan 👍
True, I always hate it when i watch 16:9 youtube videos on modern 20:9 phone displays, it looks so zoomed out but the second you zoom in you loose a ton of content from the top and bottom, and i think the 18:9 looks better for PC monitors and TVs too, as when pausing the video, the title at the top and the "player bar" at the bottom still don't interfere with the video's content so now it's easier to pause and read something or taking a screenshot.
This was a simple and easy explanation of 2:1 thanks man.
You are absolutely welcome.
Thanks for the great explanation, Tom!! I'm going to try out the 2:1 ratio on my next videos. 👍
Good luck! I find it really fun!
This is super helpful. I wonder why not many youtuber using this format.
I'm noticing it it pop up more and more. I personally really like the slightly wider format for framing and composition. 😎
@@tombuck I tried it for the first time on my latest video - following your tutorial. I noticed the difference.
Great points. I’ll have to take that into consideration on future projects. Cheers
I did a video explaining this..... So, here is the problem that I see with this.... the 2:1 I like it I started to use it... the problem that I see is that you are stretching the video image 115% BUT is only a 115% because the "Spatial Conform" it was set by default to "FIT" when you dragged the clip to the project timeline. So, in reality, FCPX already stretched more than 115% to fit the video in the project then you stretched even more to fill the gaps that is the same as you move the clip to the project while having the "Spatial Conform" set to FILL (50% STRETCHING). You can see what I am saying by setting the "Spatial Conform" to NONE then move the clip to the project, you will see that in reality, you are stretching the image 50%. the correct way of doing this for a 1080p video is by having the "Spatial Conform" set to NONE and the project dimensions set to 1920x960 that is the correct 2:1 aspect ratio for 1080p. ALSO, youtube re-encode the video AGAIN to 1920x960 when you upload the video as 3840x1920.
You’re 100% correct- there are a lot of factors to consider. But fortunately, especially with the EOS R’s high bitrate, the image still looks good despite having been scaled and stretched to oblivion 😬
@@tombuck Lucky you because I'm still filming with a Canon 80D. Tom thank you for the videos you do a great job. I hesitated to write the comment because I did not want it to be taken as a critic, I just wanted to contribute. see you in the next video.
Are you kidding? I’m happy to have good info shared! Always appreciated. 👍
THANK YOU SO MUCH! NEW TH-camR AND MY VIDEOS NEEDED THIS TIP!
I’m really happy it was helpful!
Thank you
Thanks Tom. You just answered a question I had for a long time 😁
Happy to help!
I’ve been thinking about doing this, thanks bro
i have a feature on my BMPCC4K, that give the ability to shot in real cinemascope with a 2.35 preview windows on a regular 4K 1.88 aspect ratio shot it give me a " Safe Zone " to recrop in any kind of ultrawide format, im probably shoot more in scope even if the export was 16/9 or Univisium, they use to do that in super 35 mm square image to make scope movie without the use of anamorphic lense and the good thing was it works with 4/3 or 16/9 and even IMAX aspect ratio.
Those Blackmagic cameras really got it right. So many useful features!
@@tombuck if you buy any of there hardware like the edit control keyboard or a camera, you have a full da Vinci resolve pro licence , thats a very good deal.
Also free upgrade for every New version.
Awesome video. Also do you add your own captions?!-great work as always!
I use Rev for captions because I want to make sure they’re accurate, but I’m also lazy.
Okay, okay! Convinced. Thanks bro!
Haha, were you on the fence? I definitely was.
This is exactly what I wanted to do. Thank you!
I like this. Totally new information for me.
Appreciate the info in this, and your other videos!
I’m so glad to hear it! 👊
Are you using 6D mark ii & is there any problem if u change 1080p video to 2:1 ratio (like loss in quality) ?
I use the EOS R and the 6D II together, and both work totally fine. 👍
The Enthusiasm Project thanks mate
Do you have a video on 21:9 (3840 x 1600) aspect ratio?
So glad i found your video! The 2:1 aspect ratio looks good too👍👍
I don’t yet, but that’s a good idea! Really it would be the same process, just using a different project size.
Also I think it's a little bit of a bias to consider just iPhone as an example. Although recents iPhones (except SE 2020) is the best example to show the benefit of a 2:1 aspect ratio as it avoids the content in hitting the notch on that side of the device but creators must also understand that notch is not the standards of all cutouts and that majority of android phones (which is the main smartphone platform in the world) had started using cutouts/holes and some are even all screen thanks to the development of popup/rotating/flipping camera modules. Those are also things that creators must consider in terms of aspect ratio. But honestly I'd rather use 16:9/21:9 aspect ratio rather than 18:9/2:1 aspect ratios if I am a creator myself.
Hola Tom! Que pasa? I came to your channel because of Peter Londgren and wasn’t lying! After watching a couple of videos, all I could say was: ORALE!!
So I’m subscribing and activating the bell!
Watch my ORALE video to get the meaning of the word!
Órale Tom!
Gracias! That’s awesome to hear, Jesse. Peter is a great guy, and has always been ultra nice to me. Glad you’re here!
Try using an adjustment layer to do all your scaling and moving etc.
Great channel I recently subscribed. Very good!
I’ve tried playing around with adjustment layers, but haven’t found a good option for Final Cut. But I’m open to suggestions! 👍
Great Video Mate!
Thanks man! 😎
Personally i love when my tv have a full picture. 16:10 is a terribIe resolution, too thin and to much streched. I wish everything was in 16:9.
Thx for this. 🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳
Video making has definitely needed to undergo some serious learning curves with the implementation of new techs all the time. This is an awesome idea though (didn't know thats how you zoom in on videos).
Super underrated video
Thanks! I’m still using this same technique and it works great 👍
I've been thinking about exporting 2:1 in my new videos. Unrelated, what do you use for the RGB lights in the back? (sorry if I missed this in the description)
Heya! The lights are just 30w rgb panels from Amazon (there’s a video about my studio on the channel), and a few Philips Hue bulbs. The Amazon lights are pretty affordable, but they do flicker at certain shutter speeds.
Very cool tip. I immediately thought "I wonder if I can just shoot in 2:1 from my iPhone." So, I looked at Filmic Pro's aspect ratio options. 2:1 is not offered. Instead they offer several other similar ratios that (I have since learned) are other common standards... For example, 2.39:1 (intl widescreen movie) or 2.2:1 (70mm film). Filmic also offers 17:9 (no idea what standard that is) which is halfway between 16:9 and 2:1... My question (as a film/video neophyte)... Would there be any advantage to choosing one of these "standards" rather than 2:1? On the plus side, I could just choose a preset in Filmic and shoot (no post adjustment needed). On the downside, the math is much easier if I'm fiddling with something in 2:1.
The other possible pro would be that, as an unskilled videographer, not having to think about leaving some wiggle room for resizing when I'm shooting would be a plus. Losing WYSIWYG framing is not particularly appealing to a novice like me.
Great questions- "wiggle room" is always nice to have. Otherwise it's mostly a matter of personal preference. If you're uploading to TH-cam, the site is really good at optimizing for just about any format/aspect ratio. If you're viewing somewhere else, it could just depend on what looks best in that location.
Thanks, Tom! Not sure what route I will take (will just try some things out And see what feels right, I guess). Your video on Final Cut presets may make this a fairly unimportant consideration anyway. Regardless, I appreciate the advice.
Great channel overall, btw. I'm a college prof - I teach entrepreneurship and strategy in a b-school. I was forced into TH-cam/Podcasting/live-streaming over the past 18mo, and your channel was incredibly helpful throughout that journey. Now I'm finding that video/audio content creation is likely a permanent part of my teaching work, so I'll definitely stay tuned.
TLDR: thank you!
:000 all i needed :)
New subscriber here. Awesome content. I have a question, I have recently uploaded a video in 2:1 however, TH-cam says that I cannot add end screen content unless my ratio is 16:9. How can I make this work?
Hmm, that’s strange. I’ve been uploading 2:1 videos with 3840x1920 resolution since last summer with no issues. I wish I had a more specific answer for you. 😕
Glad you’re here!
The Enthusiasm Project Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I can’t find an answer anywhere. This is what it tells me in creator studio when I try “The end screen tool currently only supports videos with an aspect ratio of approximately 16:9.”
Awesome video...
When you export from FCP, do you keep as a master file or the one that FCPX deliver natively apple 1080 ? What is the best for TH-cam ?
Thank you
BTW +1 subscriber
Your channel is very helpful 👌🏽🙏🏽
Thank you! I’ve been using a 3840 x 1920 timeline lately that I export as H.264, and that’s what I upload to TH-cam/save to my hard drive.
The Enthusiasm Project but there is no direct settings to h.264, or you choose master file or apple file 1080, 720p and so...
I don’t know if my question is clear... sorry for my bad English
I m just french 🤪
I have a question, do you know any mobile editing apps that allow a 2:1 ratio? Because the apps I use don’t allow that such as KineMaster. I tried searching up apps that have it but no answers were found.
It really depends on the app, but most will let you select a project size when you create a new project, or they'll allow you to enter custom dimensions (in this case 3840 x 1920).
@@tombuck ohh ok, the project I was planning on doing was a vr video, but I wanted to have the right size so it didn’t look weird
Hey Tom, just curious why you wouldn’t use the phones resolution for export VS 2:1? Great tutorial man thanks for all
You’re doing!
The biggest reason is that there are so many different phone resolutions out there, that it's almost impossible to accomodate them all, whereas 2:1 is somewhat standardized.
@@tombuck figured as much but wanted to be sure. Thanks man!
Would 2048 × 1080 (17:9) be good for TH-cam videos? It fills up more of the screen on a 2:1 smartphone than 16:9 videos. Also, alot of the 2:1 smartphones have a camera hole which cuts into a 2:1 video but if I'm correct I dont think it cuts through a 17:9 video. And 17:9 videos also fill up more of the screen on devices with a ratio of 16:10, 16:9, 4:3 etc than a 2:1 video.
It’s probably worth a try! A lot of it depends on your specific audience too, and what device most of them are using to watch your videos.
Hi...It is possible to have a 9:1 video playing on youtube without black up and down??
That's a good question. TH-cam is amazing with different horizontal aspect ratios, but I don't think they do "unusual" vertical aspect ratios quite yet.
Can we just settle on 2:1 for entertainment and 3:2 for productivity? It would make things SO MUCH simpler!
That’s an interesting way to differentiate. I like it.
THATS MY FIANCÉ!! ❤️😘😘
Where?!?
I upload my videos in a 2:1 aspect ratio, but nothing seems to change. I’ve set the settings to 4096:2048 in Final Cut Pro X, which is 2:1, but still no change. Am I overlooking something?
TH-cam is constantly changing their interfaces and it is a bit different on desktop vs mobile (and even then, between tablets and phones there’s a difference too).
@@tombuck Yes, but other users upload their videos so that the entire screen is filled. I’ve tried 18:9, 19:9, and 16:9, and nothing changes. What could be the reason for this?
How to download avengers infinity war movie 1:9:1 aspect ratio please help me 🙏 🙏
So what’s the frame size to type in to use 2k? Is it 2560x1080?
You could try 2560 x 1920, but I don't know that it'd work right.
2:1 aspect ratio SUCKS especially when not all computing nor mobile devices supports this weird aspect ratio. I would still pick 16:9 as my aspect ratio in videos instead of a 2:1 simply because you have the option to zoom videos if you like to or not to zoom it if you want to. Having such versatility is just amazing and I still don't understand why some creators is throwing shade against 16:9 which is still the most proper and perfect aspect ratio for High Definition contents unless it's a movie which is better in 21:9.
I don't think it's about throwing any shade, it's jut a cool way to adapt to changing tech. For me personally, I've always liked wider formats, but I don't want to just add black bard in editing to mimic that. The reason I like it is because of how it allows you to compose shots in a slightly different way (and this comes from watching wide format movies as a kid and wishing I could mimic that on my old Sony Handycam).
There's no right or wrong, it all comes down to what works best for each person and their needs/preferences. 👍
I wish 2:1 had been the standard all along (instead of 16:9).
It’s all started when some movies in 80’s start using 16:9 in some movies. Then, TV follow and after that phone like IP6 and other android phone started using 16:9 aspect ratio. So TH-camrs also started using 16:9 aspect ratio, until larger screen phone come out and phone companies are no longer using 16:9 aspect ratio to their new phone…
Which editor is this?
Final Cut Pro 👍
谢谢
Great ! But those little BARS :s
Those will only show up on players not natively capable of playing back 2:1 videos. I guess it’s the price to pay 🤷🏻♂️
The Enthusiasm Project thank you 🙏
Can I record directly in a 2:1 aspect ratio?