| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/07/2011 05:04:29 PM · #1 |
| I believe it does. It occurred to me that most ribbon winning images were landscape orientation, so I went through the archives, and indeed, it would appear that the winners, by a substantial percentage, are in landscape orientation. In addition, it appears that even a square crop is preferable to a portrait orientation. I wonder if it's because in most cases, we have to scroll up images in portrait orientation to see the entire picture. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 05:10:25 PM · #2 |
| I've had the exact same thought! |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 05:14:01 PM · #3 |
| Only 7 out of the 45 entries in Magnifying Glass are shot in portrait orientation while it looks like 9 are square crops and the remaining 29 are some type of landscape orientation. So perhaps it is just that there is a very significant difference in the number of entries shot in that orientation. Of course this is only comparing one challenge. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 05:16:58 PM · #4 |
| I did the same sort of analysis on Bits and Pieces. Roughly fifteen out of 107 entries are noticeably portrait oriented. So it might just be a case of numbers. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 05:22:00 PM · #5 |
Bvy, jminso, are saying the same thing from a different direction, as tanguera. At the most obvious level, the REASON square and horizontal win more is because many, many more of them are entered.
The interesting question is, does the imbalance exist because people PREFER horizontal and square to vertical, or because at 800 pixels vertical is pushing or exceeding the limits on some screens and people are aware of this? Someone should go back and check whether the same ratios held true in the 640-pixel days, but I'm too lazy.
I believe we're seeing a lower percentage of square crops now that we are at 800 pixels; in the 640 days, you really NEEDED that extra real estate, now not so much. For me, in general, horizontal images just look better, seem larger on the page, than same-size vertical images do.
R. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 05:23:11 PM · #6 |
| Fewer than 5% of ribbon winners are sideways. However, that's still better than upside-down. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 05:26:46 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Fewer than 5% of ribbon winners are sideways. However, that's still better than upside-down. |
I have a sideways in voting right now. Shoulda' stood it on its head...
R. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 06:09:14 PM · #8 |
I believe that when all the stats are tallied horizontal will still come out on top, by a margin. The most common view for the species, after all, is a horizontal sweep. It stands to reason, that the images we make reflect this. I also believe that landscape orientation is growing even wider and narrower with much recent work, simulating TV and monitor ratios at 16:9.
Message edited by author 2011-01-07 18:14:01.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2011 06:12:32 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Bvy, jminso, are saying the same thing from a different direction, as tanguera. At the most obvious level, the REASON square and horizontal win more is because many, many more of them are entered.
The interesting question is, does the imbalance exist because people PREFER horizontal and square to vertical, or because at 800 pixels vertical is pushing or exceeding the limits on some screens and people are aware of this? Someone should go back and check whether the same ratios held true in the 640-pixel days, but I'm too lazy.
I believe we're seeing a lower percentage of square crops now that we are at 800 pixels; in the 640 days, you really NEEDED that extra real estate, now not so much. For me, in general, horizontal images just look better, seem larger on the page, than same-size vertical images do.
R. |
wow... I feel the opposite. I think that landscape pictures look smaller and less impressive than portrait. Probably because when I'm working on a portrait orientation, when I fit the screen in photoshop, and then shrink down to 800 pixels, it still fits the screen.
However, when I fit the screen in a landscape, and then shrink to 800 pixels, it's so much smaller than it was while editing.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2011 06:19:51 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
I believe that when all the stats are tallied horizontal will still come out on top, by a margin. The most common view for the species, after all, is a horizontal sweep. It stands to reason, that the images we make reflect this. I also believe that landscape orientation is growing even wider and narrower with much recent work, simulating TV and monitor ratios at 16:9. |
I watched Ben Hur on Christmas Day -- wonderful in that ultrawide 2.76:1 format. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 08:37:28 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
I believe that when all the stats are tallied horizontal will still come out on top, by a margin. The most common view for the species, after all, is a horizontal sweep. It stands to reason, that the images we make reflect this. I also believe that landscape orientation is growing even wider and narrower with much recent work, simulating TV and monitor ratios at 16:9. |
Perhaps this is also why so many "PH" images seem to be vertical. Maybe turning something on its side adds an extra disorienting quality? |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 08:59:02 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The interesting question is, does the imbalance exist because people PREFER horizontal and square to vertical, or because at 800 pixels vertical is pushing or exceeding the limits on some screens and people are aware of this? Someone should go back and check whether the same ratios held true in the 640-pixel days, but I'm too lazy.
R. |
Hmm.. That is an interesting point. I know in the past I had shortened a couple portrait oriented entries so that they would not be larger (taller) then most monitors but then I was afraid they were too small and may get voted down for that. I looked through my last 10 images to see if I was still doing that and apparently I had forgotten all about it and have entered both landscape and portrait oriented shots at the full size. That does make you wonder if people are intentionally shooting landscapes for challenges because they think it will be received better but I think while there are likely some that do that I think most enter landscape orientation just because they feel it works best for the photo that way. Still all in all an interesting question of which we will likely never have a definitive answer. |
|
|
|
01/07/2011 09:09:30 PM · #13 |
At a quick glance, it appears that I'm pretty equal on my portrait vs landscape entries. However, I've ribboned on many more landscape than portrait orientation. But perhaps it's just because I suck at portrait orientation.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2011 11:50:06 PM · #14 |
| ;-P I have the same number of ribbons in both orientations. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 01:17:38 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
;-P I have the same number of ribbons in both orientations. |
My only ribbon is Portrait orientation. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 10:56:19 AM · #16 |
My number one, two, and four of my Top 5 are portrait orientation.....12 0f my top 17 are portrait as well.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2011 11:14:34 AM · #17 |
Of my 5th-place-or-better images, 2 are square, 5 are vertical, and 14 are horizontal. A number of the horizontal ones are nearly square...
R. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 11:47:33 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Of my 5th-place-or-better images, 2 are square, 5 are vertical, and 14 are horizontal. A number of the horizontal ones are nearly square...
R. |
Really interesting to look at. I have 5 square, 23 vertical, and 40 landscape. The percentages are interestingly similar. I was surprised at myself for having that many vertical orientations as I consider myself mainly a landscape guy. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 12:03:57 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Of my 5th-place-or-better images, 2 are square, 5 are vertical, and 14 are horizontal. A number of the horizontal ones are nearly square...
R. |
Really interesting to look at. I have 5 square, 23 vertical, and 40 landscape. The percentages are interestingly similar. I was surprised at myself for having that many vertical orientations as I consider myself mainly a landscape guy. |
Only 68? Slacker!
5 of 13 are vertical for me.
Message edited by author 2011-01-08 12:05:19. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 12:31:55 PM · #20 |
| 5th place or better... I will have to go with top twenty finishes to have enough to compare lol. So out of my top 20 finishes 3 were portrait orientation and 5 were landscape orientation. Hmm... I take sucky pictures lol |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 12:35:38 PM · #21 |
| Interesting.....out of my top ten scores 4 are portrait orientation, the top 5 are landscape orientation. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 01:38:24 PM · #22 |
I don't have as many to compare as the Doc, but out of mine that placed 5th or higher here is the breakdown
Landscape 6
Square 5
Portrait 6
In my case I would say the orientation doesn't matter :)
|
|
|
|
01/08/2011 01:50:04 PM · #23 |
| I don't have any ribbons and only two top 5 finishes, but of MY top 5, three are portrait, one is square and only one is landscape. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 02:01:33 PM · #24 |
| It's interesting to see square crops do so well. |
|
|
|
01/08/2011 02:28:03 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Of my 5th-place-or-better images, 2 are square, 5 are vertical, and 14 are horizontal. A number of the horizontal ones are nearly square...
R. |
Really interesting to look at. I have 5 square, 23 vertical, and 40 landscape. The percentages are interestingly similar. I was surprised at myself for having that many vertical orientations as I consider myself mainly a landscape guy. |
I think to make a valid analysis we also need to know the orientation breakdown of all of your entries, to see whether any one is in or out of proportion. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/07/2025 03:26:03 PM EDT.
