Vertical Video: Just say No!

[Tom Sefton]

VR is a different medium because of the requirement to wear the device in landscape and the relationship between left and right eye in processing stereo 3D images versus the convergence point of the 3D plane. We’ve done a stereo VR project recently and that was filmed with wide lenses and 3D -the only thing holding it back was waiting for a platform to host the film. Now it’s available it can be viewed https://inceptionvr.com/experience/kyla-la-grange/ – but what’s really awesome is that when you are on a mobile device and portrait format, and not occulus with their page, in mono mode the camera can pan around and you get the same experience.

It’s all about the tailored experience to the end user – which is cool because there could be infinite amounts of content to create, even for large providers like Netflix and Amazon in the future as more people want to watch in portrait – even iPads playing in 4:3 should and could in theory have their own output for a custom play – with Netflix requiring all content to be shot at 6K minimum meaning the epic dragon is king, this should only mean a slight reframe and encoding option.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk

[Todd Terry]

I’m for vertical video when appropriate… but I just think it all depends on the needed end result.

99% of what I produce winds up on broadcast television… a horizontal format.

Most of the rest is usually for web-based viewing, embedding on clients’ websites, etc.

So for me, horizontal/widescreen (the way human eyes work), is the way to go. We have yet to produce anything that is intended solely or primarily for mobile devices. That day may come, but it’s not here yet at our place.

We get auditions in, cull through them, and send our picks to clients for approval produced all in one video file. Sometimes that reel includes a bunch, five, 10, or maybe even 20 different actors. We are invariably asked by clients why John Doe’s audition isn’t like the rest, but just a skinny strip in the middle of the screen.

We’ve only once been asked to produce specifically a vertical video… for a security scanner that had a vertical screen on the side that demonstrated how to use the device. After coming up with a complicated way to mount/shoot with our camera sideways, only then did the device manufacturer give us tech specs… and the screen resolution of their monitors was soooo low that we could have simply shot with the camera oriented correctly and sliced out a vertical center section and would have been golden.

What’s next? Vertical anamorphic lenses? Maybe I’m behind the times… but then again this is my actual kitchen phone at home (and yes, it works like a charm)….

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Mark Suszko]

I saw him 3 times in 2 weeks. In addition to an arena and a festival-style event, I saw him at a bar with 300 people!!! I was right at the rail, close enough to touch him…which I did a couple of times when we slapped palms. A life highlight for me, for sure.

I’m pretty sure I hate you now.

There’s apps you can download to the phone that automatically turn live vertical video into landscape horizontal for the times when the operator is too stupid or excited to think of it. I think the majority of vertical video you see in candids is because of idiocy, not intent. I believe this horizontal conversion app should be a default setting in every cameraphone, and I think the cute puppets that started this thread are exactly right.

There are too many exceptions out there; it’s largely situational. I think the Beeb isn’t really so much a fan of vertical, as it is just making allowances due to the huge number of poor photographers supplying content.

I remember having an argument about shooting some oral history in 16:9 versus 4:3. My argument for 4:3 at the time was first, that we had more of the gear available in that aspect ratio, but then I asked, if the subject is a seated person in medium to tight shots that rarely change, what do you do with all the extra space to the left and right of them? I went on to say, the 4 by 3 shot could be comped into a larger 16 by 9 in various clever and creative ways during post, based on the intent of the producer and editor using the footage, but I didn’t see a value in raw 16:9 for compositions that were in effect vertical portraits. But then again, the nature of the subject being shot makes all the difference.

[Tim Wilson]

[Mark Suszko] “I’m pretty sure I hate you now.”

There are so many reasons that people hate me — this is my favorite yet. LOL

A picture from Paul’s tour photographer JM Kim that ran in the LA Times – horizontal, but the fisheye required to get both Paul and the audience in the picture opened a wide gulf between us that wasn’t there. Except when he sat down to play the piano toward the back of the stage, he was mostly directly in front of me, 6-7 away. I’m the second from the left of the frame, with my arm resting on the rail.

I still think that the vertical video does a better job of capturing the scene, but having a professional document it, with a flash photo no less, is still more than I’d hoped for. It’s a big pic, so click if you care, or not, as you see fit.

[Mark Suszko] “I think the Beeb isn’t really so much a fan of vertical, as it is just making allowances due to the huge number of poor photographers supplying content. “

That’s the part that I disagree with a million percent. LOL The allowance is for the “wrong” way that people hold their phones and tablets, except that “holding it wrong” is irrelevant. If almost all of your audience, almost all the time, is holding the screen vertically, it’s your JOB to shoot vertically.

The thing is, I don’t think it’s AT ALL an accident that watching video on Facebook and Instagram is skyrocketing, and in the case of FB, arguably past YouTube: vertical (if also sometimes square) is the CORRECT aspect ratio for devices. VERTICAL is NATIVE.

Again acknowledging that this isn’t true at all for long form programming. Even as long as a music video. Horizontal ftw. You turn device horizontal….unless you don’t. (“You” rhetorically that is.) Have you noticed how many people around you don’t turn their devices? Not unlike the number of people who preferred to stretch the SD content on their HD sets by default, rather than zoom. I want a full screen AND crawls, onscreen bugs, scores, etc.

But the BBC app is meant to provide a VERTICALLY scrolling list of short clips. Watch one short clip. Want to watch another? Here ya go. Vertical video after vertical video.

Not that they’ll all be vertical any time soon. But the horizontal ones will look wrong, because they ARE wrong.

[Mark Suszko] ” I went on to say, the 4 by 3 shot could be comped into a larger 16 by 9 in various clever and creative ways during post, based on the intent of the producer and editor using the footage, but I didn’t see a value in raw 16:9 for compositions that were in effect vertical portraits. “

You make it sound like this was a while ago, and that you might have lost the argument. Am I jumping to conclusions? Wouldn’t be the first time of course, but I’d love to know how the conversation went, and what the outcome was for both shooting and post.

My own thinking nowadays would be to go Tom’s route: biggest sensor I could find, shoot to protect multiple aspect ratios…including, yes, vertical. You’re right, Mark, interviews are fundamentally vertical-to-square. We usually make them widescreen by adding a lot of empty space to “balance” the actual content….but what happened with the project you’re talking about here?

And I said this a bunch of posts ago, but it’s worth repeating here: I’m not saying that anyone should feel any differently than they do, except to the extent that I think it’s an error to reject vertical video on principle, even when it’s containerized in a 16:9 frame. For devices, it’s native, and to be preferred in very nearly every circumstance, which is why the mobile videographer is NOT holding it wrong. That’s how devices are meant to be held, regardless of suitability in the eyes of those as old as we are. LOL

But also to a point that Ned made upthread, we really do need to be thinking about this as the amount of vertical video skyrockets — or we could just accept the scaled / blurred / dimmed solution that YouTube defaults to. People understand what it means, and most people don’t even notice that anything is “wrong”. Since, of course, it’s not wrong. It’s just vertical. LOL

[Mark Suszko]

I still hate you, but I’ll answer the question:-)

They went along with my logic for as long as we still owned 4:3 cameras. When the HD upgrade came, a few years later, we had to go with the wider shots, but our style of doing these has also evolved, to where we usually shoot a live-switched, 3-camera interview, and retain isos of the single-shot and 2-shot, in case some future user disagrees with how I called the live switch, or they need the raw iso for another reason. I try to make it a practice to shoot the iso backgrounds with some room tone, after the interviews, to help anybody who wants to pull a difference matte of the guest speaker. I think the day isn’t far off though, when cameras can record detailed depth info for every pixel, and we’ll do “chromakeying” by just lassoing everything we want that’s at a certain x-azis depth. All else will just drop away.

[Michael Phillips]

Storytelling and viewer engagement methodologies have been changing since storytelling began. So I am all for new methods to be explored. On a related note, here are some stats for vertical viewing.

Other studies have shown that for videos shown on phone devices that vertical videos have longer viewing engagement than horizontal videos. Yes, it may be due to laziness to turn a phone, but the numbers bear out and marketers keep that in mind when trying to delivery their message via video.

Michael

[David Shirey]

Well non-standard video is fine when we’re talking about all you professionals framing your shots properly for paying clients with specific needs. My problem with vertical video is that most users are shooting it because it’s how they hold the phone in their hand, and no other reason. Every vertical video a client sends me just has a ton of ceiling and/or floor in it. Then they have their phone recompress it to an abysmal resolution/bitrate so they can cram it in an e-mail. When I can coax them to use something like wetransfer to give me the native file, the quality is decent enough that it looks pretty good when cropped.

I actually follow Glove and Boots so when that video came out in 2012 I immediately forwarded it to friends and family. I’m glad I did because all the cell phone videos I get of my baby nephew look fantastic.

[Michael Phillips]

Horizon App records horizontal anyway when holding the phone vertically.
https://petapixel.com/2014/01/15/horizon-app-kills-vertical-video-shoots-lanscape-matter/

But as with all things, knowing your destination is key. Social mobile video? Vertical may be better.
Inserting user generated video into broadcast? Horizontal.
Don’t know? Deal with it. ☺

Michael

[Brett Sherman]

The trick is, what if you don’t know how it will be used, or know that it will be used in different places. How do you shoot for both? Another reason to start acquiring in 4K. For interviews I’m considering shooting in 4K wider then I typically would. Then I can zoom in for 16:9 and crop for vertical.

————————–
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it\’s video related I\’ll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here.

[Paul Neumann]

Frito Lay Snapchat shoot last month.