• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Irrational aspect ratios

Irrational aspect ratios

April 1, 2014 JimK 1 Comment

Since the dawn of digital photography, practitioners of the art have been barred from a creative freedom enjoyed by their image-making predecessors. Oil and watercolor painters, printmakers, and, yes, chemically-based photographers could make an image any shape they wanted to. Not so in the digital world. When cropping a raster image, a digital photographer must either leave an entire pixel in, or take it out. The result is that the aspect ratio of the cropped photograph is limited to the ratios of the integer dimensions of  a rectangular subset of the pixels in an image.

An example with a small image will make this clear. Let’s say that the original image is 3×4 pixels. The possible aspect ratios that can be cropped from this image are 3:4 (the entire image), 1:1 (3×3, 2×2, and 1×1 pixel crops), 1:4, 1:3, 1:2, 3:1, 2:1, 3:2, 2:3, and so on. 4:5, a common photographic aspect ratio, is simply not available. As the size of the original image, measured in pixels, increases, the choices grow, but it’s never been enough for the truly creative photographer.

As often happens this time of year, the inspired geniuses at Lirpa Labs, the wholly-owned research subsidiary of the Sloof Lirpa Corporation, have invented a solution to a problem that many of us didn’t even know we had. Some of Sloop Lirpa’s previous breakthroughs include the DED-backlit LCD and the 4×5 cellphone.

This year, the Lirpa researchers took a look at what they could do to increase the limited selection of aspect ratios available to photographers. They explored the obvious, such as increasing the resolution of images to gain a wider variety of ratios. That wasn’t good enough for the Lirpalites. True, the number of aspect ratios available through that stratagem is infinite. But mathematicians have hierarchies of infinities, and the set of rational numbers, which the set of aspect ratios you can get by scaling and cropping, is the lowliest of infinities, the countable kind.

There is a much larger infinity out there, the set of all real numbers. How could the Lirpa scientists make that entire set available to photographers, both as aspect ratios and as both horizontal and vertical dimensions? Pixels are integrally addressed by definition, so the number of pixels in each direction are integers, and the ratio of those integers must be a rational number.

The breakthrough came when the researchers explored the ramifications of the fact that pixels don’t have to be square. Their unsquareness is not itself the breakthrough; such pixels are used often in moving images. But the aspect ratio of the pixel has always been rational. The new Lirpa pixels can have any real number for their aspect ratio, and thus, images composed of these pixels can themselves have any real number for their aspect ratio.

And here’s the great thing about the invention; the new type of pixels can be entirely implemented through the addition of a few new metadata fields. Rather than indicating the pixel aspect ratio with a number, which, in order to be representable in binary form must perforce be rational, the new fields allow the specification of an algorithm for calculating the aspect ratio in a programming language created for the purpose in a manner similar to the PostScript language. In order to make the specification of some useful aspect ratios simpler, commonly used ones such as e, pi, and the square root of two are predefined and may be invoked by reference.

Well, there you have it. A host of new possibilities are now available to you. The engineers on the parent company, Sloof Lirpa, who are responsible for making practical the Lirpa Labs discoveries, are hard at work on creating displays and printers whose pixel dimensions are irrational. And the researchers, always staying at the forefront of human knowledge — and sometimes considerably beyond — have set their sights on complex aspect ratios.

The Last Word

← Nonlinearities in autohalftoning Fence kernels for autohalftoning →

Comments

  1. Dan Barthel says

    April 1, 2014 at 1:28 pm

    :)))))))))))

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.