>>11842134216:9 > 4:3 because 4:3 is too small and 16:9 allows more dynamic shots
16:9 > 18:9 because in 18:9, squeezing the shot for an even wider view is ridiculously stupid looking while in 16:9 it's a great way to engage the audience with tension or panoramic stills (panning shots stay in 16:9 because it's redundant otherwise). Also squeezing back a perspective to 4:3 could work in 16:9 shows quite well (flashbacks, time travel shenanigans, 4th wall breaks, computer screenshots, etc.) In 18:9 it looks ugly (both reverting to 16:9 and 4:3) and doesn't work due to 16:9 being considered still a modern standard and 4:3 leaving too large a gap.
>>118422234I so want Samurai Jack in 16:9 (with 18:9 cuts) I was watching through the first four seasons 2 weeks ago and I don't think there's a single shot that couldn't be done well. Genndy will probably not touch it with Primal and his other projects going on.
Also
4:3 = Horse blinders
16:9 = Helmet
18:9 is closest you could get to simulating human perspective on a 2D medium so it should only be reserved for home cinemas or screens big enough to cover the entire view of a human.
This has been my weekly autistic ramble.
