Talk:2119: Video Orientation

[IMG]http://i64.tinypic.com/2co1zio.png[/IMG] More readable:I think this could be done with text too. 172.68.154.64 13:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Obligatory prior art in this commentary space: Glove and Boots: Vertical Video Syndrome (apparently they decamped from Youtube to Vimeo last month, the original c. 2013 video was Bt9zSfinwFA). JohnHawkinson (talk) 14:21, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

The title text seems to be a reference to AL, the A.I in 2001 : A Space Odyssey which cause a few problems to the crew and mainly communicate through a round lens. 172.69.226.171 14:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Or 2002 movie The Ring 141.101.96.221 14:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I presumed it was a reference to summoning circles. 172.69.62.160 15:28, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

My first thought was a reference to Matt Parker of standupmaths and his spherical camera: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgyI8aPctaI 162.158.62.67 18:17, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I think the same... Isn't it some Terry Pratchett quote? or may be from other fantasy? --162.158.94.2 18:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

It was HAL, not AL in Space Odyssey. Move the letters forward one, and it's IBM. Deliberate Easter egg. 162.158.38.94 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I thought it was something that wasn't planned by the author? But yeah, still makes for an interesting Easter egg. Herobrine (talk) 13:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

You are correct. Clarke has always insisted that the letter-shift from IBM was coincidence and that he would've picked a different name had they known at the time. HAL has always stood for "Heuristically programmed ALgorithmic computer". (source). Shamino (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Nonsense. The title text is clearly stating that Randall sees Family Circus [1] as his nemesis. JamesCurran (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

A circular screen is great for that retro-look, like a 1950's Zenith Porthole TV. I seem to remember seeing circular screens on some really old sci-fi shows as well. As well as one use of a triangular screen. Shamino (talk) 14:37, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I thought the circular format was a reference to SnapChat's camera glasses and people's mistrust of "surveillance glasses". I am probably wrong. RIIW - Ponder it (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Fails in the obvious- Horizontal is better because you can send the video in to the TV news for your 15 seconds of fame without looking like a douche who doesn't know how to rotate their phone. And why isn't there a setting for "always landscape" anyway?Seebert (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I have to agree... the fact that most non-mobile screens are oriented horizontally being left out was kind of a big miss. A vertical video looks like crap on a TV or Computer Monitor (Ironically unless it's an old 3:4 one, where the difference is a lot more minor.) -Graptor 172.69.62.220 15:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I assume that inside your phone camera there's a "retina" chip in the same dimensions as your screen, so if your phone is upright (portrait) then the picture is portrait shape too. But, sure, they could make the camera rotate inside the phone... that would work for switching between selfie / other people modes, too. But no, then your selfies would be upside down... or... can I get back to you?  :-) Robert Carnegie [email protected] 162.158.155.200 11:14, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Ironically, when I first read the comic on my phone (portrait), I did not realise there was a third "CONS" column. ColinHogben (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

that never would have happened with a circular screen ~ ocæon 01:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Not that good of an explanation, even if I wrote some of it. Actually, especially since I wrote some of it. Netherin5 (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks 90.10 Netherin5 (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I have never had problems holding my smartphone in landscape, or my camera in portrait. I just can't understand the use of portrait to film anything but one for two people's faces just because you hold the device that way to make a phone call (on the v rare occasion they do). Hey but I was born in the 50's RIIW - Ponder it (talk) 18:57, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I don't think the 50x150 view comment is right. I'd suggest removing it or backing it up with a source. 162.158.146.16 23:14, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I feel like there's an awesome joke to be made about Battlefield Earth here... Glassvein (talk) 02:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Anti-Semitic trolling

Edited to remove the anti-Semitic tag and content. -- Elusis (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Dealing with the same thing. Netherin5 (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Maybe we should replace the Google CAPTCHA with an IQ test? That should get rid of the 5-year old troll.172.69.226.171 18:33, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

But then they’d say IQ was rigged by the communistic jewish theocracy. Netherin5 (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

This replies aren't helpful. --Dgbrt (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for removing that content, but please do not remove the entire incomplete tag that soon. --Dgbrt (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

My advice for now: Just revert that content silently, that unregistered user always has to solve a captcha while a registered user easily can revert it. Without any discussion that IP will get tired sooner or later. Nonetheless many thanks to everybody keeping an eye on this destructive edits. --Dgbrt (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, just revert, do not try to edit it out or you'll miss some little bit stuffed here or there - but look at the revision history before to check out if someone haven't added useful stuff in between troll's edits. In this case you need to edit it out, just be careful. -- 162.158.90.150 17:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour and stop censoring my edits? If your position has any merit (it doesn't), you could defeat me in debate (you can't). 162.158.106.6 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

There is no censorship here. And please do us a favor and sign your comments. --Dgbrt (talk) 21:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Fuck you, shill. Soon the truth will be revealed, whether you want it to be or not. 162.158.106.240 21:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Please no censorship on comments like this in a talk page unless it's really vandalism. I have reverted the two "deleted troll stuff" remarks back to the original. --Dgbrt (talk) 19:59, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

With the language being used, the comments were, indeed, vandalism. Re-removed them. 108.162.216.82 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Bad language isn't vandalism - but your action editing comments written by others is vandalism. This is a talk page and everybody can say anything, but some nonsense like this require a proper reply. This is not the explanation page. And further more deleting comments gives the writer an argument about censorship which in this case would be correct. Do you want that writer having a correct argument?

BTW: Please do not forget to sign your comments. --Dgbrt (talk) 19:21, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Off-topic rants (my characterization) and vulgar personal attacks on other commentators (including against you, Dgbrt) is OK, because this is a 'talk' section? If it entertains me to post "The NFL is rigged to let New England win" in every comic I should go ahead? These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For (talk) 04:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

but guys, the stuff he's saying is bold and dynamic @_@172.69.33.23 00:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Table

may the pro con table be replicated and expanded upon? the realworld aplications of horizontal, vertical, diagonal, and circular screens would be comparable the same way. ocæon 01:54, 5 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

so my first contibution and i screwed up formatting, heh, i have no clues to fixing that.. anyway angular filming with cameras goes well beyond dutchy, nobody else remember early handheld rap music videos? and circular screens also gave a pro which is not yet noted at all please don't make me add it! ocæon 18:34, 5 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

You did start your first line with a space which formats the text as a quote. And please sign your comments with at least ~~~~ or use the sign button at the top of the editor. --Dgbrt (talk) 19:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"I'm not turning my phone sideways" -- seems like someone never plays any games on his phone. Heck, even docs and sheets are better in horizontal orientation than vertical orientation. As for the "don't trust anyone speaking from inside a circle," it made me think of (1) the little peepholes on doorways to see who's out there and (2) The Oval Office. While that's not technically a circle, it's somewhat related... 162.158.74.153 08:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"The title text quip about circular video would be a reference to having a demon trapped inside a summoning circle" Oh really? You know this how? Google certainly didn't show anything like that; indeed, there was a lot about "circle of trust" and I don't trust this comment. I'd say [citation needed] or change it to "circle of trust". ( DON'T CENSOR ME, MAN! ;^) 162.158.214.70 11:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Circle of trust seems to be a clothing brand? I do not see any relevance on that. Nevertheless I think the demon thing should, if at all, be one of few alternative explanations. It might just be a nonsense statement, or could be related to a fisheye objective, binoculars, or to the looking holes in appartment doors. --Lupo (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

wow this circle is sure disliked alot considering randall says it solves the aspect ratio problem. if it's a trust issue then what happens in the case that two people hold a conversation via circular televideophones? ocæon 22:14, 6 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Maybe Randal and someone he knows have those Alexa video things that are circular and people talk out of... RIIW - Ponder it (talk) 22:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Randalls favorite video orientation

What makes people think he likes the horizontal orientation more? Looking at the comic it seems to me he likes the vertical orientation more. --172.69.54.87 10:05, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

the pro for vertical suggests it has reached a tipping point for widespread social acceptance, but whether it's pro status is an assertion or a path of least resistance remains unclear. it leaves us free to project on the issue. ocæon 22:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC) -- Ocæon (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Pro/Contra Vertical Video

The explanation so far seems to suggest that he thinks vertical video is obviously bad, and even compares it to the "Norm" type file comic. "claiming that an obviously bad idea keeps being done by accident 'so we might as well just accept it'". However, I think this is not true at all, and the comic aligns much more to the comics which talked about common misconceptions (Frankenstein) or commonly used bad grammar ("could care less"). On many of these comics, he seems to have the opinion that the people who insist on the "correct" way should stop insisting and just accept the change. I think this one relates much more to those, and he is pro vertical video [which I'm not, so this is not an interpretation based on personal preference], instead of relating to the "Norm" comic where he obviously is just joking. The point of the comic is "stop fighting it". And nowhere in the comic he claims that horizontal video is obviously better, like the explanation says so far. 162.158.89.223 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Another con with circular video is that it can get distorted because of Mercator Projection.