Aspect Ratio For Web Videos: 16:9 or 4:3?
 

Is widescreen preferable to the 4:3 aspect ratio on the web, where you have a choice? If so, why is widescreen better?

I don't think your question can be answered generically. No one aspect ratio is best for the web - it all depends on the content. I would say that one of the nice things about the web is that you can easily deliver using the aspect ratio that works best for your material!

- Martin

Which one would you say is "better"? How does one choose the right one?

Animorphic widescreen is always "better" I think, because it's bigger. But maybe in your case 4:3 is better since 720x480 isn't too big, but to be the same size in 16:9 it would be something around 864x480 -pretty much the same size but since it's wider it will be a larger file size.

Use the aspect ratio you shot in.

19x9 is the "new" thing... 4x3 looks rather old. But don't listen to what others say, go with what you like - and as Emre suggested, go with the a/r you filmed in, otherwise you will have useless extra work to put in.

What aspect ration should I shoot in?

Might as well shoot 16x9. Does give you more room, and lends to more stylized framing. Besides, you never know if you want to put your stuff on DVD someday, and it won't be long before every TV in America is widescreen.

Secondly you just flat have more pixels to work with.

Some would say it's just person preference, and that is partially true. But the whole thing is that it used to be a big deal (and more expensive) to shoot widescreen, so when something had a 1.85:1 ratio or higher it was considered to have a higher production value. Obviously that's not the case anymore, but I think the 'public' as they are still tend to feel that way when they see a widescreen movie. Truth is, if I see a movie/show on TV, and it's not letterboxed, I usually don't stop to watch.

So take that for what it's worth. Probably not much, but... :-P

Its down to personal taste,
But I dont know anyone who prefers 4:3 over 16:9, unless they are viewing the stuff on a 4:3 screen.
As far as web videos go, they wont be filling the screen, so 16:9 looks better, or so i personally think.

I have an old sample online in 4:3 and a new one in 16:9. This should answer your question as they are easily compared.

4:3
http://www.iol.ie/~griffinpromedia/d...&dnewmain.html

16:9
http://www.iol.ie/~griffinpromedia/d...aulaphoto.html

I think the widescreen gives the footage more of a movie like feel.

16:9 DV has the same number of pixels as 4:3 DV. HD has more pixels, obviously.

With proliferation of widescreen TVs 16:9 becomes -- and in other parts of the world has already became -- the norm. With all other things being equal I don't see the point in shooting 4:3.

YouTube and iPod slow down 16:9 acceptance, but YouTube has made some steps recently towards widescreen. if you have noticed, their preview thumbnails are WS now. I am pretty sure they will enable native WS support pretty soon.