| For the sake of simplicity, we
insofar stuck to a rectangular horizontal frame. Although this is the locked-in
form of some media (film), many more do have a choice among not only horizontal
and vertical, but variously proportioned formats (and even of different shapes). So, let's (again) start with HORIZONTAL format, that we deemed
the most neutral. In comparison, the character easily emerges:
the horizontal format seems to almost unfold before our eyes, in
the interchangeable dimensions of both space and time. There is a feeling of stability and reliability, of every thing being anchored in narrative flows of space and time. This works well in the images that intend to show, state, tell, or conclude something without rush. There's discreet dignity in this unhurried manner. The influence of left and right is most pronounced here, because that is the more pronounced dimension. The serenity and impression that "all will come in its own time" contribute to the clarity of the subject. Expect opposite from the VERTICAL format. Certain non-dimensionality of space and time creates an impression of everything happening in one point (of space and time). The result is an extremely dynamic structure, where all is happening in dimension of energies, forces. (Curiously, this is almost exclusive format I happened to find in portfolios of New York photographers in early nineties.) The aggressive character comes out of the necessity for super- or inferiority of the elements, positioned above or below the others. Most everything happens on relation up – down, with all the traits of this orientation: the tension between the ground we fall onto, and heavens we long for. All these characteristics are only amplified by the physiological fact of our eye having a more horizontal field of view. SQUARE format, rather than summing it all up, simply sheds the attributes of horizontal and vertical altogether. This neutrality can at times be of use, especially if recognized and used as ambivalence, which is the most popular reason for going square. Much less do we see this format's potential for symmetry realized, with all hypnotic and suggestive authority it carries forth. EXTREME formats are in many ways just a more articulate versions of their moderate ancestors. However, they do inspire some original impressions. The extreme horizontal frame, found here and there in painting, and as a standard in film (even if 1 : 2.35 is just barely wide to be called extreme), especially focuses onto a linear course of events. These formats deconstruct the whole, translating it into a sort of one-dimensional world (sometimes to the cinematographer's despair), so the influence of left and right is limited to relations between the objects: sides are far away. In a pompous epic, but also a patientlyl narrative manner, this format was instantly recognized as perfect fit for historical spectacles, friezes in architecture and similar subjects. Extreme vertical format can be found in the far east drawings, and the turn of the century art (inspired by the former). Its one-dimensionality is perceived as a spiritual simultaneousness of superior and inferior, or as a line of causality, where the famous Art Nuveau/Seccesionistic "line of life" grows out from one thing into another. Again, the influence of far sides (top and bottom here) is extinguished by the interrelation of objects within the image - what remains is just an endless, general direction – mostly towards the heavens. It is curious to note how much this obvious and first choice of format indicates author's general psychological predisposition towards the media. A lot can be concluded from this simple finding. |
|||
| aspect ratio |
|||
This image gains monumental firmness and anchor in space and time from the horizontal orientation, accented by the edge elements of composition and the active empty surface on the left.
|
|||
   |
|||
