Changing aspect ratio from portrait orientation 2:3 to 8:10 without compositional compromise eg For Instagram

[Danny Rowton]

For Instagram posts, and when in portrait orientation, how can I change from a narrower aspect such as 2:3 to a squarer ratio of 8:10 without compromise on the composition? I know this can be done. There is a video or two on YouTube but it wasn't very clearly explained. Can anybody tell me step by step how to get around this issue?

[carl123]

Can you give a link to one of the videos on youtube?

[walt.farrell]

Welcome to the Serif Affinity forums.

First, 8:10 isn't "square"

Next, without cropping some of the image out, or ending up with white space around it, you can only end up with 8:12 or 6.667:10.

 

[Old Bruce]

1:1.5 to 1:1.25 needs to lose some of the left and right, or has to add to the top and bottom of the original. White is the 1:1.5 and Grey is the 1:1.25. White is not changed in size, Grey is changed in size.

[Danny Rowton]

PS Hi Walt, yes I understand that, and it's why I did say squarer, not square. The point being I am trying to minimise or ideally eliminate compositional changes whilst also making the aspect more square than 2:3.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, Danny Rowton said:

it's why I did say squarer, not square

Sorry, missed the extra "r".

[Danny Rowton]

On 4/10/2020 at 4:11 PM, Old Bruce said:

1:1.5 to 1:1.25 needs to lose some of the left and right, or has to add to the top and bottom of the original. White is the 1:1.5 and Grey is the 1:1.25. White is not changed in size, Grey is changed in size.

Thanks for replying. The issue relates to portrait orientation. Landscape isn't an issue. I am currently unable to avoid cut off body parts of the subject, which is frustrating.

[walt.farrell]

2 hours ago, Danny Rowton said:

I am currently unable to avoid cut off body parts of the subject, which is frustrating.

You may need to practice composing the image before you take the picture, while being aware of the final cropping you'll want to do.

Or, embrace the beauty of images that have body parts cropped off

[thomaso]

3 hours ago, Danny Rowton said:

The issue relates to portrait orientation. Landscape isn't an issue. I am currently unable to avoid cut off body parts of the subject, which is frustrating.

It is independent of the orientation, actually even of the source's ratio. The sample in your video avoids to crop at all but does a stretching instead on that side which is too short for the wanted ratio.

Of cause the visibility of the stretching in the final result depends on the stretched content, so it is less obvious for instance if you stretch the legs of a standing person but more if you manipulate the face (or parts of it) in a portrait, while it always also depends on the amount of stretching and a viewers knowledge of the stretched object in the original image. Of cause there are motives which may even turn into different objects when stretched, mostly those of a clear and known geometry, like a basketball (> oval football) or an egg (> table tennis ball) etc.

Therefore you should prefer a motive with some background at those image edges which are too short, (e.g. landscape, room, wall, table, bed, etc.).