>>3244465It's fine when not overdone since it does make footage look tidier but anything past the 2.55 scale on that image can indeed feel like overcompensation. I can understand when it comes to video quality, not everyone is capable of affording high end gear and having less things to look at on a wider frame might help to distract from the lower bitrate of an older camera (t. done it in the past and worked well enough), but god, film students who just put their bland portrait shots with blurry backgrounds on a 21:9 aspect ratio with shitty pre-made color grades all over it make me physically sick.
So yeah, tight aspect rations can be good but the composition itself needs to be cinematic to warrant a cinematic aspect ratio in the first place, otherwise you're just putting lipstick on a pig.
