Aspect Ratio Calculator
Enter any two dimensions to read the ratio, or a ratio and one side to get the other.
Open the calculatorWhat this calculator does
- Reads the simplified ratio from any width and height
- Fills in the missing side when you already know the ratio
- Shows the decimal value and the common name of the format
- Lists the standard resolutions for each common ratio
Calculator
Calculate an aspect ratio
The calculator works both ways. Switch modes above the inputs depending on what you already know.
Visual Preview
Find Aspect Ratio
Aspect Ratio
-
Decimal
-
Common Name
-
Ratio presets
How it works
The arithmetic behind the result
An aspect ratio is width divided by height, reduced to its smallest whole numbers. Everything the calculator shows follows from that one division.
Divide
Width divided by height gives the decimal value. 1920 / 1080 is 1.778, which is what 16:9 means in practice.
Reduce
The two numbers are divided by their greatest common divisor. 1920 and 1080 share 120, which leaves 16 and 9.
Name
The reduced pair is matched against the standard formats, so 16:9 comes back as widescreen rather than a bare pair of numbers.
Scale
To resize without distortion, multiply both sides by the same factor. Any dimension the calculator returns already follows that rule.
Reference
Ratios covered on this page
Each ratio below has its own resolution table and the details that matter when you actually use it.
4:3 - the standard format
The shape of television and computer displays until widescreen took over, and still the native ratio of most projectors and presentation slides.
Common 4:3 resolutions
| Resolution | Width × Height | Common usage |
|---|---|---|
| VGA | 640 × 480 | Early PC displays and classic game capture |
| SVGA | 800 × 600 | Standard-definition presentations and older projectors |
| XGA | 1024 × 768 | The most common 4:3 projector and document camera resolution |
| SXGA | 1280 × 960 | Legacy CRT monitors and industrial displays |
| UXGA | 1600 × 1200 | Photo printing and mid-range 4:3 monitors |
| QXGA | 2048 × 1536 | iPad Retina displays and high-resolution 4:3 capture |
Displaying 4:3 on Widescreen
When 4:3 content is shown on a 16:9 display, the aspect ratios do not match. There are three standard methods to handle this, each with trade-offs.
Pillarboxing
Black bars are added on the left and right sides to preserve the original 4:3 framing. The image remains untouched.
Crop (Pan & Scan)
The 4:3 image is zoomed in and the top and bottom are cropped to fill the 16:9 frame. Some content is lost.
Stretch
The 4:3 image is horizontally stretched to fill the 16:9 frame. Everything is visible but distorted.
4:3 survives where a taller frame is useful. Conference projectors, older document cameras and iPad photography all still work in it, and presentation software offers it alongside 16:9 for exactly that reason.
The practical problem with 4:3 today is playback. A 4:3 frame on a 16:9 screen leaves a quarter of the display unused, which is why the three handling methods below exist and why the choice between them is a real decision rather than a default.
3:2 - the photography format
The ratio of a 35 mm negative, carried over into full frame and APS-C sensors, which is why it prints to standard photo sizes without cropping.
Common 3:2 resolutions
| Resolution | Width × Height | Common usage |
|---|---|---|
| 4×6 Print (300 DPI) | 1800 × 1200 | 4 × 6 photo prints at 300 DPI, the standard album size |
| 6×9 Print (300 DPI) | 2700 × 1800 | 6 × 9 prints, common for enlargements |
| Full Frame 24 MP | 6000 × 4000 | Canon 5D Mark IV, Nikon D750, Sony A7 III |
| Full Frame 45 MP | 8256 × 5504 | Nikon Z7, Sony A7R III, Canon EOS R5 |
| Full Frame 50 MP | 8688 × 5792 | Canon 5DS R, Sony A7R IV |
| APS-C 24 MP | 6000 × 4000 | Canon 90D, Nikon D7500, Sony A6400 |
Photography Print Size Reference
Standard photo print sizes that match the 3:2 aspect ratio. All sizes print without cropping from a 3:2 camera sensor.
| Print Size | Pixels at 300 DPI | Min. Megapixels | Typical Use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 x 6 in 10 x 15 cm | 1200 x 1800 | 2.2 MP | Everyday prints, photo albums |
| 6 x 9 in 15 x 23 cm | 1800 x 2700 | 4.9 MP | Postcards, larger album prints |
| 8 x 12 in 20 x 30 cm | 2400 x 3600 | 8.6 MP | Framed photos, wall decor |
| 10 x 15 in 25 x 38 cm | 3000 x 4500 | 13.5 MP | Large framed prints |
| 12 x 18 in 30 x 46 cm | 3600 x 5400 | 19.4 MP | Gallery prints, posters |
| 16 x 24 in 41 x 61 cm | 4800 x 7200 | 34.6 MP | Exhibition, fine art |
| 20 x 30 in 51 x 76 cm | 6000 x 9000 | 54.0 MP | Large-format, studio displays |
Nearly every interchangeable-lens camera outputs 3:2. A 24 megapixel full frame sensor gives 6000 × 4000 pixels, and both numbers divide cleanly by 2000, which is the whole reason a 4 × 6 print needs no crop.
The constraint worth knowing is resolution rather than shape. Print size and sharpness are tied together through DPI, so the table below lists the sensor resolution each print size actually requires at 300 DPI.
4:5 - the portrait post
The tallest frame Instagram and Facebook accept in the feed, which makes it the most screen space a single post can occupy on a phone.
Common 4:5 resolutions
| Resolution | Width × Height | Common usage |
|---|---|---|
| Small Portrait | 800 × 1000 | Small web thumbnails and preview crops |
| Instagram Standard | 1080 × 1350 | Instagram and Facebook portrait feed posts |
| High Quality | 1440 × 1800 | Retina-quality portrait posts and print-ready web images |
| Maximum Quality | 2160 × 2700 | Maximum quality uploads before platform compression |
| Facebook Portrait | 1080 × 1350 | Facebook feed posts and portrait ads |
| Pinterest Pin | 1000 × 1250 | Pinterest vertical pins |
4:5 Dimensions for Social Media
The 4:5 aspect ratio takes up the most screen space in social feeds. Here are the recommended dimensions and limits for each platform.
4:5 is the tallest ratio allowed in the feed. It takes up 20% more vertical space than a square (1:1) post.
Taller pins perform better. Pinterest recommends 2:3, but handles 4:5 well in the feed layout.
Facebook supports 4:5 in the feed. Taller images take up more screen space and drive higher engagement.
Vertical 4:5 images stand out in LinkedIn's text-dominated feed.
4:5 is a deliberate platform limit rather than a historical format. Feeds crop anything taller, so 1080 × 1350 is the working size: it fills the column without triggering a crop that would cut the composition.
Note that 4:5 is portrait while 5:4 is landscape. The two are easy to confuse and the calculator will tell them apart for you, since it reports the decimal alongside the ratio.
16:10 - the productivity format
Slightly taller than 16:9 at the same width, which is why it keeps returning to laptops and monitors aimed at work rather than video.
Common 16:10 resolutions
| Resolution | Width × Height | Common usage |
|---|---|---|
| WXGA | 1280 × 800 | Older laptops and entry-level widescreen displays |
| WXGA+ | 1440 × 900 | Standard laptop panels and budget professional monitors |
| WSXGA+ | 1680 × 1050 | Business monitors and productivity displays |
| WUXGA | 1920 × 1200 | Professional monitors, high-end laptops and creative workstations |
| WQXGA | 2560 × 1600 | Premium laptops and high-resolution professional displays |
| WQUXGA | 3840 × 2400 | Ultra high-end creative displays and workstations |
The Extra Vertical Space: 16:10 vs 16:9
At the same width, 16:10 delivers 11.1% more vertical pixels than 16:9. Here is what that means in practice.
| Base Width | 16:10 Resolution | 16:9 Resolution | Extra Rows |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1920 px | 1920 x 1200 | 1920 x 1080 | 120 rows +11.1% |
| 2560 px | 2560 x 1600 | 2560 x 1440 | 160 rows +11.1% |
| 3840 px | 3840 x 2400 | 3840 x 2160 | 240 rows +11.1% |
What Fits in the Extra Space
Coding & IDEs
About 5-6 extra lines of code visible without scrolling. Terminal and tool panels fit better below the editor.
Document Work
A4 and Letter pages display with less cropping. Toolbars, ribbons, and rulers take less of the usable area.
Web Browsing
More content visible per page. Address bar, bookmarks, and tabs take a smaller share of the screen.
Photo & Video Editing
Timeline panels, layer lists, and property inspectors fit alongside the canvas without overlapping.
At 1920 pixels wide, 16:10 gives 1200 rows against 1080. That is 120 extra rows, or roughly two more toolbars, one more paragraph of a document and a noticeably longer view of a code file.
The trade-off is video. A 16:9 film on a 16:10 display letterboxes, which is the reason the format lost the consumer market in the first place and the reason it came back for professional displays.
32:9 - the super ultrawide
Exactly two 16:9 screens side by side in one panel, with no bezel down the middle.
Common 32:9 resolutions
| Resolution | Width × Height | Common usage |
|---|---|---|
| Dual WUXGA | 3200 × 900 | Two 1600 × 900 panels joined, the entry-level super ultrawide |
| DFHD | 3840 × 1080 | Dual Full HD, the most common 32:9 gaming monitor |
| DQHD | 5120 × 1440 | Dual QHD, the mainstream high-end 32:9 resolution |
| 32:9 QHD+ | 5760 × 1620 | High-refresh 32:9 panels aimed at gaming |
| DUHD | 7680 × 2160 | Dual 4K, used for professional editing and simulation |
Super Ultrawide vs Ultrawide vs Standard: 32:9, 21:9 and 16:9 Compared
How the super ultrawide 32:9 format compares to 21:9 and 16:9 for gaming, video, and everyday work.
- Widest field of view of any mainstream ratio
- Wrap-around immersion for racing and flight sims
- Common resolutions: 3840 x 1080, 5120 x 1440
- Native support is growing; some titles still letterbox
- 21:9 offers wide immersion with broader game support
- 16:9 guarantees compatibility with every title
- Common resolutions: 2560 x 1440, 1920 x 1080
- Often preferred for competitive esports
Verdict: 32:9 delivers the deepest immersion, especially in sims. 21:9 and 16:9 offer wider compatibility.
- Even cinemascope films do not fill the full width
- Best used as an editing canvas, not a viewing format
- Huge horizontal timeline space for video and audio
- Reference monitors can sit beside the timeline
- 21:9 matches cinemascope films almost exactly
- 16:9 is the native format for TV and streaming
- Less black space when watching standard content
- Lower bandwidth and storage requirements
Verdict: 32:9 is an editing powerhouse. For watching films, 21:9 or 16:9 fit the content better.
- Equivalent workspace of two full monitors, no bezel
- Three or four windows side by side comfortably
- Ideal for trading desks and dashboards
- Replaces a dual-monitor setup with one screen
- 21:9 fits two or three windows with less width
- 16:9 suits focused, single-window work
- Lower GPU load and easier window management
- Cheaper and more widely available
Verdict: 32:9 is unmatched for heavy multitasking. 21:9 and 16:9 are simpler and more affordable.
A 5120 × 1440 panel is two 2560 × 1440 monitors joined together. For anything that tiles windows side by side, that is the entire point: the same working area without a seam through the middle of it.
Support is the catch. Games and video that assume a 16:9 or 21:9 frame either letterbox or stretch, so 32:9 rewards work that fills width and punishes content that was authored for a fixed frame.
2.35:1 and 2.39:1 - the cinema formats
The two scope ratios used for theatrical release, close enough to look identical and different enough to matter when you are cutting a master.
Common cinema resolutions
| Resolution | Width × Height | Format | Common usage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full HD Scope | 1920 × 817 | 2.35:1 | 16:9 Full HD cropped to cinematic scope |
| DCI 2K Scope | 2048 × 871 | 2.35:1 | Digital cinema 2K projection |
| UHD Scope | 3840 × 1634 | 2.35:1 | 4K UHD cropped to scope |
| DCI 4K Scope | 4096 × 1743 | 2.35:1 | Digital cinema 4K projection |
| Full HD Anamorphic | 1920 × 803 | 2.39:1 | Modern anamorphic standard for Full HD delivery |
| DCI 2K Flat | 2048 × 858 | 2.39:1 | Digital cinema 2K at the tightened scope ratio |
| UHD Anamorphic | 3840 × 1607 | 2.39:1 | 4K UHD modern anamorphic |
| DCI 4K Flat | 4096 × 1716 | 2.39:1 | Digital cinema 4K at the tightened scope ratio |
Scope format calculator
Cinema Aspect Ratio Timeline
How widescreen cinema evolved from the near-square Academy format to today's ultra-wide ratios.
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences standardized this near-square format in 1932. It remained the dominant cinema ratio for over two decades.
To compete with television, studios introduced CinemaScope (2.55:1, later 2.35:1) and flat widescreen (1.85:1). Anamorphic lenses squeezed a wide image onto standard 35 mm film.
SMPTE updated the anamorphic specification from 2.35:1 to 2.39:1 in 1970. Panavision lenses became the industry standard for widescreen cinematography.
Modern directors treat aspect ratio as a storytelling tool. Some films switch between ratios (IMAX 1.43:1 to 2.39:1) within a single movie for dramatic effect.
2.35:1 was the anamorphic standard until 1970, when the specification was tightened to 2.39:1 to hide splice damage at reel changes. Both are still called scope, and 2.35:1 remains the name most people use for either.
In a digital workflow the difference is a few rows of pixels. From a 1920 pixel wide frame, 2.35:1 gives 817 rows and 2.39:1 gives 803. The switcher below shows both so you can match whichever your delivery spec asks for.
Looking for the full list instead?
This page is the tool, with a reference section for each ratio it covers. If you want every common ratio side by side in one table, the cheat sheet is the shorter read.
Open the aspect ratio cheat sheetFrequently asked questions
Related Calculators
Explore Other Aspect Ratios
Find the perfect aspect ratio calculator for your specific needs
16:9 calculator
The widescreen standard for Full HD, 4K and nearly every modern display.
9:16 calculator
The vertical format behind Reels, Shorts and TikTok video.
21:9 calculator
The ultrawide format for cinematic gaming and wide monitors.
Ratio comparison
See how any two aspect ratios differ, drawn to scale side by side.