720p resolution at a 21:9 aspect ratio

[Handsome Sheep Shearer]

Is there a 720p resoluion at the 21:9 ultrawide resolution and if so what is it?

[Menacing Scarab]

Looks like it should be about 1707x720 for an approximate 21:9 resolution at that level.

[🌑Trimatix]

I don't think that's correct

For a resolution of w x h, at an aspect ratio of aW:aH, you can use the equation w = (h*aW)/aH to get the width from the resolution and aspect ratio

If we use that, the width comes out at (720*21)/9 = 1680

[Menacing Scarab]

I did say "about" didn't I? I never said my answer was definitive for such an odd setup.
Edit: I also used the word "approximate"

[Dr.Shadowds 🐉]

It's 1680 x 720 to have it at 21:9.

Either doing basic math that Trimatix provided, or use this site that is a calculator for your aspect ratio, and resolution. https://calculateaspectratio.com/ You put in your ratio, then put in one of pixel height which is 720 you wanted to go by, and you get your answer for width which works out 1680.

[🌑Trimatix]

Opprinnelig skrevet av The Redneck Ram:

I did say "about" didn't I? I never said my answer was definitive for such an odd setup.
Edit: I also used the word "approximate"

sorry for giving the correct answer :(

[Menacing Scarab]

Giving a correct answer is fine, but there was no need to be a ♥♥♥♥ with the delivery. Reading it had a very smartass tone to it. For starters this thread is over 3 years old. Then on top of that instead of just saying something to the effect of "the actual resolution is xxxxxx and I derived that by using this forumula: yyyyy" you went through the trouble of mentioning how wrong I was when I had already just taken an estimated guess and had even mentioned that it was just an approximation. It was like being slapped in the face for giving any kind of an answer even when mentioning that the answer would only have been close and then someone coming in later and saying "oh you're completely wrong, ♥♥♥♥ off you dumbass because I'm clearly smarter." And even with my answer being a guess look how close I was to it. I'd say being within 27 pixels without using any kind of math formula was a pretty damn close guess.

[SCRUB_A_DUB]

This man just had a complete mental breakdown because he imagined malicious intent over a simple reply 🤣🤣🤣

[nullable]

Opprinnelig skrevet av The Redneck Ram:

Giving a correct answer is fine, but there was no need to be a ♥♥♥♥ with the delivery.

Saying, "I don't think your answer is correct" isn't an attack on you. Lighten up.

Opprinnelig skrevet av The Redneck Ram:

Reading it had a very smartass tone to it.

You imagined that.

Like reading your post had a messy sobbing tone to it... that's what I'm imagining. Must be true, right?

Opprinnelig skrevet av The Redneck Ram:

For starters this thread is over 3 years old. Then on top of that instead of just saying something to the effect of "the actual resolution is xxxxxx and I derived that by using this forumula: yyyyy" you went through the trouble of mentioning how wrong I was when I had already just taken an estimated guess and had even mentioned that it was just an approximation. It was like being slapped in the face for giving any kind of an answer even when mentioning that the answer would only have been close and then someone coming in later and saying "oh you're completely wrong, ♥♥♥♥ off you dumbass because I'm clearly smarter." And even with my answer being a guess look how close I was to it. I'd say being within 27 pixels without using any kind of math formula was a pretty damn close guess.

You're pretty defensive about three year old post for starters. No reason to fly off the handle because someone gave a more precise answer to your approximation. And how much credit do you want for close guesses you didn't really bother to put effort into anyway?

[wuddih]

Opprinnelig skrevet av The Redneck Ram:

For starters this thread is over 3 years old.

and it is never too late to educate and to correct false and wrong information.

i can feel the urge of the repliers to correct the misinformation.