Public ContentView homePagePortraitContentView Public partial class HomePageOrientationViewLoader : ContentView namespace ScoreKeepersBoard.ContentViews This is the control that will load either the HomePagePortrait ContentView when in portrait mode or HomePageLandscape ContentView when in landscape mode. The HomePageOrientationViewLoader will get loaded directly into the HomePage.xaml file later on. I added 3 new ContentViews (the XAML with the code behind): I created a new folder called "ContentViews" in my solution. I'm attempting the solution that FreakyAli posted and have a mostly working prototype, so anyone who is wanting to use a different XAML layout based upon the screen orientation can use this approach. Here are examples of my portrait vs landscape mockup I created on Photoshop: Here is my layout and in landscape mode I can fit 3 major sections in one row but this won't work in portrait and in portrait I would like the middle major element to be on the next row. If not what is the best practice in regards to this? I tinkered around with Android programming a long time ago and for Android Studio there was a way to choose a XAML file when the device was in landscape and a different XAML file when the device was in portrait. NET MAUI and I have a particular view that is rather complicated and I would rather have a different layout if the device orientation is in Portrait vs if the device orientation is in landscape. So far as I know, all current equipment, both cameras and displays, uses square pixels. Way back, there were computers with rectangular pixels in their displays. Depending on the exact ratios of each factor either could show relatively more or less relative resolution or they could be equal. If two sensors have equal numbers of pixels but one is larger than the other that one will pick up more millimetres' worth of resolution from the lens so its image will show relatively higher resolution.Īnd then there's the combination of sensors with different sizes and different numbers of pixels. But the resolution you observe depends also on the sensor: if two sensors are of equal size but one has more pixels that one will show the lens's resolution better so its image will show relatively higher resolution. A lens has a certain resolution in a certain set of conditions (aperture and subject distance are critical) so to that extent you can say its resolution is absolute. If it's a yes I have another much more technical and somewhat obscure question to those that are technically/engineering inclined regarding "absolute" versus "relative" resolution.Īgain, this depends on what you actually mean. This is why you can get more detail in a picture of a tall building if you fill the frame height when shooting portrait (as stated in another reply). By this definition resolution will be higher in portrait orientation because "height" is greater when the sensor is turned vertically. Today resolution is also measured by lines-per-picture-height, which can be useful when comparing resolution between different sensor formats. Lines/mm caused no confusion when film formats were mostly 35mm or medium format. With a regular array of pixels resolution diagonally can be different but horizontal and vertical are the same. By that definition resolution of a lens is the same in any direction - vertical, horizontal or vertical. Traditionally resolution has been measured in lines-per-millimetre (or inch), by which it means the maximum number of alternating black and white lines that can be distinguished before merging into grey. It depends on what you mean - or how you define resolution. I see you immediately realized where I am going with the "relative" resolution as far as packing pixels into the object, wow, great intuition. If they rectangular than the resolution could be different between the long and short axis of the rectangle. The opposite is true if you are shooting something wide and not very tall like a sofa.Īre the pixels square or are they rectangular. If you just fitted the skyscraper in vertically in both a portrait and a landscape orientation, the actual skyscraper would have a higher resolution in the portrait orientation because there would be less wasted space down the sides. That would be true if you were photographing something tall and thin like a sky scraper. I read somewhere the following line "highest resolution is obtained in landscape in preference to the portrait orientation". There will be the same number of pixels in both images. Is there a difference in resolution between Landscape and Portrait orientations?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |