The Rise of Vertical Content and the Aspect Ratio Conundrum

by James Mathers
Cinematographer and Founder of the Digital Cinema Society
(Excerpted from the November 2025 Digital Cinema Society eNewsletter)

In the dozens of indie features I shot throughout the ’80s and ’90s, an eventual television release was always an important factor to keep in mind. This necessitated concurrently framing for both 1:85, (for theatrical release,) and 4×3, (for TV). It was a source of constant consternation and required real-time, on-the-fly compromise, especially challenging when following fast moving action. In those days, finishing on film, there was no quick digital fix in post.

This aspect ratio dichotomy could be even more of an issue for wider screen formats commonly used in higher end features, but those often merited full “pan-and-scan” treatment where the framing was dynamically adjusted for TV during telecine. Even this was far from ideal, since the TV release was done, sometimes years later, in the absence of filmmaker supervision and not what they envisioned when they originally framed the shot.

Things got a little easier in my world when television transitioned to 16×9, which was much closer to 1:85, (you just had to protect with a little more headroom.) When I started shooting indie features digitally in the early 2000s, it was mostly 16×9 from start to finish. Things went along pretty smoothly for a time until the smartphone started being used as a mobile display, along with the subsequent emergence of social media.

Cinematographers were now being requested to frame for a vertical aspect ratio of 9×16. It was not what we were used to, but no big ask, we simply turned our cameras 90 degrees and went about our other normal filmmaking tasks. You could go the deluxe route with something like a Cartoni Lambda three-axis head, or just mount an L-shaped cheese plate extension on top of your fluid head for a simple, but far less flexible, fix. And with the ever-improving image capture quality of mobile devices like the iPhone, shooting on a smartphone became another viable option.

Much to my chagrin, this vertical orientation has gained major acceptance lately, especially with younger audiences who have gotten used to viewing content delivered as square or vertically formatted on platforms like TikTok and Instagram. In fact, they seem to prefer holding their phones upright to view programming. A recent study found that most users don’t bother to turn their phones when presented with short content that is in a “landscape,” or horizontal orientation.

Being that a large segment of the viewing public now prefers a vertical orientation, the entertainment industry has begun to meet the demand and deliver suitably formatted programs. This has all led to a whole genre of streaming serialized-story content that has come to be known as “Verticals.” These are dramas akin to 90-minute soap operas that are broken into short, episodic bursts usually lasting no more than a couple of minutes each. Plots tend to be well trodden tropes of romance novels, but nothing that requires too much production value, so no pirate ships, casts of thousands, or big action sequences.

Since they are designed for mobile devices, they are shot and consumed vertically with little regard for any other aspect ratio. Distribution channels have developed via dedicated apps like ReelShort, FlickReels and DramaBox where viewers can subscribe to view select series. According to the Data Insights Market research company, the vertical drama market is currently valued at $5 billion. It’s set to triple in size to $15 billion by 2033, growing at a 15% compound annual growth rate.

Challenging traditional cinematic norms, DCS member Christian Meoli, Founder of Cinelounge, a chain of boutique screening venues, has begun to offer theatrical screenings in the vertical format. He and his co-owner wife, Camilla, have now also created the Marin Vertical Film Festival to showcase and celebrate films shot in the vertical 9:16 aspect ratio on theatrical screens. According to Christian, “the rise of social media platforms like Snapchat and TikTok have normalized the vertical format, allowing exhibitors to engage with a massive, mobile-native audience.”

While doing research for this essay, I came across “Vertical Drama Love.”  It’s a website and fan collective that is devoted to the genre. It features reviews, awards coverage, and behind the scenes interviews with actors and filmmakers; (a link follows this essay.)

Vertical Dramas are usually shot in 8-10 days, with non-union actors and minimal crew being the norm, but the various unions are starting to take notice. SAG-AFTRA has announced that they are creating specialized signatory agreements to meet the unique needs of serialized micro-dramas designed for mobile screens. This will allow more experienced performers to take on these roles, and as long as the budgets are under $300,000, they will have the same protections as other more main stream productions. The Writers Guild of America (WGA) has also discussed the need to organize writers working in verticals and the DGA and IATSE can’t be far behind.

I’m not a fan of watching programs vertically, and I have not yet had the occasion to shoot any of these Vertical productions, but I think they’re great. The format opens up new creative composition and aesthetic possibilities. I also embrace the filmmakers like Wes Anderson who choose to shoot theatrical motion pictures in the old 4×3 aspect ratio; it is a wonderful creative choice to have. Personally, I prefer wider formats like 2:35, and with a little letter-boxing, it still allows for a great viewing experience on today’s large screen displays.

My gripe, however, is with producers who are now asking cinematographers to concurrently cover wildly disparate formats like 16×9 and 9×16. They somehow expect us to hold and properly frame two completely different aspect ratios in the same shot so they can simultaneously release the content on both TV and social media. The necessary compromises are huge, and there is just no good answer to make this work perfectly in production.

The best remedy I can recommend, which I have tried a couple of times, is to shoot at resolutions of 8K or more and digitally reframe in post. If you are shooting in 8K, you can extract a 9×16 vertical frame and still maintain 4K resolution. This works best when shooting on greenscreen where the background can be independently adjusted to match foreground, but like pan-and-scan, the DP is seldom there to sign-off on the framing.

Editing programs like DaVinci Resolve and Adobe Premiere Pro are now able to use AI to automatically reformat images for different aspect ratios for delivery, but dare I make the point again, that the DP who originally framed the shot will rarely have any say in the process. A square aspect ratio, popularized on social media is another consideration, but it is manageable, not being so far afield from either vertical or horizontal. So, I would like to rephrase the old adage: “You can have Good, Fast, or Cheap…Pick any two.” I would say, instead, “Vertical, Horizontal, or Square…Pick any two.”

A horizontal aspect ratio is much closer to the natural field of view for human vision and was established as the standard for theatrical motion pictures over a century ago. Ironically, when the movie business first felt threatened by TV in the 1950s they went even wider with Cinemascope and Vistavision. Now the entertainment industry seems to be going in the opposite direction. For a variety of complicated reasons, the theatrical motion picture business seems to be in decline as star-driven movies are failing at the box office. Meanwhile, influencers and content creators have become the new celebrities and much of their programming is consumed in a vertical aspect ratio.

In the end, content will be delivered in the format that will be consumed by the largest and most engaged audience. Wide screen movies aren’t going anywhere, but as mobile-forward videos dominate the content creator landscape on social media, more vertically framed content will remain a large part of the, (no pun intended,) landscape. So, buckle up; it’s going to be a bumpy ride for the cinematographer trying to find the best framing compromises for all the various divergent aspect ratios coming our way.

The “Vertical Drama Love” websites devoted to the genre:
https://www.verticaldramalove.com/