<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
That the sensor_width becomes sensor_height in portrait, is asFrancois writes,<div class="gmail_quote"><div><br>NO ! I was actually saying that the sensor width NEVER becomes the sensor height. portrait mode is a rotation of the camera itself. You should never intervert those parameter<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><div><br>I'm not convinced by this reasoning (any time the sensor height > width represents a camera rotation). Firstly not all camera formats are landscape - some are square, some are portrait. We're not just talking about tracking here (which I agree most of the time is done with landscape formats), but we're talking about blender's camera model in general, and this should be more flexible. I should be able to use blender to match output from my 6x6 mamiya or my half-frame olympus pen! ;)<br>
<br>The other thing is that bringing the idea of a camera rotation into blender's camera model complicates and confuses the issue - rotation is a property of the object and has nothing to do with the lens/film back.<br>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br>I probably mis-explain myself, because that exactly what I meant :) <br>
</div></div>