Watch the three clean outputs
Preserves the broadest left-to-right room and facade context.
Uses a tall phone-first canvas, so horizontal context must be prioritised more aggressively.
Balances vertical and horizontal space without matching either landscape width or portrait height.
Landscape protects width
The exterior and wider living spaces retain more of their left-to-right relationships in 16:9. Garage-to-entry spacing, furniture groupings and window-to-wall context have more room to coexist before the frame edge becomes a constraint.
Vertical forces stronger prioritisation
A 9:16 canvas cannot preserve the same horizontal field. The useful question is not whether vertical is “better,” but whether the most important subject survives the narrower frame. A source image with its selling feature near one edge is naturally harder to adapt than one with a strong central focal area.
Square changes the compromise again
1:1 gives back horizontal room compared with portrait while sacrificing the width available in landscape. That can suit feed presentation, but the viewer should still inspect where architecture, furniture or fixtures approach the crop boundary.
Editing happens after this format split
These are clean outputs. AbodeVid’s editing workflow then treats the three ratios as separate delivery versions, so an overlay that fits landscape does not have to be accepted unchanged in portrait or square. The editor evidence page documents that next stage of the workflow.