Why Not A Simple 2:1 Aspect Ratio?

[abajan]

It's something I've being pondering for quite a while and more so lately, since getting a new computer with a widescreen monitor. It's this: Why haven't aspect ratios been standardized to a simple 2:1 (two units wide for every unit high). For instance, my monitor's screen is 16" wide by 10" high (which in itself is a bit odd, as I know of a 16:9 standard but no 16:10 one).

Judging from the number of results Google throws up, it seems many others have been wondering the same thing. In 1994 (that's 14 years ago, folks) the American Society of Cinematographers published this statement on the matter. So it begs to question: Whither the 2:1 standard?

[Skyhawk]

Could it be an approximation to the golden rectangle (1:1.618) that is said to be aesthetically pleasing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rectangle

[abajan]

You have a valid point there, Skyhawk. This cool golden rectangle calculator visually reinforces what you've stated. 16:10 is simply too close to 16.18:10 to be considered as just a mere coincidence.

Actually, your link answers another question I had about the meaning of the "Golden Section" tooltip that appears when drawing rectangles in SketchUp. Thanks