Windows desktop wallpaper - Fill vs. Stretch

[ChrisGreaves]

FillVsStretch.png

If I have understood this page correctly:
FILL modifies only the width, maintaining the original aspect ratio, which can result in truncation
STRETCH modifies both height and width - which can result in distortion.

Correct?
Thanks
Chris

[HansV]

The description of FILL is not entirely correct. Width and height of the image may both be changed; the aspect ratio will be preserved.
If the width:height ratio of the image is larger than that of the screen, the height of the image will set to be equal to the height of the screen, causing the left and right sides of the image to be cut off.
If the width:height ratio of the image is smaller than that of the screen, the width of the image will set to be equal to the width of the screen, causing the top and bottom sides of the image to be cut off.

STRETCH causes the image to exactly fill the screen. This does not preserve the aspect ratio, and may cause the image to be distorted.

[Jay Freedman]

The true effect of FILL will be [painfully] evident if you try it with two different images: one that's very wide, such as a panoramic view (Hans' first case), and one that's in portrait orientation (the second case).

[ChrisGreaves]

The description of FILL is not entirely correct. ....

Thanks Hans. (Does "not entirely correct" translate to "incorrect" (grin))

I thought that my mind wasn't functioning correctly!

Cheers
Chris

[ChrisGreaves]

The true effect of FILL will be [painfully] evident if you try it with two different images: one that's very wide, such as a panoramic view (Hans' first case), and one that's in portrait orientation (the second case).

Thanks Jay.
I have found warping and truncation on occasions in the past, which is why (thirty years on!) I decided to read the Help files.

I am now of an age when it is a bit of a toss-up as to whether Microsoft Documentation OR my reasoning is failing.

Cheers
Chris