Forum Replies Created

  • Thanks for being so generous with your time David.

    I don’t believe there is anything inherently wrong with the images themselves, they look fine in preview.app and in the 4:3 sequence. I should note however that they are all 72dpi TIFF’s, downsized in PS from the original 300dpi TIFF’s supplied by the museum because I read somewhere years ago that one shouldn’t use massively oversampled images for Ken Burns style rostrum animation (in FCE anyway) because of moire effects -that may not be an issue in FCP, particularly if I “send to Motion”.

    As an experiment I have reimported a small selection of TIFF’s into the browser and when I drop them onto a video track above the stretched images I note in the Motion tab that they have been interpreted as having an aspect ratio of 42.22 and have no distortion.

    By adjusting the aspect ratio of the original images in the track underneath to 42.22 I can eliminate the distortion and the Basic Motion attributes from the 2003 edit are retained which gives me a good starting point for animating them within the new wider frame.

    I have no idea where these odd aspect ratio numbers are coming from, perhaps in the fullness of time someone will shed some light, but I can now start the job proper.

    Thanks again for paying attention to this issue for me,

    All the best,

    Mike

  • Hi David,

    Thanks for the reminder about removing attributes. Unfortunately the practical impact of right-clicking and removing the “distort” attribute is to reset the aspect ratio slider to zero which again stretches the images even further in the horizontal direction.

    Cheers,

    Mike

  • Thanks Mark,

    The aspect ratio is unchanged from 6.67

    Thanks David,

    If by “distort parameter” you mean the aspect ratio slider that is unchanged at 6.67 as mentioned above.

    Decreasing it to zero as suggested makes the still image wider and more slightly more distorted. By eye, it needs to be increased to between 40 to 50 to look normal. Strange that it is so non-linear.

    Cheers,

    Mike

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy