This content has been marked as final. Show 13 replies
Can you resize the matte?
No the matte file (photoshop or title) doesn't have the option to unscale and the matte doesn't change no matter how big I make the file.
A line that is supposed to go from screen top to bottom only goes about 3/4 of the way and is much narrower.
Have you used Effect>Motion>Scale (on Effects Panel for your Clip) to alter the size? I've done this with Video Clips, though have not tried with stills, so maybe there is some problem with using this.
When I use stills I sometimes want to get really close. If I use the scale I can only get to about 200 before the image gets blurry, however when I unscale to frame size it is completley sharp. But unfortunately that is when I get the track matte problem.
I was hoping someone might know of a workaround maybe using nested sequences or such.
I think that is a bug. There is a bug with the garbage mattes also. The sizing is all messed up. I hope this get addressed in the next update.
I've read this thread-- and granted I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed -- but I'm having trouble following the issue.
Is the problem that if you scale the matte shape, it doesn't scale properly when using it as a track matte? If so, then first scale the matte shape in another sequence A, and then nest sequence A into sequence B and use the nested clip A as your track matte.
OR... is the problem that once you apply the track matte, and then scale the underlying clip, the track matte scales with it? If that's the case, you should not add the track matte effect until after scaling the underlying image.
Or... perhaps I missed the target on both of these. Which is likely. :)
Glad you're attempting to weigh in. I'll try to explain better.
If I drag my photos (stills) to the timeline and then right click and uncheck the scale to frame size option the picture becomes very large but still crystal clear. If I wanted to see it in the full frame I would have to go back to about 30 in the motion effects>scale.
The alternative is to scale to frame size and then using motion>scale bring it up to 200 or more. This makes the picture blurry so I often opt to do the former.
The trouble comes in when I try to add a track matte. For instance if I want to see the entire picture and then keyframe the track matte so it is a vertical line down the center of the picture. What happens here is the matte doesn't cover the entire screen. It seems to be scaled at the same size as the scaled picture.
I have some screen shots to post but I don't know how to post screen shots.
Well, this is tangential to your issue-- but my first reaction is, "Oh no, don't scale to frame size and then scale your image up to 200%." That is like throwing away half of the lumber needed to build a house, and then trying to build the house with what you have left.
But, I also know that Premiere gets sluggish with very large images, so importing many still images and scaling them to 30% may not result in smooth editing. If you have Photoshop, I would do a batch scale process on all of your images at once to reduce their size so that you never have to go over 100% in Premiere.
Back to your track matte problem: The above solution would likely solve your track matte issue. However, my question to you is-- are you applying the track matte and then scaling, or are you scaling and then applying the track matte?
As far as posting screen shots-- you can use an image sharing service like Photobucket (photobucket.com) or Google's Picasa (picasa.google.com) and then post the URL address here.
> If I wanted to see it in the full frame I would have to go back to about 30 in the motion effects>scale
This is the correct way to do things.
If you are trying to use a track matte, I suggest putting the original image in a separate sequence, scale it, and then use the separate sequence nested back in the original sequence. Then apply the track matte.
I don't know why the track matte scales to the same scale as the image, but it does. It does not do the same thing with nested sequences though, so unless you want to create the track matte at the same size as the original image (not a bad idea in Photoshop) you should use nested sequences.
Maybe Adobe assumes that you are creating the track matte based on the original image, and the current system allows you to resize the still image as you wish and the track matte will still be the right size?
thanks, I'll try scaling in a separate sequence and then nesting to add the track matte. I'll let you know if that works.
Yup, this worked.
I wish it wasn't the case as keyframing scale of original image will now have to be done in nested sequence but at least it is working so THANKS.
OOOHHH-- you were keyframing the scale of the original image. Sorry it took me so long to figure that out. For what it's worth-- this isn't necessarily a bug. Premiere Pro locks the matte to your clip's properties-- position, scale, rotation, etc.
Not saying this is right -- but they have attempted to dummy proof it. Personally, I would prefer some sort of lock/unlock feature similar to the way Photoshop allows you to lock or unlock a mask.
Hmmm. Now that I think about it-- I'm going to go file a feature request!
It was a similar case in the Pro 2 forum a while ago, but then it was used key frames for moving the footage, and it had to fit the track matte.
Anyway, just for the record here in the CS3 forum (I guess many CS3 users only search in the CS3 forum), a little tip:
In the sequence where the key framing of the footage (picture or video) is done, one can just put a copy of the track matte in video 2 (assuming the footage is in video 1) and set the opacity of the track matte copy to for example 50% so that you see it but also through it. Do NOT apply the track matte key to the footage in video 1. When the key framing is done, just delete the copy of the track matte.
EDIT: Jeff, I agree with you about the lock/unlock. But, if they don't do lock/unlock, I do hope they keep it as it is, and don't change it to unlocked only.