1 person found this helpful
Your sequence is using non-square pixels. Your images are using square pixels. If both are the same dimensions--720x480--there will still be a difference in the raster.
Photoshop has several video templates built-in, like this:
You can also use the 720x534 square pixel (1.0) option; I'm assuming that your sequence is DV. You could also reinterpret the images in Premiere Pro (right-click > Modify > Interpret Footage) but they'll stretch.
1 person found this helpful
I looked at the presets but I am working with scanned images and digital photos.
I am working with DV wide (1.2 aspect)
I have cropped the images in photoshop and adjusted the aspect as well but the image size isn't close. It is much to narrow to fill the field.
I had hoped to crop everything to 2888x1920 px so I would have room for effects but could also simply fit the image to the full screen (at 25% size) without any black bars.
I'm sure I am missing something simple
Is your timeline in Premiere Pro widescreen (16:9 ratio) or Standard (4:3 ratio)?
Photos from any digital camera use a 1.0 pixel ratio where as 4:3 DV video uses 0.9 and SD widescreen uses 1.2 pixel ratio. The pixel ratios as well as resolution, (720x480 in your case), need to match.
To do this, you can right click on your images in the project bin in Premiere Pro. Then go to Modify -> Interpret Footage. Then under the Pixel Aspect Ratio, you can conform it to match your project.
Hope that helps.
I am using widescreen. I have just switched my crop to 720x400 or 2880x1600 and it seems to work pretty well. I left the aspect unchanged
When I changed the aspect ratio in photoshop it didn't seem to transfer to premiere.
If I were to change the aspect in Premiere as you suggest, what size would you recommend I crop the image to in photoshop?
Got it. Alright, math time:
DV Widescreen is 720x480, PAR 1.2121. Let's calculate that in square pixels.
720 x 1.2121 = 872.712 or 873
So DV Widescreen is 873x480. Cool? Cool.
You want an image height of 1920, so we need to figure out the width to eliminate the black bars. So let's calculate ratios of our sequence and our images:
873 / 480 = 1.81875 * 1920 = 3492
Make your images 3492 x 1920, square pixels.
Colin's solution is the best way. I tested it and it works just fine.
Better than my math.
With the above numbers I would leave my aspect at 1, right? Would the image be any better or worse if I used a different number of pixels (ratio) and changed the aspect to 1.2? I think not but am easily confused
Does it matter what the resolution is in photoshop. Normally I'm at 300 ppi. Should I change this to 72 or will premiere take care of it either way.
Use square pixels (1.0). Photoshop only really works with square pixels, and all images have square pixels--it's simply a bit of metadata written into the file that tells Premiere Pro how to interpret the image, if you use a non-square pixel aspect ratio. If you use 1.21(2121212121-blah-blah-blah), you'd be telling Premiere Pro to interpret those pixels wider than they are tall--which would result in a horizontally stretched image.
Kick it down to 72dpi/ppi. Video really doesn't have DPI, and you're just unnecessarily increasing the memory requirements by keeping the DPI so high. You won't notice a dip in quality--you're already at 16x the resolution of the sequence.
Many thanks Colin and Mike
Now I can spend hours adjusting each image just because I don't like the black bars.
Your help is greatly appreciated
Cool. In case you didn't know, you can do a batch render in Photoshop so that you don't have to tweek every image one at a time.
I had been cropping each image individually to 3492x1920. I didn't think I could do this as a batch since I would lose control of what is cropped.
Can I change the image size to 3492x1920 instead or will this distort the image? If this would work I think it would be much easier to set up a batch and process a group of pictures for transfer to Premeire
Does anyone know if this will work or if there will be to much distortion
I ususally just import my photos as is directly into Premiere Pro. Then drag all of the images down onto the timeline. I'll then modify the first image through the effects control (adjusting the size and position). I'll then copy these attributes and then apply(paste) them to all of my other images on the timeline. Usually some of the images' position needs to be adjusted one at a time due to the crop factor.
This is the quickest way without messing with Photoshop.
But if you're wanting to crop them in Photoshop, for what you're doing, it'll have to be one at a time and can't be done well through a batch.
Unforunately I like to make things as complicated as possible
I really like my pics to fill the screen completely without the need for a backround under them if they don't fill the screen. ( a bit of OCD on my part)
If I do 3492x1920 I can then have premiere adjust them in the timeline or leave them at this size to allow more options for animation
I have tried to simply adjust the size rather than crop as I have done in the past so I can run a batch. I have done this to a few pics and am not sure if it has distorted them
Using a system with a GTX480 with 1.5GB memory & 12GB system memory, and I've noticed that premiere CS5.03 gets a little wiggy if the graphics are over 3200ppi. Specifically, I'm refering to a Ken Burns type project that was all photos with motion added. It had a number of photos over 4000ppi and PP would crash occasionally, and then display a graphics driver failure notice. Pre-editing the photos in PS to under 3200ppi smoothed out the project.
Thanks for the info
I have been scanning several old photos to include in an upcoming project and although I started at 3200 I recently changed to 6400 for the scanned images
Do you crop/resize your photos in photo shop or adjust with the zoom in PP?
ppi is completely irrelevant for video. It is only about pixel dimensions and you should always keep your pixel dimensions in close vicinity of your sequence pixel dimensions if you want to avoid problems. If you export for the web in 360x240 dimensions, it is absurd to use 4500 x 3000 stills, even if they are only 100 ppi.
Sorry, wrong terminology, same idea. I adjust Pixel Dimensions ( X Width and X Hieght, contrain proportions enabled ) in Photoshop. The pics are usually 72 PPI.
If I limit my images to DV Widescreen is 873x480 animation becomes problematic. By importing images at 4x the size I have more room for animation and can have premiere scale to the frame if I will not be animating a particular image.
Does this make sense or am i still missing something
DV widescreen with a PAR of 1.0 is 854 x 480 and not 873 x 480. Sure you can use larger pixel dimensions, but it only carries overhead if you want to use scale to frame. I mentioned 'vicinity' to allow for some panning of zooming, but going to 4 x the size is only good for creating overhead and reducing responsiveness.
would the following work for you ?
edit > preferences > general > default scale to frame size ( click in the little box to the left of that to put a checkmark there )
I have checked the math several times and your numbers are correct but when I put my pics on the time line there are very small black bars on the top and bottom.