8 Replies Latest reply: Oct 4, 2012 8:53 PM by Jim Wanamaker
Fergus Meiklejohn1 Level 1 (65 points)

Dropzones: where is the "fit, stretch.." image parameter gone in Motion 5?  I can't see it in the inspector anymore.  Has it been removed?


I'm having all kinds of trouble creating a lower third with a dropzone for a logo, creating that dropzone a certain size and position then forcing any logo dragged into it to resize to fit the dropzone.  Media larger than the dropzone will not resize to fit, and I can't see the old "fit, stretch.." parameter anywhere



MacBook Pro with Retina display, Mac OS X (10.7.4), 16GB RAM
  • Jim Wanamaker Level 4 (2,440 points)

    In the image tab of the drop zone inspector you should have pan and scale parameters. These will adjust size and position of the image in the drop zone.

  • Fergus Meiklejohn1 Level 1 (65 points)

    yeah I know, thanks.  so I'm not going mad then LOL ?  the "fit,scale.." parameters have been axed in Motion 5?


    they always were a bit quirky but dead useful on occassion, seems strange to axe them I think

  • Fergus Meiklejohn1 Level 1 (65 points)

    I'm using Motion 5.0.4


    I did some quick testing and my specific problem is this: in a title motion project (.moti) when I add a dropzone and scale it in the image inspector to say 30%, as soon as I save the project the dropzone automatically jumps back up to 100% scale value.  Pan adjustments are preserved, only scale jumps back up to 100%.  This does not happen with standard motion projects.


    is this a bug or is it supposed to happen this way?  When I making title projects for my own use in FCPX it's not a big deal as I understand what is happening but when I'm making them for outside editors its a bit of a problem.


    Any idea if I'm doing anything wrong?

  • Jim Wanamaker Level 4 (2,440 points)

    I don't believe you are doing anything wrong as I see the same result. The scale in the image inspector reflects the scale of the image in the drop zone. When you resize the drop zone using scale in the properties inspector and then scale the image to fit in the resized zone, Motion considers that to be 100%. If you publish both scale parameters, then in FCP you can both change the drop zone size and scale the image as you like. You can also double click it and pan. If you publish position you can move it where you like. Only anomly I see is in FCP the properties scale initially reads 100% even if you have scaled down the drop zone in Motion. As soon as you adjust it in FCP it jumps in size and you need to scale it back. When you get it to look like the original size then the scale value shown will be the same as what it was in Motion. Complicated to explain, but as you play with it I think you will see what I mean.

  • fox_m Level 5 (5,030 points)

    Yes, the Fit, Fill, and None (or whatever they were - they are no longer) options have been removed.


    Drop Zones are a major sticking point with me at the moment... Apple has screwed the pooch. If you stay with the standard drop zones, in FCPX, adding HD content gets forced into "box" shape (not even SD format!) and there is nothing you can do about it!!!!! If you try to scale, the image/media gets cropped within the square boundaries --- it's flat out maddening. Every time  you turn off Crop and try to save, Crop gets turned back on. And, I've had to repair several effects that I offer publicly since the .0.4 update.


    There is a workaround. Took me awhile to figure it out.  The culprit is the standard DZ .tif file used as the "holder". It's natively 600x600 .  What I did was create a 16:9 image file (1920x1080) that I load into the drop zone as a new holder and saving that out.


    You might have to create a dummy image for the lower third dimensions. Try turning off Properties > Crop as well (watch for it too -- every time it comes back on -- and right before you save, turn it off). I've complained to Apple a number of times about this... hopefully they'll fix it for the next update.

  • Jim Wanamaker Level 4 (2,440 points)

    I don't see what you are describing. In 10.0.5 if I add a drop zone to a motion project, title, generator etc. If comes in with the aspect ratio of the project. If the project properties are 16x9 ie 1080 or 720 then the drop zone is the same. I can drop an HD clip in it and it remains 16x9 with no cropping. I can scale the clip ie zoom etc and scale the drop zone keeping the clip fill unchanged. If I publish to FCP the drop zone is still 16x9 and I can pan, scale etc if I publish the properties. In general I have had no problems like you are seeing. I am using snow leopard by the way. The mystery continues!

  • fox_m Level 5 (5,030 points)

    I'm using Lion. It *might* make a difference. Drop zones effects used to work at some point. And, some clips do work properly, I'll come back to that.


    Here's an example:



    (stockfootage by bottled video [bottledvideo.com])


    The drop zone media is cropped *square* -- not SD 4:3 aspect.  The white region is part of the "new" features of drop zones, with "opaque" background... etc...


    I mentioned some clips still work.  This is the way I figure it: if the project is 1920x1080 and the clips added to the drop zones are the same (1920x1080) they'll work... but heaven help you if you have 1440x1080 anamorphic, 1280x720, or any other frame size, they almost all turn out like this.


    I have, however, only just figured out how to fix this condition (I didn't realize this could be done before):




    Needless to say -- it was a head-slapping moment...

  • Jim Wanamaker Level 4 (2,440 points)

    Hey, that's a very informative video thanks for taking the time to do it. I can get the same drop zone to look square when you scale it down, I tried 1280x720, 1920x1080 and a large 4x3 still. They all came in to the drop zone as 16x9 aspect. I don't have any anamorphic clips so couldn't try that. They all scaled and panned fine and no problem repositioning either. The only way I could get them square was to crop in the video tab of the title. Guess we have learned enough to work with the new paradigm. Thanks for the discussion.