Still photos in Final Cut Pro X do not fill up the screen

On a related topic. Please see the attached picture, and can anyone tell me why my FCPX (10.1.1) is not applying pillarboxes, but instead lets the background of the clip show through on the sides of the 4x3 still. I do not want to have to fill the screen with the picture; I want the picture to be pillarboxed. I can't find the setting to force FCPX to do this. I know I'm missing something.

You see the sides of the clip on the primary storyline because the still image is a smaller frame size. If you want black bars, you need to put something between the clip and the still of the same size and shape as the clip on the primary storyline. Try a custom solids generator – the default color which is black. Either stack the generator betweem the still and the clip or overwrite the clip with the generator.

Russ

Smaller is the wrong way to describe this; it's that the still's width is narrower than what's under it. Sorry for that.

Message was edited by: Russ H To correct "smaller".

Russ, thank you. I appreciate the answer. What boggles my mind is that the literature out there on every help site says that FCP will add black sidebars automatically if you use "fit". iMovie also behaves that way; it'll put bars wherever the space doesn't equal. I get what you're saying, but it seems like a serious problem. Especially when FCPX knows how to do this when you use the option of "Overwrite to Primary Storyline" - when you do that, it creates the pillarbars on either side. Seems like a weird contradiction.

Thanks again.

David

dh2015 wrote:

very help site says that FCP will add black sidebars automatically if you use "fit".

Hi David. That's absolutely correct. But that advice assumes that there is no clip below the still image. Otherwise parts od the clip will show where you want to see black pillars.

Russ

The thing is, David, FCP X does not "create pillarbars" or black boxes (it would be tragic if it did, by the way). It "composites" images over a background, which is by default black. So if your image does not completely fill the frame, you see some of that black background. You are place a video which DOES fill the frame, and then compositing an image on top of it. The image fills only part of the frame, so naturally the video underneath is partially visible.

first off see my previous post on frame ratios and pixel dimensions.

Why use the 'Q'' command, connect to primary storyline ?

Hit range tool, 'R' ...select the range on the primary story line, select the still image and hit 'D' this will overwrite the still image to the primary storyline removing the video in the same process. Which is what I guess you want so as not to composite it underneath.

The still image is most likley to be 5:4 ratio so of course you will get black bars either side in a 16:9 HD project.

If you want to have the image 'fill the frame then you mustl expect some cropping.

Test this by:

Select your image on the timeline

Select the Transform icon

set the viewing percenage to 12.5%

In the inspector set Spatial Conform type'to 'Fill', note the cropping top and bottom.

more fun...

If you select type 'None' the image will resize its self to show the original native pixel dimension of the image.

Note: 108016:9 HD video frame is 1920x1080 pixels at screen res i'e 72 dpi

therefore if you drop an image 1920x1080 @ 150 dpi selecting the 'None' spatial conformation will 'expand the image to twice the HD frame.

Select Fill and it will fit perfectly in the frame and also allow you to pan and zoom up to twice screen size.

Allow me to make a correction. Resolution does not mean anything in video. A 1920x1080 pixel image is a 1920x1080 pixel image, period.

If you export a 1080p movie each frame is 1920 pixels wide and 1080 pixels tall. You can play it fullscreen and pixel accurate on any full HD monitor - whether a 21.5" imac or a 50" HDTV - the number of pixels is the same.

"dpi" means "dots per inch". Only if you making conversions from pixels to cm or inches do you have any meaning for that. More dpi means the pixels are smaller.

I fully understand the difference between dpi/ppi etc...coming from a photography, video and a print background I appreciate that dpi is in fact a print term and should be not be mixed.

I use the analogy in its simplest form so as not to cloud the issue. I could go into the background behind the screen resolution of PC v Mac...72 and 96 'dpi' ???..but no one would understand.

I am trying to explain the problems / benefits that could arise when using and scaling low resolution still images in a video.

Simple trick is to export a frame from FCPX using the PSD option, opening it in Photoshop and you will see it the Image size is '1920x1080 @72 'dpi' (67x38cm) ...yes I know that's print talk but it helps to appreciate what happens if you drop a massive 240 'dpi' 8000x5000 px image into the timeline.

My point can be summarize thus: there is no difference between an image file being 1920x1080 at 72dpi or 1920x1080 at 150 dpi. The pixel content is the same, and so is the pixel count.

A 8000x5000 px image is massive any way you think of it. Again, 'dpi' is irrelevant unless you want to print it.

There's a simple function built into FCPX to exactly what you want.

1. Highlight the image in the storyline.

2. Right click.

3. Choose Overwrite to primary storyline (second from bottom).

4. Done.

The shortcut is Shift-Command and Down Arrow.

thank you!

Never mind...