Custom transition changes when sharpening used

[Cedric Dawnhawk]

I created the attached custom transition which is a sort of keyhole mask effect with a border. This works fine until you change the Unsharp mask setting in Project Options to anything other than zero when the border becomes a different shape to the mask area. Any explanations? I'm using PTE 9.0.20

Andrew

PushPin.pteeff

[davegee]

I have no idea why you are seeing that effect - one for Igor.

However,  would suggest that you examine your reason for wanting to use Unsharp Mask. If the native size of your mask and surround were bigger then the un-sharp mask would be unnecessary. Also the "Outline" is not needed - you can create that in the Custom Transition.

Try this:

Diamond.pteeff

DG

P.S. V9.0.21 is available.

[Cedric Dawnhawk]

Thanks for your interest

No I agree I can't see why sharpening affects the transition but I'm sure Igor and his team will find a simple explanation.

I don't want to use unsharp mask to sharpen the mask or any part of the transition. It's just a convenient and lazy way of sharpening up the images in the rest of the sequence. It took me a while to realise that it was applying the sharpening to the project that had upset my transition.

I tried your diamond transition and yes it has a border and it doesn't seem to have any associated outline or mask in the transition definition. So how do you do that?

Yes I saw 9.0.21 but none of the fixes seemed relevant and presumably you have tried my transition on 9.0.21 and it still has the same effect.

[Igor]

Andrew,

I see this problem, thanks. We'll check the code of PTE.

[davegee]

9 hours ago, Cedric Dawnhawk said:

Thanks for your interest

No I agree I can't see why sharpening affects the transition but I'm sure Igor and his team will find a simple explanation.

I don't want to use unsharp mask to sharpen the mask or any part of the transition. It's just a convenient and lazy way of sharpening up the images in the rest of the sequence. It took me a while to realise that it was applying the sharpening to the project that had upset my transition.

I tried your diamond transition and yes it has a border and it doesn't seem to have any associated outline or mask in the transition definition. So how do you do that?

Yes I saw 9.0.21 but none of the fixes seemed relevant and presumably you have tried my transition on 9.0.21 and it still has the same effect.

If you examine the Diamond.pteeff in the CT Editor you will see two Mask Containers.

The foreground one uses a PTE generated rectangle (square) as a mask operating on slide 2.

The background one uses the same (slightly larger) mask to create the outline operating on a white rectangle.

You could vary the outline thickness. Colour etc - I used 4% and white.

I also started the mask zooms at zero. Yours jump in at something like 5%?

DG

[Cedric Dawnhawk]

It was a bit late at night and I had forgotten that I could edit your transition and see how it worked. I was surprised why there wasn't an associated mask but I see that because you used a standard PTE rectangle object as the mask, this is not necessary. Anyway I understand what you are doing and see that it gives a sharp clear border but I don't think this method is easily adaptable to my transition.

One problem is that the visual centre of my 'keyhole' mask isn't exactly in the centre of the mask image, so the border doesn't expand equally. I have tried moving the centres of the two mask images to correspond to the visual centre but It's fiddly to get it accurate.

The other thing is I don't particularly want a sharp border. I've attached part of the sequence where I use this transition and you will see that a blurry edge is probably better. It also explains why the mask starts at about 5%!

However I do appreciate your response and your suggestions may well be applicable to another transition in the future.

Andrew

 

Urban Legends demo 2_Dec24-2018_10-10-04.zip

[Igor]

Andrew,

It appears to be a complex problem and fix may take long time. Sorry.

[Cedric Dawnhawk]

No  problem – I can work round it

Andrew