GateTrue

What each generator documents about marking its output

Reframe: recomposing for a different shape of screen

A reframe recomposes a shot for a different aspect ratio: a horizontal generation cut to vertical, or the reverse. It is routine in short-form work, and no page in this register says what it does to a mark. As of 2026-09-22.

Why a routine production step is the largest gap hereShort-form work regularly delivers vertical cuts of wide material, which can move a corner mark out of frame without anybody intending it. Nothing in this register says whether a mark is re-placed, scaled, or fixed as a proportion of the shorter edge.Generated wideA mark somewhere in a wide framePosition published on one entryKnown only at the shape it was generatedinDelivered narrowA vertical cut of the middleNo published rule at allThe mark may or may not be inside itThe operation short-form work performs constantlyWhat the register can say: nothing, and that this is why
Fig. 1 A placement rule inferred from one downloaded clip would be the part readers quoted, because it answers the question they actually have.
How this register uses the term, and what it excludes. Written 2026-09-22.
The termReframe
What it namesRecomposing a shot for a different aspect ratio
What it is notA crop for its own sake, which keeps the same shape
Where the register uses itThe gap named in every visible-mark reading

Inclusion rule. Words this site uses in a narrow sense, where the ordinary sense would lead a reader to misread a cell. No vendor statement appears on this page. Order. Fixed order: what the word names, what it excludes, then where it is used here.

1A production operation, not an attack

Vertical delivery from horizontal material and horizontal delivery from vertical are both ordinary. The operation exists because platforms want different shapes, and it happens in the edit rather than in an attempt to remove anything.

It is nonetheless the operation most likely to move a mark out of frame by accident. A lower-right stamp on a wide frame may simply not be inside a vertical cut of the middle of that frame, and nobody involved has thought about marking at all.

2What no vendor publishes about it

Behaviour at other aspect ratios is unpublished across the whole register. Nothing says whether a mark is re-placed when a generation is requested vertically, whether it scales with the frame, or whether it occupies a fixed proportion of the shorter edge.

That is a real gap rather than a pedantic one, because the products here are used heavily for short-form vertical video and a good deal of their output is generated wide and delivered narrow. The readings name the gap rather than filling it from a sample.

3Why the register will not infer it

A mark's position in one downloaded clip at one aspect ratio is one observation. Inferring a placement rule from it would put a guess beside carefully sourced values, and the guess would be the part readers quoted, because it answers the question they actually have.

So the columns record what is published and the prose says what a reader would need. In this case that is a single sentence from any vendor about how its mark is placed at more than one shape of frame.

Nothing on this page is a vendor statement; the values it helps read are on the support table, with the page and the date each one was read from. See also the machine-readable column, what survives an export. Nearby terms: lossy compression, frame-rate change, composite step.