If I understand the issue correctly, then there is no way that AE knows that what you rendered is an overscan of your actual desired output size.
What are you wanting to do in AE with the frames? Overscan is normally used so you perform zooms etc. in AE, so your AE comp is set to e.g. 4k but your overscan frames are of course larger, allowing this.
No of course i scaled or used a wider comp. It’s just not possible to make it visible.
See also here my question:
Ah ok, I see. As the responder to your post mentioned, it’s not possible in AE.
Out of interest, why would you need it to be visible (other than having the handles visible)?
The reason is very obvious, here is just one example out of many possible reasons:
Imagine you have already set up and rendered a full project and in the end you find out, you need more bleed (= margin), maybe due to camera shake or different output formats.
This is also the reason why I have recently suggested the ability to invert the region selection, in order to render the margin only.
So if you do now camera changes, you come very quick into trouble, as you are changing the scene and it is also not clear, how many pixels were exactly added.
This is for sure the reason, why someone invented the camera overrides with extra margin.
But I think it should be also rendered properly fully visible
(or at least been given the option, to render it out as a fully visible image, so that After Effects can read it (“optional” just in case that some people do not want to have it visible for unknown reasons, I couldn’t tell you)).
Hehe, I fully understand the need for overscanning 
I work with Max, which does not have this overscan tool, so we need to use a script to do the same, which simply renders the expanded frame and is useable in AE as expected.
I still don’t understand what you are saying will not happen in AE that does happen in Nuke and am curious…
I thought that the problem was that when you take your overscanned image into AE, then you cannot see the extra pixels
outside of the e.g. HD comp border, and that in Nuke, this is visible outside the frame border. Which would just be a quirk between the 2 softwares.
However, are you actually saying that when you pull your frame/s into AE that the extra pixels are just not visible at all?
Ok, so after a search I see the problem.
Because I use 3ds Max there just isn’t a problem - just set the new resolution using an overscan script and you have the adjusted frame.
The Maya overscan tool is clearly doing something odd when writing the exr that disables those pixels in AE. In Nuke it seems it’s viewable simply by a reformat process.
I found this post mentioning an option in OpenEXR, which may/may not help https://answers.arnoldrenderer.com/questions/23441/overscan-usage.html
Could you share your Max-Script for overscan?
I‘m new to Max and could use it…
The shared link thread is just about someone wrongly using Photoshop as far as I understand.
I have now posted at Vray Maya feature suggestions here.
p.s. If someone expects that something on Autdesks side could be fixed, you can just forget it. They don’t care about any user feedback, they rather start 3 days of discussion with you than just spending an hour for fixing a simple line of code.
Maybe it’s different if Chaosgroup is demanding something…
That post had just the one response about the openexr option to ‘ignore window’ or something like that, so thought that may tell open exr to display those pixels…not something I can test unfortunately.
I guess you have ProEXR for AE? Just to eliminate any old unsupported stuff..
Here’s the script anyway Dropbox
Very very old but just works - tested in 21 so all good
Agreed re AD choosing to ignore stuff…such is life…we should be used to it by now 
