A client brought me a card with 1920x1080 24p footage AVCHD footage (MTS files). I think it was from a Panasonic prosumer camera. Because I am zooming through a lot of the footage to get tighter closeups (of the discussion panel especially), I have decided that I will output 1280x720 24p as the highest quality. This allowed me to pan and scan the 1080p without losing any pixels, or choose to show it full-screen.
Not that I am done, I realized that I edited this in a 1080p sequence. Now Iam wondering if I should make a new 720p sequence and scale all of the footage (including the 1080p titles and lower thirds, etc) before rendering it out. ( i.e. in the 1080p timeline the clip is full-frame at 100% scale - wheras that same clip fills the frame at when scaled to 66.7 in the 720p timeline, and the clip needs rendering) I am pretty sure that Premiere deals with it all as native 1080p footage either way and that it doesn't matter - but if anyone knows of any reason my 720p output quality would suffer in any way without editing in an actual 720p timeline, please advise. It wouldn't be too much work either way to re-do it, if it means better output...
Any and all comments welcome... Thanks!
You can edit 1080P in a 1080P sequence and export to 720P without a problem. I just don't think that is what you really want to do.
However, perhaps I don't understand exactly what you meant.
If you zoomed into 1080P footage - you did lose quality. If you look at the clips you see something over 100% in the Motion effect's Scale parameter. Right?
If you had edited in a 720P sequence, then you would have needed to scale down whatever you did NOT want to see as zoomed in as you described. But by not scaling it down, it would have looked zoomed in but without the loss of quality - because it was still at 100%. Even if you needed to zoom in more, and risk the quality loss, it would be less loss than in a 1080P sequence.
So, basically, yes, you need to select and copy the entire sequence and paste it into a 720P sequence. The resize everything. Non zoomed footage to the 66.7 figure and zoomed in footage to 100%. I suggest 100% because then you will know when you have exceeded 100% and you will be able to make an informed decision about zooming past 100%.
Make sense? Or did I not understand your needs?
I remember shooting video with my HDV camera back in the days when we were all posting videos at 320X240 to save bandwidth because some people were still using dial-up modems, or because our web sites had monthly bandwidth restrictions. I would shoot 1080 but be able to zoom WAY in by editing in a 320X240 sequence. Although it was just called a timeline back then, not a sequence, since there was only one per project.
I shot the surfers in this video from a pretty great distance. But, since I only needed a very small part of the HDV frame in my tiny little frame, it looks like I was able to get relatively close. Here is a frame from that video I entered into a contest on these forums all those years ago. He was a tiny little bit in an HDV frame. But in a 320X240 frame he fits quite nicely.
Thanks. That answers my question. I went ahead and just did it anyway before I got a reply, since it was only a 3-min video with less than 40 clips total - but I still kinda wonder if Premiere is smart-enough to recognize what the end-result is and process it the same way... If nothing else, it sure does render the clips I used the Neat Video plugin on - since Neat Video sees it as 720p now! I wish I had done this from the start -
Europe, Middle East and Africa