2 people found this helpful
Not true for your workflow.
In some other (non-Adobe) applications, footage is repeatedly changed and re-saved as it runs through a series of different apps, so it will deteriorate if a lossy codec is used. In Premiere Pro the timeline can have any number of things applied, and it's only rendered once at the export stage. The only exception is if you pass footage off to SpeedGrade, when a lossless image sequence is used.
The only reason some Premiere users transcode to ProRes or AVI is to take some of the pressure off the CPU when scrubbing about the timeline. Camera footage in H.264 or AVCHD requires a lot of CPU cycles to decompress, so on a low-spec machine it can be stuttery. ProRes/AVI is easier to read but at the cost of a lot more disk space, so if your disk throughput is slow the bottleneck is simply moved.
Transcoding has no effect whatsoever on the quality of the output from Premiere Pro, as Premiere always upsamples everything on every timeline to 32-bit floating point. It may have a slight effect on how fast the render process runs, but nothing to get excited about.
When editing with FCP, there was a natural tendency to convert a lot of source material to ProRes 422, simply because you had no choice. Now you have the choice after moving to PR.
The choice is quite simple, either edit in the native format your material was shot in, or convert to ProRes 422. The advise is to
Not convert to ProRes.
Using native format has the following advantages: No transcoding, no rendering, no data change, no recompression, no degradation and no damage. But converting to ProRes 422 has singnificant disadvantages, it takes twice as long, it uses nearly three times the disk space and shows no visible improvement. For example, ingesting a 16 GB card with MXF material on a certain machine takes around 6 minutes in native format but takes around 12 minutes when transcoded to ProRes 422, the storage requirements go from 16 GB to around 43 GB without any visible difference.
Additionally, ProRes can not be exported from a PC and has problems with gamma shifts.
The post you quoted has a serious flaw in it. It assumes multiple exports and imports, creating generation losses. That is a very strange workflow. One would normally edit and once finished, export once. That gives the same generation loss as converting to ProRes to start with. Only with ProRes you will suffer another generation loss when exporting from that.