Using both 2.7k and 1080p footage on my timeline. Should I scale the 1080p footage to 2.7k or downscale the 2.7k footage to 1080p??

[vincentt92253622]

Should I scale the 1080p footage to 2.7k or downscale the 2.7k footage to 1080p?? I would say that 60 percent of the footage was shot in 2.7k while the other 40 in 1080p!

also when should I use "set to frame size" rather than "scale to frame size" ?

Thanks in advance!!

[Peru Bob · Accepted solution]

vincentt92253622  wrote

Should I scale the 1080p footage to 2.7k or downscale the 2.7k footage to 1080p?

Downscale the 2.7k footage to 1080p.

What will the output be used for?

vincentt92253622

also when should I use "set to frame size" rather than "scale to frame size" ?

I always use "set to frame size" rather than "scale to frame size."

Some will say to use :"scale" when downsizing and "set" when upsizing.

[vincentt92253622]

Thanks for the answer!

I will be using the output for youtube. Why do you say I should downscale the 2.7k footage? also, would the 2.7k export look worse than the 1080p export when viewed at 1080p on youtube?

[RjL190365]

Here's why:

If you upscale your 1080p footage to 2.7K, and then output to 1080p, what happens there is that there will be a double conversion of 1080p footage - and that double-converted footage will look worse than native 1080p! In fact, you would actually be degrading that 1080p footage to the image-quality equivalent of 720p or even 480p when you perform such a double conversion. This is because upconverting will not improve image quality one bit while downconverting always degrades image quality.

Randall

[vincentt92253622]

when you say "If you upscale your 1080p footage to 2.7K, and then output to 1080p" -do you mean if i export at 2.7k and then watch at 1080p on youtube ? also why do you say I should downscale the 2.7k footage to 1080p as opposed to upscale the

  1080p footage and have half of the footage remain at its naitive 2.7k? is this because the reduction in quality of the 1080p footage (when upscaled to 2.7k) would outweigh the reduction of quality of the  2.7k footage when downscaled to 1080p?

[Peru Bob]

You could always do a couple short test exports doing it each way..  Maybe it will look good enough for you.

[RjL190365]

When I stated "upscaling 1080p to 2.7k and then exporting to 1080p", I was assuming that your final output was going to be in 1080p. You see, I have never uploaded any videos to YouTube, and every single video that I've viewed on YouTube is at 1080p or lower. Thus, I was assuming that YouTube either didn't accept any video content higher than 1080p or automatically downconverted higher resolution video down to 1080p.

Sorry that I didn't make myself clear there.

Randall

[MyerPj]

RjL190365  wrote

This is because upconverting will not improve image quality one bit while downconverting always degrades image quality.

Hey Randall, is the above correct? I can't get my head around it? When I was trying to get some old 3/4" video transferred from tape to disk files I was told no sense in upconverting to HD as that makes the picture worse overall? So, I got them converted to SD.

[Peru Bob]

MyerPj  wrote

RjL190365   wrote

This is because upconverting will not improve image quality one bit while downconverting always degrades image quality.

Hey Randall, is the above correct? I can't get my head around it? When I was trying to get some old 3/4" video transferred from tape to disk files I was told no sense in upconverting to HD as that makes the picture worse overall? So, I got them converted to SD.

I'm not Randall, but yes, that is correct, however, downconverting sometimes results in very minimal quality loss, while upconvertng usually results in a lot of quality loss.

[excited_Genie16B8]

A good rule of thumb is to never scale above 100%.  I think it applies here nicely.