Mixed Pixel Aspect Ration in one Project

[chall161]

Hello all,

I intend to to have a final video saved at 16:9 at 4K. The issue I have is that I have 1.33x anamorphic footage that I would like to drop in (with black bars top and bottom). The 1.33x anamorphic video is sourced unsqueezed. After going through workflow: Modify - Interpret Footage - Conform PAR - HD Anamorphic 1080 (1.33), the resulting clip cannot be dropped into the 16:9 timeline.... How can I rework this so that I can have the 1:33 anamorphic clip into the 16:9 timeline? 

Extra question: The HD Anamorphic 1080 (1.33).... does this mean that the resulting footage is now 1080 instead of 4K? If so, is there a work around for this?

Many thanks in advance,

Christopher

[Ann Bens]

1.33 footage usually fits nicely a widescreen frame.

Please post screenshot of 1,33 footage in MediaInfo in treeview here on forum.

[chall161]

Thank you Ann. Embarassed to say it is a rookie mistake. All I needed to do is scale to frame size and render. I appreciate your help and patience!

[Michael Grenadier]

usually, Premiere takes care of this stuff automatically.  Set up your sequence to match your delivery settings which now adays are almost always with square pixels.   If your anamorphic footage has the correct metadata, when you drop it in to your timeline, it should format correctly.   However, if your 1.33 source footage is just HD, it will need to be scaled up if your sequence settings are 4K.  you can just select the HD clip(s) in the timeline, and control click (or right click) and choose set to frame size...  and you will loose some quality since your source is just HD...  

[chall161]

Hi mgrenadier... thanks for your help and patience! It is a simple rookie mistake. All I needed to do was scale to frame size and render. I was originally concerned because the 1.33 clip was black on the timeline/preview... this is new in my experience. Thanks again.

[Michael Grenadier]

I think "set to frame size" is the better choice, but I'm just relying on what other people I trust have said on this forum.... you might do some searches here to get the precise reasons...  ..  gotta say this pixel aspect ratio stuff was a nightmare for me back in the day.  Thankful that for the most part we're just dealing with square pixels now...

[Ann Bens]

I think "set to frame size" is the better choice,

By @Michael Grenadier

Dont think it matters in this case: both settings are scaled 200%

Scale to framesize will rasterize the 200% to 100%.

[Michael Grenadier]

but if it's the better choice for scaling down, and doesn't make a difference when scaling up, why not just as a reflex use "set to frame size?"  bwdik.