Interesting point about downscaling 4k video, I've found a lot of people online saying the same, that you should start with a 1080 timeline and all your 4k videos at 50% scale to start out.
However, I had a nice chat with Emma from Adobe support today and she said it was much better to work with a 4k timeline and then export it out at 1080. I asked about what happens when I scale up a 4k clip in a 4k timeline to say 140% and then export at 1080. Does Premiere first scale up the 4k to 140% (which would introduce bad things into the clip) and then scale that damaged clip down to 1080. The answer is no, Premiere will work out that the final render needs to be at 70% and just do the 1 scale operation to export at 1080.
Even if you add 1080 clips to your 4k timeline, you can safely scale them up to fit the screen and when you render at 1080 premiere will just use the original clip with no zoom or distortion.
I've seen a few clips online showing a sharper render from 4k timeline at 1080 as opposed to 1080 timeline, especially if you are adding any effects or colour. The more data premiere has to work with the better?
I'd also say the 4k method is better as it gives me the option in the future to export at 2.7k or 4k without having to change anything in the project.
Osmo Tips Posted at 2016-8-4 11:18
very interesting! with this additional detail, I'll also check it out in detail and do more tests. ...
I tried a quick test, the left side is 1080 timeline and right a 4k timeline. 4k clip exported at 1080.. I think the 4k timeline (right side) is a little sharper, the cracks near the top look sharper? But then other parts the 1080 one looks better.. I'm guessing very little in it. Performance would be a consideration, does working on a bigger timeline make things slow?
Note: On the latest Windows version of Premier Pro CC, Adobe have changed folder destination to the same as the Mac version for any LUT now,Just paste them into the folder under Lumetri\LUTs\Creative EXAMPLE C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2015.3\Lumetri\LUTs\Creative
I got a couple questions to ask Brian.
(1) I know you talked about this a little is an earlier video but Is a Variable ND filter really worth it for its price, and its ability for changing on the fly or is it better to just get a complete set of singles at a higher price?
(2) I have been using Director Suite 4 by Cyberlink for a very long time and put up with its clunky way of handling content, Your LUT packs are brillant but to get them working with the Cyberlink Suite is very time consuming and not very productive when on a strict time scale. The only way I've found to make them work is to apply a LUT through the softwares Globe setting, Remaster a piece of footage, Save it, Then close/exit the package and restart having to repeat over and over. For some reason Cyberlink can't handle third party Luts at all, even when importing each one into the package, you have to do one at a time and hoping it will work and in most cases it does not. I would'nt recommend using Cyberlink Director Suite 4 now even though I said it was ok before, it's just not worth the hassle!!!!!.
So has your an Adobe Premier Pro CC user and like the package is it in my best interest to bite the £200+ subscribing for a year to Adobe or not ?
My first attempt using the Neewe Variable ND filter, Video enhanced with the Everest Neutral Punch LUT, Edited with Adobe PP.
Captain
lvl.4
lvl.2
lvl.1
EXAMPLE C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2015.3\Lumetri\LUTs\Creative