ADOBE PREMIERE PRO: Tutorials Forum Articles Creative Cloud Debate

Set Frame vs Scale to Frame

COW Forums : Adobe Premiere Pro

<< PREVIOUS   •   FAQ   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
RJ MilesSet Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 7, 2016 at 6:30:48 am

Set Frame vs Scale to Frame

Can anyone comment on the inherent difference between these two options making 4K source fit a 1080P sequence?

I'm interested knowing if either would be preferred if the 4K source might be called larger and cropped as part of building a composite image in the timeline? I didn't want to assume they basically both do the same thing as far as preserving more of the 4K image quality when scaling the source larger.

Thanks



Return to posts index

Jon DoughtieRe: Set Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 7, 2016 at 2:21:05 pm

The answer depends in part on the footage, of course. If seeing a lot of fine detail is important, you may wish to let the footage be cropped. You might have to add some "pan and scan" to utilize some of the shots.

If fine detail is not an issue, then you can scale to 1080 and see the entire image.

Really, both approaches reduce the amount of visual data presented. One eliminates part of the shot, but gives you full resolution of the portion you can see (up to 1920x1080). The other gives you the entire image, but not all the image information.

Ultimately, if your deliverables are 1920x1080, you can use either or both approaches, depending on what any individual shot requires. You will probably want to experiment with a few shots and see what you think of the rendered output.

System:
Dell Precision T7600 (x2)
Win 7 64-bit
32GB RAM
Adobe CC 2014 (as of 7/2015)
256GB SSD system drive
4 internal media drives RAID 5
Typically cutting short form from HD MP4 and P2 MXF.


Return to posts index

RJ MilesRe: Set Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 7, 2016 at 2:23:56 pm

Thanks for the reply...

I just wondered if there was any inherent difference in the way the two methods work, such that one might provide superior image quality when zooming into the source material. Thanks



Return to posts index


jerry wiseRe: Set Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 7, 2016 at 4:38:46 pm

use "set to frame size". then you can zoom in and pan around and lose no quality.


Return to posts index

Peter GarawayRe: Set Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 8, 2016 at 11:32:29 pm

Hi RJ,

Here's a very helpful video from Colin explaining Set To Frame Size vs Scale.







Best,

Peter Garaway
Adobe
Premiere Pro


Return to posts index

RJ MilesRe: Set Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 9, 2016 at 12:04:15 am

Thanks Peter. Excellent. Exactly what I was trying to figure out and now I have my answer.

Set to Frame size is what I want, as others have said, so I can playing the source image without degrading the image.



Return to posts index


RJ MilesRe: Set Frame vs Scale to Frame
by on Jan 21, 2016 at 7:13:34 am

OK... just had my 1st issue with Set to Frame.

The issue ... after I made an adjustment to scale, when I hit play the image size on the screen was reduced by 50%. When I stop playback, image goes back to full size. I'd note this seems to be a random bug and is not easily repeated, but once it happens, the only solution seems to be to revert to Scale to Frame and continue with the changes to the clip.

Anyone else see this bug?

Looks like I'm going to have to use Scale to Frame until I can get a fix to this bug.



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2016 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]