Just like the title says,
Watch This Video Before Scaling Up
Your 4K Footage in an HD Timeline.
We’ll take a look at using 4K footage in HD timelines,
to zoom in on your image,
reframe your shot,
or even use the Ken Burns Effect,
without losing video resolution.
So before you drop your 4K clip in an HD timeline
and scale it up to 200 percent,
watch this video first.
Hey guys, whats up.
This is Serge, and welcome back to my channel.
A few weeks ago,
Larry Jordan released a video that talks about this subject.
This was something I didn’t know about,
so I found this very interesting.
Here’s Larry’s theory.
When you use a 4K video in HD timelines,
your original video files
have way more resolution than you need
for an HD project.
The 4K video files are 3840 pixels wide,
by 2160 pixels tall.
An HD video is 1920 pixels wide
by 1080 pixels tall.
This allows you to zoom in on your video up to 200 percent,
while still retaining the necessary resolution
for an HD project.
This can be used to scale your image,
reframe your shot,
or even simulate camera moves.
There’s a couple different ways this can be achieved,
and this is the part that I found interesting.
So let’s take a look.
I’ll create a new project,
and set the video resolution to 1080p.
So my image in my project
will be 1920 pixels wide, by 1080 pixels tall.
Now, in my browser, I have a 4K video clip.
If I add it to my timeline,
Final Cut Pro automatically scales my image
to fit my frame.
But, since I have all the extra resolution in my original video,
I can theoretically scale my video up to 200 percent
without loosing any resolution.
So the way I’ve always done it
is by using the transform tool.
I can use the scale slider in the inspector
to zoom in on my video,
and use the transform controls in the viewer
to reframe my shot.
And, as long as I don’t go over 200 percent,
I will still have enough pixels in the original video
to keep the HD resolution
without losing any image quality.
Or so I thought.
What I learned from Larry,
is when you add a 4K video into your HD timeline,
Final Cut Pro renders your video as an HD clip.
So instead of your clip being 3480 pixels wide
by 2160 pixels tall,
it’s only 1920 by 1080 pixels.
When you scale your image up with the transform tool,
you’re basically stretching your pixels,
which will result in decreased image quality.
Another way of doing this,
and is the method Larry Jordan suggests,
is by using the Spacial Conform tool.
This way you don’t lose any video resolution.
Let’s try it this way.
I’ll add the same clip to my timeline,
and in the video inspector,
from the Spacial Conform dropdown menu,
select none.
Now, instead of adjusting the image size to fit my frame,
Final Cut Pro leaves it at its original size,
and only displays the part of the image that fits in my frame.
The final image is the same size as my first clip
that has been scaled up to 200 percent.
Except this time, the clip in my timeline,
instead of having pixels stretched to 200 percent,
still has the same size pixels,
which should look better and sharper.
Makes sense, right?
I can now use the transform tool to reframe my clip,
or even use the scale slider to reduce the size
to frame it exactly the way I want,
without losing any resolution.
I’ll reset the transform parameter in my second clip,
so we can compare the two clips,
and see if we can tell the difference.
I’ll compare the same frame from my first clip,
which has been scaled up to 200 percent,
to the same frame from my second clip.
Theoretically, the frame from the second clip
should look better.
I don’t know about you,
but even when zoomed in 600 percent,
I still can’t tell the difference.
And for another comparison,
I exported the same original video as an HD master file,
1920 by 1080 pixels,
to compare to the first two clips.
Just like my first clip,
I scaled this one up to 200 percent to get the same image size.
The last clip looks considerably softer,
but my first 2 clips look very similar.
So, was Larry wrong?
Well, not necessarily.
Like Larry says,
any time you scale an image to over one hundred percent,
you run the risk of creating video artifacts
when rendering your video.
So even though I can’t tell the difference by looking at it,
going forward I’ll be using Larry’s method,
just to make sure I retain the maximum image quality.
If you want to watch Larry’s video,
I’ll link it in the video description below.
Watch it, and try both of these methods
in your project just to see if you can tell the difference.
Let me know what you find in the comments below.
As always, if you enjoyed this video,
make sure to hit the like button,
and come back next week for another Final Cut Pro tutorial.
Thanks for watching,
and I’ll see you back here next week.