Quote:
Originally Posted by Mentar
Ugh, the typesetter upscales the SD workraw and then starts typesetting on the blurry mush? What's the point? ^_^; ... sorry, I'd definitely avoid this step which is error-prone AND problematic due to missing details (AFX sign with full replacement or fadeover, anyone?)
If you're really worried about the size, go to quant 3.5 or 4.
|
Hehe. Everyone has their opinion.
I guess with signs that you mentioned there you do need the detail there, but if it is just a <sign here> <br> <tl here> it is enough in my opinion. (Hint: use your imagination when looking at the mush ^_^). That is, final point being, depending on how much typesetting the series would need and its complexity. That's I guess what I would base my choice of workraw resolution on...
Ah yes... Slow-rendering karaoke effects. Those are yummy. n_n
EDIT: I do also remember staff members not being too happy about a high resolution workraw and welcoming an SD one, but I guess that just depends on who you're working with...