Most revealing editor render quality evaluation - low light noisy photage?

[larioso]

What is most revealing - rendering low light photage video or must you do all kinds to really decide which editor to prefer?

I am also wondering for still images - how bad it is to load stills into video same size as video or original resolution(TIF 5184x2916 and 6000x3376 from different cameras)?
Or use high quality downsizing of some program with Cubic or similar algos before loading into video editor?

Since I have limited data a month on internet 4G connection I try to minimize how much I have to up/down-load to Vimeo.
So in the end I have to upload and then watch to really see what happend through the full chain.

I will upload only 1920x1080p as 24 or 25 fps, AVCHD/H264.

If you have any suggestions I appreciate it.

Workflow and features I like the best are in the three I have now in following order:
1. PowerDirector 15 Ultimate
2. Nero Video 2017
3. Premiere Elements 15

Thanks.

[poisondeathray]

What is most revealing - rendering low light photage video or must you do all kinds to really decide which editor to prefer?

I am also wondering for still images - how bad it is to load stills into video same size as video or original resolution(TIF 5184x2916 and 6000x3376 from different cameras)?
Or use high quality downsizing of some program with Cubic or similar algos before loading into video editor?

For low light, noisy photos or video - the quality of the final product has more to do with cleaning up noise , filtering, and making levels/color adjustments , not necessarily the choice of editor. Most video editors are limited with the toolset in terms of denoising, but may have 3rd party plugins to assist

For resizing - it depends on how the photos are going to be used, or what type of compilation. If you are reframing shots , zooming in, animation (e.g. ken burns effect) those sorts of things, then often the higher resolution is beneficial . If you're not doing any of those then pre-resizing to smaller dimensions will make the editing process "snappier", less memory and resource intensive

[larioso]

Thanks for response.

For low light, noisy photos or video - the quality of the final product has more to do with cleaning up noise , filtering, and making levels/color adjustments , not necessarily the choice of editor. Most video editors are limited with the toolset in terms of denoising, but may have 3rd party plugins to assist

Good to know to fix up noisy photage - but was thinking if it possibly shows the quality of rendering more when dealing with noisy source material?

What I was going for was to rate one editors rendering compared to another in as few steps as possible. Looking for fastest way to evaluate.

For resizing - it depends on how the photos are going to be used, or what type of compilation. If you are reframing shots , zooming in, animation (e.g. ken burns effect) those sorts of things, then often the higher resolution is beneficial . If you're not doing any of those then pre-resizing to smaller dimensions will make the editing process "snappier", less memory and resource intensive

It makes sense what you say, if zooming in like in doing slight pan and zoom while showing stills - and you have higher resolution source in there, that you don't have to do quality reducing operations to zoom a bit. Unless the editor is doing very poor resizing to start with, and you loose overall quality anyway - I guess higher resolution is a beneficial factor. and as you mention, various effects have more data to deal with to do it's operations.

Maybe there is no shortcut in this, I just have to enter the same slides in original and resized and look at end result.
But again is curious if already visibly degraded images, a bit noisy maybe, is more revealing of the overall quality of the editors processing?
Maybe take a range of images with ISO 6400, 12000 or similar rather than at 100.

Just felt it would be good get opinion from more experienced video folks.

[jagabo]

Yes, dark noisy shots are a weak sport for most video encoders. You will see artifacts there first because little bitrate is given to those shots. But you should use actual video, not stills, so the noise is different in each frame.