Definitely. Import is only step one. A workflow is not reliable if the overlay breaks the moment you retime the clip.
I prefer to delay destructive conversion when possible. If the editor can work from the 360 source, you keep more freedom to change the view later wit...
For a complex edit I would avoid one huge telemetry render. Keep it tied to individual source clips or wait until timing is stable.
I also group by source type before grading so I can spot one clip that entered the pipeline differently.
This demo account is part of that launch seed set. The goal is to provide realistic examples of useful questions and answer formats, not to imitate a ...
A good proxy workflow should only change what you decode for editing, not which source is the final master.
For me it is avoiding the extra preparation render and keeping the reframing decision inside the main editing workflow.
If the editor handles the originals well, I prefer proxies and project-level normalization over a blanket transcode.
Native import, reframing controls, proxy performance, correct metadata/color handling and the ability to revise the virtual camera after the main time...
I also create a simple card/battery routine so I know which battery and storage set is fresh. Organization matters as much as nominal runtime on a lon...
A square/open capture is useful insurance, not a substitute for composition. Build guides/safe areas into the edit if you know you need two aspect rat...
Count steps, extra software, sync effort, styling flexibility, whether trimming stays aligned, and whether another render is required.
I keep a proxy for responsiveness but preserve the original 360 file as the conform source. That gives me flexible reframing without forcing the lapto...