Well, there are two schools of thought, and neither is a universal - it depends on the situation.
You could set the timeline processing resolution to...
a) The resolution the majority of the footage is natively at. This provides uniformity by up/down-scaling the less-frequent stuff.
b) The resolution of the highest-resolution footage. This ensure no downscaling is done, but probably will result in a lot of upscaling. Too much upscaling will make things look soft.
In the case of mixed 1280x720 and 960x720, I'd process in 1280x720. The JVC stuff look retain its sharpness, and the Panasonic stuff will display "as it should" since it would be upsampled to 1280x720 on 720p output anyway.
Now for delivering to DVD, my personal preference would be to edit in HD, make a HD "finished" output file, then downscale the output to SD for DVD.
The alternative is to have EDIUS downscale everything to SD and edit in an SD project. This takes the guesswork out of "what the viewer will see" and gives you some additional flexibility since your sources are HD (you can zoom/crop without penalty, etc) but you'd have to revisit some stuff on the timeline such if the client asked for a HD version later.
Note that you can switch between project resolutions freely in EDIUS, but you cannot switch between project framerates at this time. Also, switching between resolutions does not interpolate size or positional values, so P-in-Ps, titles and scaled items would also need to be reviewed when switching a project between SD and HD resolutions.
There are many things to consider, for example titles... Titles that look great in HD can turn to utter crap in SD, especially if you forget the guidelines about sizing and serifs. Aspect ratio is another one if you're shooting 16:9 and intend to deliver 4:3 DVD.
I'd try a short project using typical footage and editing style and see which result you prefer better.
Brandon
You could set the timeline processing resolution to...
a) The resolution the majority of the footage is natively at. This provides uniformity by up/down-scaling the less-frequent stuff.
b) The resolution of the highest-resolution footage. This ensure no downscaling is done, but probably will result in a lot of upscaling. Too much upscaling will make things look soft.
In the case of mixed 1280x720 and 960x720, I'd process in 1280x720. The JVC stuff look retain its sharpness, and the Panasonic stuff will display "as it should" since it would be upsampled to 1280x720 on 720p output anyway.
Now for delivering to DVD, my personal preference would be to edit in HD, make a HD "finished" output file, then downscale the output to SD for DVD.
The alternative is to have EDIUS downscale everything to SD and edit in an SD project. This takes the guesswork out of "what the viewer will see" and gives you some additional flexibility since your sources are HD (you can zoom/crop without penalty, etc) but you'd have to revisit some stuff on the timeline such if the client asked for a HD version later.
Note that you can switch between project resolutions freely in EDIUS, but you cannot switch between project framerates at this time. Also, switching between resolutions does not interpolate size or positional values, so P-in-Ps, titles and scaled items would also need to be reviewed when switching a project between SD and HD resolutions.
There are many things to consider, for example titles... Titles that look great in HD can turn to utter crap in SD, especially if you forget the guidelines about sizing and serifs. Aspect ratio is another one if you're shooting 16:9 and intend to deliver 4:3 DVD.
I'd try a short project using typical footage and editing style and see which result you prefer better.
Brandon
) a smaller cam would be much easier to set up especially on hot sweaty days like this morning (and now I just realised I missed a couple of cutaway shots :-().
.