Try upscaling when the shot's identity, composition and motion are already acceptable but its spatial detail is insufficient at the intended display size. Regenerate or revise the shot when the problem is a wrong face, changing hands, missing action or an incoherent background. More pixels do not by themselves correct the event depicted.
First name the defect. “It looks low quality” is too broad to guide a useful next step.
Separate softness from content failure
Watch the original at normal speed on the intended class of screen. Then inspect important areas at a matching viewing scale. Ask whether the shot is merely soft or whether it tells the wrong story.
A blurred but correct sleeve edge is a different issue from an extra hand. A face that remains consistent but lacks fine texture is different from one that changes identity halfway through the clip. Compression, focus blur and a small source frame can also look similar in a quick preview.
Write an acceptance note before enhancement: approved action, approved identity, remaining spatial-detail concern. If the first two are not approved, address them first.
Distinguish a larger export from an upscale
Choosing a larger timeline or export frame is not the same as applying a dedicated enhancement workflow. Runway's 4K guidance explicitly distinguishes its upscaling process from simply exporting a Video Editor Project at 4K.
Its upscaling documentation describes a separate workflow and explains that resulting dimensions depend on the source aspect ratio. Treat the exported candidate's actual dimensions as evidence, rather than assuming a button label means one exact delivery size.
These are external Runway features. Check your chosen provider's current input requirements and output behavior before using that workflow.
Compare a candidate without rewarding invented detail
Retain the original and compare the enhanced candidate at the target display size. Also compare matching content crops so that a larger preview is not mistaken for better detail merely because it fills more of the screen.
Inspect faces, small props, lettering, moving hair and fabric through the full shot. Enhancement can produce plausible texture that is not established by the source. Reject changes that undermine an approved identity or make a meaningful prop misleading.
Review normal-speed motion as well as selected frames. A crisp still does not establish stable detail across time.
A fictional proposal-shot decision
An editor plans to deliver a proposal film to a large screen. One accepted shot shows the correct couple and a readable ring-box action, but the image appears soft at that viewing size. A short external upscale comparison is a reasonable next experiment.
A second shot shows the ring passing through a finger. Its defect is content, so the plan returns to the shot brief or chooses another accepted take. Upscaling that frame would only enlarge the unresolved problem.
This example is invented for planning. It does not report an enhancement test or a successful generation.
Check timing and the delivery file again
After enhancement, verify duration, frame rate, framing and any audio against the accepted source. Do not assume an enhancement label proves every delivery property remained correct. If an editor scales the candidate to an exact delivery size, review that final file too.
Keep the accepted original available for comparison and record which version entered the film. Plan shot revisions in Imagild Film Studio; use an external enhancement workflow only when it addresses the defect you identified.