Editing video on a Mini Mac.

[Sean Michael]

Is this doable (assuming you upgrade the onboard RAM from 256k to 1 GB) or a complete waste of time and moula?

[kito]

IT is totally doable,render time and compression will take longer than say on a g5,but what a great deal,and yes go with at least a gig of ram.If you get it put up a product review.

[reservoir]

Very doable. You will be able to do everything except use Apple Motion. This requires a more *beefy* video card. Otherwise you'll be able to run the "Production Suite" , "Protools", etc. just fine. I've tested all of these so far. You're only complaint would be that it will run considerably slower than a G5 or dual G5. But you'll be saving a few thousand dollars if you can put with the extra render times, etc. ~reservoir~

[aaron_wade]

could you run fcphd or fcphd express on the mac mini? can i transfer footage from a dv deck to the mac mini also? sorry for the simple questions, but im new. hehe.

[Sean Michael]

My understanding is that the Mac Mini onboard RAM is upgradable to 1GB max (from the standard 256MB). The upgrade can be easily and cheaply done by the user.

RAM upgrade (http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2005/01/macminiinside/index.php)

As far as capturing footage from a DV deck, I assume this would be a definite yes? I'd use an external hard drive for storage--I think the Mac Mini tops out at 80GB.

Not sure about fcpHD . . .

[reservoir]

FCP runs fine on the mac mini. Better put in 1GB of Ram. Get the upgrade from Crucial at

http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.asp?Mfr%2BProductline=Apple%2BMac+mini&mfr=Apple&cat=RAM&model=Mac+mini+%28G4+-+1.25GHz%29&submit=Go - 1.25GHz

http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.asp?Mfr%2BProductline=Apple%2BMac+mini&mfr=Apple&cat=RAM&model=Mac+mini+%28G4+-+1.42GHz%29&submit=Go - 1.42GHz

$161.99 for the 1GB. ~reservoir~

[Terry_Lasater]

It's just too bad they decided to make the Mini a G4 instead of a G5. Heck, even the iMacs are G5.

[kito]

It's just too bad they decided to make the Mini a G4 instead of a G5. Heck, even the iMacs are G5

Ya,whats up with that.

[J_Barnes]

It's hard to fit a thermonuclear device inside a shoebox and not have it all melt.

[Terry_Lasater]

It's hard to fit a thermonuclear device inside a shoebox and not have it all melt.

Well, the iMacs are G5's packed in an LCD monitor.

[J_Barnes]

Yes, but the iMac has more surface area so that the flux capacitor to dissapate excess heat. Time travel really requires so much engineering, doesn't it?

[Terry_Lasater]

Ahhh, I see... I had my sarcasm filter set to "on". Pardon me. :)

[SkiUtah]

I'm editing on an 800mhz iMac right now, and its manageble.

[Terry_Lasater]

I'm editing on an 800mhz iMac right now, and its manageble.

Who do you think you're fooling? I edit on an 867MHz G4 tower w/1GB of RAM and it bites!

I'll be stepping up to a G5 in the next two months in preparation of my new HDX.

[bgundu]

totally doable.

http://www.hdforindies.com/2005/02/reader-report-final-cut-express-hd-mac

[Terry_Lasater]

Since your post immediately followed mine, I thought I'd point out that I'm not doubting it can be done. ;)

[SkiUtah]

Who do you think you're fooling? I edit on an 867MHz G4 tower w/1GB of RAM and it bites!

I'll be stepping up to a G5 in the next two months in preparation of my new HDX.

You're doing something wrong then. Sure the renders take a long ass time, but i rarely drop frames or anything of the like.

And hopefully this summer I will also be upgrading to G5.

[reservoir]

The reason for the G4 in the mac mini was price. Could a G5 have been done? I think so. But Steve Jobs made it crystal clear that the mac mini was intented to be at a price point to make winblows users switch. The mini is a little smaller footprint than the iMac so overheating may be an issue as well, but I'm 99% sure the main reason for the G4 was cost in order to appeal to a wider audience.....say...Fed up Windows users who wanted something better at *about* the same price as a mid-level PC!! ~reservoir~

[Terry_Lasater]

You're doing something wrong then. Sure the renders take a long ass time, but i rarely drop frames or anything of the like.

And hopefully this summer I will also be upgrading to G5.

No, I'm just not diggin' the long renders and occasional dropped frames on playback - especially when you have several audio tracks. Actually, I've been using Macs for 15+ years. So, I'm usually good at keeping the system nice and tidy.

However, I want a system that will allow me to use Motion and explore the upper end of FCP's capabilities.

[Policar]

Just bought a mac mini! Those things are sweet, especially with a flat screen. Awesome, awesome, awesome....

BUT:

256mb of RAM is NOT enough.
The HD is really slow. Won't necessarly be a problem, but could be a pain.

I edit on an eMac usually (1.25ghz/512mb ram) and it's fine. I can output with 3:2 pulldown in real time and color correction, etc. renders in real time fine. I also use a 1ghz g4 and it's borderline too slow for my taste. I also use a dual G5 at work with a 20'' cinema display and a dual monitor. It's amazing.

So...the mac mini will be fine as long as you don't do anything too crazy (lots of visual effects in maya). Render times will be managable, but you'll need the extra ram badly.

I also have an overclocked Athlon XP 3200+ with a PCI-E Radeon X800 XL and it just screams. I'm a mac loyalist, but uhh...WOW. It's just so insanely fast. That computer blows me away with its awesomeness. (So does the dual opteron with a nvidia quattro card at work.)

[SkiUtah]

No, I'm just not diggin' the long renders and occasional dropped frames on playback - especially when you have several audio tracks. Actually, I've been using Macs for 15+ years. So, I'm usually good at keeping the system nice and tidy.

However, I want a system that will allow me to use Motion and explore the upper end of FCP's capabilities.

Well, we all want a dual 2.5 Ghz with 8 gigs of ram with 2 30" cinema displays, but sometimes its just not in the cards.

[mehnkle]

The mac mini has a 4200 rpm drive. here ( http://www.macworld.com/2005/01/news/minioverview/index.php)
It also costs $475 for an upgrade of 1 gig.

[bgundu]

The mac mini has a 4200 rpm drive. here (http://www.macworld.com/2005/01/news/minioverview/index.php)
It also costs $475 for an upgrade of 1 gig.

Actually the prices are $325US for 1GB stick of RAM from Apple. Also, there are a few instructions and videos on the WWW showing how to install ram yourself.

[mehnkle]

oh ok. I just said $475 because thats what the link above stated.

[Sean Michael]

As noted above, the lowest cost strategy is to buy the RAM from Crucial ($165) and install yourself. Then you have a 1.42GHz G4 with 1GB RAM for about $700.

I'm debating between the Mini Mac (or Mac) and a Dell workstation. I'm squarely in Apple's target market....a longtime PC user (surrounded by extra keyboards, monitors, etc.) who'd like to be using Final Cut Pro. Mac Mini looks like an attractive deal IF it can do the job! Sounds like it can.

[kappa22]

The reason for the G4 in the mac mini was price. Could a G5 have been done? I think so. But Steve Jobs made it crystal clear that the mac mini was intented to be at a price point to make winblows users switch. The mini is a little smaller footprint than the iMac so overheating may be an issue as well, but I'm 99% sure the main reason for the G4 was cost in order to appeal to a wider audience.....say...Fed up Windows users who wanted something better at *about* the same price as a mid-level PC!! ~reservoir~

Wait, this is supposed to make me want to switch?



Just bought a mac mini! Those things are sweet, especially with a flat screen. Awesome, awesome, awesome....

BUT:

256mb of RAM is NOT enough.
The HD is really slow. Won't necessarly be a problem, but could be a pain.

I edit on an eMac usually (1.25ghz/512mb ram) and it's fine. I can output with 3:2 pulldown in real time and color correction, etc. renders in real time fine. I also use a 1ghz g4 and it's borderline too slow for my taste. I also use a dual G5 at work with a 20'' cinema display and a dual monitor. It's amazing.

So...the mac mini will be fine as long as you don't do anything too crazy (lots of visual effects in maya). Render times will be managable, but you'll need the extra ram badly.

I also have an overclocked Athlon XP 3200+ with a PCI-E Radeon X800 XL and it just screams. I'm a mac loyalist, but uhh...WOW. It's just so insanely fast. That computer blows me away with its awesomeness. (So does the dual opteron with a nvidia quattro card at work.)


I'm really convinced:huh: , especially since I too already use an Athlon 64, and know of its awesome power... even Mac loyalists (though precious few) know what I'm talking about.

It seems S.J. still needs to learn a few things about appealing to customers: just because Apple is finally pricing things close to Windows systems doesn't mean people (namely Windows users) will buy them. They have to be quality products that actually deliver PERFORMANCE, and judging by Apple's latest slips in quality, coupled with the lack of... well, everything in the Mac Mini, it would take a really, REALLY gullible Windows user to switch (and if they do switch, then it's clear that they never should have gone near Windows in the first place... the rest of us are better off without them).

[kappa22]

And the ridiculously high upgrade prices make me want one even more...

[kito]

Wait, this is supposed to make me want to switch?



I'm really convinced:huh: , especially since I too already use an Athlon 64, and know of its awesome power... even Mac loyalists (though precious few) know what I'm talking about.

It seems S.J. still needs to learn a few things about appealing to customers: just because Apple is finally pricing things close to Windows systems doesn't mean people (namely Windows users) will buy them. They have to be quality products that actually deliver PERFORMANCE, and judging by Apple's latest slips in quality, coupled with the lack of... well, everything in the Mac Mini, it would take a really, REALLY gullible Windows user to switch (and if they do switch, then it's clear that they never should have gone near Windows in the first place... the rest of us are better off without them).


Alright,this is really starting to sound like a ford verses chevy argument,and well frankly Kappa22,I'm with you, fu#@ apple and all the gullible traitors that make the switch!!!!!
They will see apple's latest slips in quality are only the begining,and yes they will not be missed,as we will truly be better of without them.

[Terry_Lasater]

Well, we all want a dual 2.5 Ghz with 8 gigs of ram with 2 30" cinema displays, but sometimes its just not in the cards.

No doubt. I've suffered long enough, though. I bought my current edit system in October 2001.

It is time for an upgrade, but I'm waiting to see what Apple might announce at NAB.

[J_Barnes]

It seems S.J. still needs to learn a few things about appealing to customers: just because Apple is finally pricing things close to Windows systems doesn't mean people (namely Windows users) will buy them. They have to be quality products that actually deliver PERFORMANCE, and judging by Apple's latest slips in quality, coupled with the lack of... well, everything in the Mac Mini, it would take a really, REALLY gullible Windows user to switch (and if they do switch, then it's clear that they never should have gone near Windows in the first place... the rest of us are better off without them).

One thing that we all need to remember here is that 80% of the home computing world out there does not fall into the category of "power user". (This is obviously excepting the rediculous wintendo users out there.)

We tend to get myopic, as we tend to use more horsepower then the average user, but most people out there just need something to connect to the internet, play their mp3's and write emails. People don't care about PERFORMANCE for the most part, and when they do buy into it...it's only for the sake of longevity, not for actual need. How many people out there do you think actuall ever undertake a ram upgrade? A lot fewer then you'd think.

The mac mini isn't intended to be an edit station or a graphics number cruncher. It's a cute little mac that will hold all your iTunes, cut home movies with iMovie, and burn them to DVD's for your grandparents with iDVD. If you don't want one, don't get one, but don't bitch about how they have underpowered a product you have no interest in either way...it just shows you have an agenda that is far from objective.

And seriously folks, traitors? Fu#@ Apple?

It's a computer, not a race war.

:beer:

[Policar]

My bad, I have an athlon 64 not XP. But it's the X800 XL that really impresses me, though everything on that computer is fast. Doom III and Half Life 2 are so beautiful they make me wish computer games weren't such a dumb waste of time.

I disagree, the Mac Mini is a high quality machine, especially for the price. Its target audience is NOT the FCP user, though...that's what the G5 is for and those are really really fast, especially within FCP/Maya/Photoshop, which is where it counts (games suck on all macs, sorry but it's true). The 4200RPM hard drive and lack of RAM are brutal, but the truth is that I'd rather edit on FCP and lose a little speed than edit on something else and gain a little. And most video editing is real time stuff if you have the RAM to use RT Extreme, and the rendering can be done when you're away. Also, it's 500 dollars. What can you expect out of it? The software costs twice that much.

[reservoir]

One thing that we all need to remember here is that 80% of the home computing world out there does not fall into the category of "power user". (This is obviously excepting the rediculous wintendo users out there.)

We tend to get myopic, as we tend to use more horsepower then the average user, but most people out there just need something to connect to the internet, play their mp3's and write emails. People don't care about PERFORMANCE for the most part, and when they do buy into it...it's only for the sake of longevity, not for actual need. How many people out there do you think actuall ever undertake a ram upgrade? A lot fewer then you'd think.

The mac mini isn't intended to be an edit station or a graphics number cruncher. It's a cute little mac that will hold all your iTunes, cut home movies with iMovie, and burn them to DVD's for your grandparents with iDVD. If you don't want one, don't get one, but don't bitch about how they have underpowered a product you have no interest in either way...it just shows you have an agenda that is far from objective.

And seriously folks, traitors? Fu#@ Apple?

It's a computer, not a race war.

:beer:


Thank you J_Barnes for saying something that actually applies to the Thread Topic. I haven't used this word in a LOOOONG time but I'm going to say it anyway: This thread contains the ramblings of Bill Gates / Windows *Fanboys* and whatever we say about Steve Jobs and Macs will have no significance. We are dealing with true closed-minded *lamers* that wouldn't see reason if it slapped them up-side the head.

The fact of the matter is this. YES, 100% without a doubt, the Mac Mini can be used for an editing station. It will have it's limitations. The same limitations that your $499 bargain bin *DELL* will have. Lack of RAM. Lack of HD size and / or speed. Lack of a powerful graphics card. So if you don't like the Mac Mini...DON'T buy it!! Simple as that. But don't act like a Windows Fanboy and dog others who are looking at purchasing it.

If you really want me to hurt your feelings, well then we can talk about how *ANY* PC no matter how *DECKED* out will never be able to compare "performance wise" to a G5 Mac when it comes to video rendering and most graphic intensive applications. That's not rhetoric!! That's a fact. I've posted ALL the references and benchmarks many times before. And all this from a Windows User!! I don't even own a Mac, I just respect what they have done and what they are capable of.


I disagree, the Mac Mini is a high quality machine, especially for the price. Its target audience is NOT the FCP user, though...that's what the G5 is for and those are really really fast, especially within FCP/Maya/Photoshop, which is where it counts (games suck on all macs, sorry but it's true). The 4200RPM hard drive and lack of RAM are brutal, but the truth is that I'd rather edit on FCP and lose a little speed than edit on something else and gain a little. And most video editing is real time stuff if you have the RAM to use RT Extreme, and the rendering can be done when you're away. Also, it's 500 dollars. What can you expect out of it? The software costs twice that much.

Thank you Policar for pointing out the obvious. The Fanboys have their thongs in a knot and can't see the forest for the trees. The Mac Mini is 499 / 599. It's targeted at *average* PC users. Listening to music, using productivity software, burning Cd's & Dvd's, using the internet, etc. But the Fanboys simply don't understand this. They will argue that their 3.06HT Pentium 4 with a gig of ram is far superior and blah, blah, blah. They are correct. But then I can argue that a 2.5Ghz Dual G5 with 8 gigs of ram is far superior to theirs!! Then I am correct. Why do the fanboys turn these threads into a *Penis Size* contest everytime someone asks a valid question about a Mac? Hhmmm.....sounds like *Penis Envy* to me?

So in closing, let's get this thread back on track. The Mac mini is great little editing machine for it's price point, but in reality it will never compete with high end PCs or G5's. But for the average hobbyist, or even the moderate editor, it will be fine. Upgrade the Ram for $161 at Crucial and pop in a faster Hard Drive (Hitachi) and you'll have an even more capable machine. Now that we have things squared away, let's try to keep the Windows Fanboy's at bay!! ~reservoir~

[kappa22]

One thing that we all need to remember here is that 80% of the home computing world out there does not fall into the category of "power user". (This is obviously excepting the rediculous wintendo users out there.)

We tend to get myopic, as we tend to use more horsepower then the average user, but most people out there just need something to connect to the internet, play their mp3's and write emails. People don't care about PERFORMANCE for the most part, and when they do buy into it...it's only for the sake of longevity, not for actual need. How many people out there do you think actuall ever undertake a ram upgrade? A lot fewer then you'd think.

The mac mini isn't intended to be an edit station or a graphics number cruncher. It's a cute little mac that will hold all your iTunes, cut home movies with iMovie, and burn them to DVD's for your grandparents with iDVD. If you don't want one, don't get one, but don't bitch about how they have underpowered a product you have no interest in either way...it just shows you have an agenda that is far from objective.

I agree with this completely. I think you're right in saying I was looking at too focused of a demographic.

resovoir: Call me whatever you want ("Fanboy, lamer, phallically envious") but I wasn't trying to stretch everything as far as you make it sound. I'm sure it sounds nice to just throw a whole bunch of insults out there at anyone you want and suddenly everything will be OK, but I think you're taking my comments way out of context. I even realized I was being fairly closed-door on the issue, but that's no call to start grossly generalizing anyone and everyone you see fit. A bit of discretion might be in order, eh?

[reservoir]

I just wanted the thread to get back on track. I think some users get a little distracted when the Mac vs. PC come up. Instead of it being an objective discussion based on facts, it usually turns into *My dad can beat up your dad*....I wasn't making any comments at you specifically, but rather the true *Fanboys* out there that love to keep these wars going. Use whatever pleases *YOU*!! But let's not compare Ferrari's to Hyundai's either. Let's be honest, you will most likely NEVER hear a Mac user compare their Dual G5 to a $399 Dell. Most understand the fundamental differences, but no matter where I go on the internet it seems PC users are the ones who will defend their machines until the end. It's like watching a Battered Wife defend her husband....She knows he's got problems and beats her silly.... but she'll never leave him because she loves him so much. Not the best analogy, but it works!! No harm, no foul I suppose!! Let's carry on with the thread!! Thanx,

~reservoir~

[J_Barnes]

and once again...there were hugs and all was right in DVXUser land...

[reservoir]

"I luv you guys".....*Cough*, *Sniff*.....

I promised myself I wouldn't cry.....

:cry:

~reservoir~

[Sean Michael]

Group hug! :grin:

[kappa22]

No harm, no foul I suppose!! Let's carry on with the thread!!

Indeed.