GH1: FCP or CS5

W

Wes-C

Active member
Okay, so I'm going to be editing a feature documentary soon. I've been just storing my footage for now because I don't have an adequate editing system yet. I noticed a lot of people are saying that CS5 handles the GH1 footage really well. My plan was to save up and get a Mac and edit on FCP, but I'm noticing a lot of good stuff from the CS5 camp. So if I go the CS5 route, I could save money by either juicing up my pc or buying a new one...which is still cheaper than the Mac/FCP way.
So my question is what is a technical (besides software preference) reason to choose FCP or CS5? I know everyone has their editing software preference. I have used most NLE software and I don't really favor one or another. So I would like to know the technical reason to go either way. And if it is really down to personal preference you can say that too.

Thanks.
Edit: Also I realize that CS5 can be on the Mac as well...I just figured it would be cheaper the PC way.
 
Last edited:
The main question is do you want to edit AVCHD natively? Cs5 is now a 64 bit NLE. Meaning you can now build a monster system (64bitPC) with unlimited RAM (more or less) This is huge for editing processor hungry AVCHD files that the GH1 produces. It also enables a much smoother editing machine but yer gonna pay for it.

Your other route is to just convert the .mts files into something different with neoscene or similar in which case it matters not what you edit with. At this point there is no substantial reason other then what i mentioned above to pick FCP over Adobe.
 
I think I would like to edit the AVCHD natively without converting. I was looking at getting a PC with 6gb RAM and a i3 processor. I believe I have seen that other people have used CS5 with less speed and they have had no problems with playback or anything. But I was also thinking of juicing it up to 8gb RAM.
I have a lot to think about. Thanks for your response.
 
I work with CS5 and love it, The Mercury playback engine with a supported NVIDIA graphics cards for GPU acceleration is amazing. I have an NVIDIA GTX285 and 8gb ram. I always never need to render, I work with 2 or 3 layers of effects max. So everything is always in realtime, my last two videos in Vimeo where done with CS5.
 
Rolly said:
I work with CS5 and love it, The Mercury playback engine with a supported NVIDIA graphics cards for GPU acceleration is amazing. I have an NVIDIA GTX285 and 8gb ram. I always never need to render, I work with 2 or 3 layers of effects max. So everything is always in realtime, my last two videos in Vimeo where done with CS5.
Click to expand...

Great. Does the processor matter? Cause I was looking at one with an i3 processor. I know I'm going to make it 8gb RAM and get a better video card.
 
Wes-C said:
Great. Does the processor matter? Cause I was looking at one with an i3 processor. I know I'm going to make it 8gb RAM and get a better video card.
Click to expand...

I have a Core 2 Quad 9550 and it work great, the i3 processor should be strong enough, without a supported NVIDIA graphics cards you will still see performance improvements over CS4.
 
Rolly said:
I have a Core 2 Quad 9550 and it work great, the i3 processor should be strong enough, without a supported NVIDIA graphics cards you will still see performance improvements over CS4.
Click to expand...
So it will still work without a supported card, till I get one?
Thanks for all the info.
 
Don't count on it working w/o a supported card. Yes it might technically work, but it won't be optimal and some features may not work. For instance I run CS5 with an older Core 2 Duo 3ghz with an Invidia card from a couple years ago and I must keep all my GH1 edits in "maximum resolution" viewing mode. With multiple layers of video this will eventually begin bogging the system.

It seems Adobe can be finicky with its video cards. Best to get one officially supported.
 
Yeah, you're probably right. I'll just look into getting a supported one. Might as well have it to what Adobe supports. Thanks
 
Wes-C said:
So it will still work without a supported card, till I get one?
Thanks for all the info.
Click to expand...

Yes, The Mercury playback engine will be software acceleration instead of GPU. Before I install my GTX285 I had better perfomance than CS4. but with a supported card and the right hardware its really really fast :)
 
Wes-C said:
So it will still work without a supported card, till I get one?
Thanks for all the info.
Click to expand...

I stumbled on a desktop PC from Tiger Direct for under 400 bucks shipped and the performance is very good with CS5. Here's the link. 6 gig, AMD Dual Core without any serious graphic card at all.. in fact, extremely whimpy, but it cuts like butter with CS5. Not recommending you buy, but just want to give you an idea of how this type of system handles CS5. I edit in 1/2 resolution and playback in full resolution.

My render times are fast with the exception of grading with Magic Bullet Looks. Render times with heavy MBL have topped out at around 10-12 minutes for a 60mb 1:30 720 HD clip. Without MBL grading... under 2 minutes to render the same clip. I eventually plan on upgrading to a decent card, but for now, I'm just fine with what it can do. I had CS3 and 4 before, but CS5 seems like a whole other animal with the new mercury engine. I absolutely love editing with it.
 
Bobomatic said:
I stumbled on a desktop PC from Tiger Direct for under 400 bucks shipped and the performance is very good with CS5. Here's the link. 6 gig, AMD Dual Core without any serious graphic card at all.. in fact, extremely whimpy, but it cuts like butter with CS5. Not recommending you buy, but just want to give you an idea of how this type of system handles CS5. I edit in 1/2 resolution and playback in full resolution.

My render times are fast with the exception of grading with Magic Bullet Looks. Render times with heavy MBL have topped out at around 10-12 minutes for a 60mb 1:30 720 HD clip. Without MBL grading... under 2 minutes to render the same clip. I eventually plan on upgrading to a decent card, but for now, I'm just fine with what it can do. I had CS3 and 4 before, but CS5 seems like a whole other animal with the new mercury engine. I absolutely love editing with it.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's great. I actually live right by TigerDirect so I think I'm going to check it out. It sounds like CS5 is a good way to go. I'll probably bump up the RAM to 8gb and get one of the supported video cards. Thanks again, I really appreciate.
 
Wes-C said:
Thanks. That's great. I actually live right by TigerDirect so I think I'm going to check it out. It sounds like CS5 is a good way to go. I'll probably bump up the RAM to 8gb and get one of the supported video cards. Thanks again, I really appreciate.
Click to expand...


Before you buy the "supported" video card.. check this out.

I picked up a GTX260 from ebay for $115.. Can't wait to test it out when it arrives on Tuesday.
 
Bobomatic said:
I stumbled on a desktop PC from Tiger Direct for under 400 bucks shipped and the performance is very good with CS5. Here's the link. 6 gig, AMD Dual Core without any serious graphic card at all.. in fact, extremely whimpy, but it cuts like butter with CS5. Not recommending you buy, but just want to give you an idea of how this type of system handles CS5. I edit in 1/2 resolution and playback in full resolution.

My render times are fast with the exception of grading with Magic Bullet Looks. Render times with heavy MBL have topped out at around 10-12 minutes for a 60mb 1:30 720 HD clip. Without MBL grading... under 2 minutes to render the same clip. I eventually plan on upgrading to a decent card, but for now, I'm just fine with what it can do. I had CS3 and 4 before, but CS5 seems like a whole other animal with the new mercury engine. I absolutely love editing with it.
Click to expand...

ok, update. I'm a cheap SOB, so while perusing my local best buy I decided to buy the nvidia GT240 for giggles to see what kind of improvement could be had over my stock system. Pretty basic, no frills, low end card but better than my stock. I'm glad to report that rendering times have been, on average, cut in half. Rendering with MBL for the above example is now down to 4-5 minutes, w/o MBL under a minute. I can live with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top