I need a new Mac

berlinfool

berlinfool

Well-known member
I own a HVX and I'm looking for the right computer to edit the Hi-Def Material.

My big question is: Mac Pro or Mac Book Pro????

I want to edit short films, music videos and similar.

What are the pros and cons?

Is the Mac Bool Pro strong enough?

(I'm aware of the fact that the Mac Book Pro is going to update in the next couple of weeks)
 
Now is a great time to get a mac pro, as they have just upped them to 8 core as standard. If you are buying a computer specifically for editing, it seems a little stupid to me to buy a macbook pro, (good machines of course) but for abit more you can get an 8 core powerhouse....
 
berlinfool said:
I own a HVX and I'm looking for the right computer to edit the Hi-Def Material.
Click to expand...

The "right" computer? A Windows box with a $75 PCMCIA slot, running any editor that natively supports MXF files (including EDIUS, Premiere Pro CS3, Speed Edit, Vegas+Raylight, or even Pinnacle Liquid or Avid XPress Pro.

But if you want to use FCP, the MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, and iMac are all plenty powerful enough to handle the footage.
 
Uh -
so why do people spend $5000 on a computer?
What are the 8 cores for?
Is a Mac Pro worth it's money?
I want to start out with more simple editing but want to move on to using Color.
Will an iMac do that for me?
Hey, if I can save $3000 - that's money freed up for lenses, lighting and sound, right?
 
I'm editing DVCPRO HD on a MacBook Pro right now. Can handle multiple streams via FW800. Keep in mind you can't plug P2 cards straight into the MacBook Pro without an adapter. Pricewise though you can't beat the new Imac. It has a FW800 port, which is more than fast enough for DVCPRO HD, so if portability isn't an issue I'd buy that...But if you got the money, definitely get the Mac Pro.
 
berlinfool said:
Uh -
so why do people spend $5000 on a computer?
What are the 8 cores for?
Is a Mac Pro worth it's money?
I want to start out with more simple editing but want to move on to using Color.
Will an iMac do that for me?
Hey, if I can save $3000 - that's money freed up for lenses, lighting and sound, right?
Click to expand...

Expandability - its way easier with a tower. You can add up to 32GB of ram with the new OctoCores. You can easily upgrade the video card. You can easily add high-end video cards such as the Kona LH or Kona 3 for SDI abilities.

Render Time - in theory, faster render times - Rendering is processor based, so more processors, faster rendering, in theory. The software has to be built to make use of the cores though. But at least with Compressor you can use the virtual systems setup and have all cores compressing together.

3D - I do not believe the iMac or MacBook Pro video card options are strong enough. I haven't looked at them today though, so perhaps they are. But last time I looked they weren't up to snuff.

Color - you mention that you would like to use Color in the long run. It doesn't run beautifully as is right now. I'd rather give it more horsepower anywhere I can to keep it as happy as possible. You can get more horsepower in the towers.

What Apple needs badly is to make the iMac a tower. Let us buy our own monitors and give us a mid-level tower option. The iMac price point is great, but an iMac sorely lacks the expandibility options that a tower would offer. But I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. Though maybe Apple will make the world's thinest tower with low-grade processors and no optical drive. MacPro Air anyone?

Cheers.
 
Also, if you're going Mac, I'd definitely recommend looking at Premier Pro CS3 instead of FCP because of its native support for the MXF files. Especially if you like After Effects and PhotoShop.
 
FCP with Rayight works fine. Sheesh Barry, when are you gonna stop doggin' the Mac?

Want to use COLOR? Gotta get a pro machine. An iMac will not cut it. You need A MacPro and a capture card. COLOR doesn't work via firewire. You need a pro machine if you want to do things right.

But Adobe CS3 is a great package, don't get me wrong. Choose your tool...they all work. FCP import of P2 blows away any metadata you have, but with Raylight you retain it....and can work with MXF natively. And P2CMS import retains the Metadata.

But, getting a PC and CS3 will be fine. Up to you.
 
EDIT: realized now that the thread title is "I need a new Mac" -- so, never mind, scratch everything I said in here. :embarasse
 
Thanks for your advice.

I think I'll buy the Mac Pro - looks like it will last a while.

I'm also dissappointed about the workflow with the Mac - it's just that Windows drives me crazy.

Any last thoughts?
 
keep in mind the imac is basically a laptop built into a monitor. the imac and macbook pro will always be slower than a mac pro of the same speed. yes you can edit hvx footage on any of these. i do simple hvx cuts on my macbook (not pro) and it works fine. however once you start adding plugins, color correcting, jumping into motion or after effects the lower end macs will lose steam a lot quicker than the mac pro. so you can decide what you need your mac to do and how much power you really need.

barry, you know you can copy hvx footage into final cut directly from p2 cards without raylight or anything else. it does rewrap the clips as quicktime but all of the image data is preserved. i have used premiere, vegas, etc. and i think fcp blows them away in general. just my opinion.

berlinfool: if you want to use fcp and work with native p2 format, just get raylight. personally i don't see the big deal about ingesting into fcp. doesn't take that much time, but if you must, get raylight.
 
I have an iMac and a MacBook Pro and definitely want to get a Mac Pro as soon as the budget allows.

Having said that, neither of these computers does a BAD job in FCP, I'd just like for things to go a bit quicker.

The statement that an iMac is a laptop built into a monitor isn't completely untrue - the iMac actually uses a laptop processor to save space!!
 
cheezweezl said:
barry, you know you can copy hvx footage into final cut directly from p2 cards without raylight or anything else. it does rewrap the clips as quicktime but all of the image data is preserved.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course. But doing so takes time, doubles the storage space, throws away the metadata, and makes files that are incompatible with Windows systems. No other editor asks you to make those compromises, I don't think FCP should either. Fortunately Mac users can select from a few options to get around this; Premiere Pro CS3 gives proper integrated MXF support, and both Raylight and HD Log provide instantaneous Quicktime proxy editing. Doesn't really solve the metadata issue, but at least it gives you instant editing without any of the other compromises.

Also, with the release of the Mac formatting tool, one of the major pains of using MacOS has been eliminated so it's becoming a friendlier-to-P2 platform.

berlinfool: if you want to use fcp and work with native p2 format, just get raylight. personally i don't see the big deal about ingesting into fcp. doesn't take that much time, but if you must, get raylight.
Click to expand...
Everyone's workflow is different. When 64GB and 128GB cards come out, spending two hours to ingest footage instead of just editing off the cards immediately may be cumbersome or even prohibitive to some. Fortunately, Raylight (and also HD Log) have the ability to avoid this process entirely for FCP users.
 
jeez. 128gb, i can't even imagine. that will be cool though. would you really edit from the cards? i guess you could if it is a quick edit but it seems like you would want to get the footage off the cards and make backups anyway. otherwise, you keep your cards tied up and have no backup. well maybe panny will start selling 128gb cards for like $20 and we can just shelf them like tapes and buy new ones for each project. THAT would be cool!!!
 
I already do edit from the cards, for small stuff. For quick-turnaround shoots like news it's perfect for that.

As for cheap cards, if prices keep going the way they have we should have pretty affordable per-gig cards in a few years. We're at $50/gig now, which means we should be at $1/gig in about five years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top