Interim HVX NLE

Pelican

Well-known member
HVX coming soon, and can't wait for some Vegas/Ppro/PC workable method. So, I just bought a used G5 1.6, powermac, for FCP. Call me cheap, not a professional shop, or just sick of outlaying cash as of late, and I'd say you must know me. 6k for the camera, and $1200 for FCP is enough already! So I tried to cut my expenses, with an interim solution,, it wasn't an easy decision and I considered quite a few options:

Option 1. A new G5 Dual or Quad that would cost somewhere between 2500, and 3500 with tax. I found that a bit too expensive considering I don't do much compositing or anything terribly processor intensive. And I just don't feel all that certain that I'll totally abandon Vegas/PC. note: if I love FCP after a year,, I'll plunk down this kind of dough.

Option 2. A new Powerbook. I know I've read a ton of posts touting how it works, but I just don't want to make it my sole editing machine. I'd probably have to buy new to get the dual firewire ports (and be able to have an ext. drive and capture - for the time P2 is not the acquisition) and the fastest 1.67mhz processor. A new 15" powerbook with the right amount of memory, will set you back about 2500, for a long-in-the-tooth processor, G4. It may be announced today that Mac is putting that to pasture with the new Intel Macs. So investing that much in a dying product line is not an option (to me)

Option 3. A Mac Mini. To me this is cheap (roughly $700), but seemingly the worst of both worlds.. not portable like a powerbook, and limited by the weak G4 processor.

Option 4. Imac G5. This is attractive and could be considered a good method of portability, and the power of a G5. But this seems to the have the same limitations of a laptop. It's limited ports, and absence of expansion capabilities (hard drive and memory) make it less attractive.

Option 5. My Choice,, a used G5, 1.6 for a $1000 bucks (easily picked up on Craigslist or eBay). It meets the memory requirements of FCP 5.0, with it's 2gig, and I toss in my terabyte SATA drives from my PC,, and hook it up to my Dell 2405, and get editing. Cheap, effective, and re-sellable ( without a ton of depreciation) if I don't like it.
 
according to Barry,,

"Raylight's better. On Raylight I can get performance that's 4x as good as on the Avid codec. Still not realtime, but maybe with a modern dual-core athlon 4400 or whatever, it would be."
 
Pelican, that avatar is priceless.

Yeah, I think to use Raylight properly you'd need a decently powerful computer. Which is no knock, of course -- Edius Broadcast recommends something like a dual 3.0GHz. I'm talking about getting 12fps playback from Raylight on a 2.66ghz P4 or a 2.00ghz Pentium M. So maybe a dual-core hyperthreaded system would deliver realtime performance?
 
Barry-

Why on earth do you need a Dual 3Ghz P4 to playback DVCProHD? For comparison, my off-the-shelf Mac Mini 1.25 plays back the 720p files just fine, and edits them.
 
Hence the reason people are so keen on Apples for DVCPRO-HD.

I can't tell you why the specs seem to need to be so high for the PC, all I can say is that using Avid's Quicktime codec in Vegas or Windows Media Player, I get maybe 3 fps, and using Raylight I get around 12 fps.

Now, the funny thing is, Apple is moving to Intel processors for their higher performance! Someone's gonna have to explain that one to me... :)
 
Software software software. That's why. FCP, for the money, is a very well optimized piece of software, and then there's the whole OS X thing. Keep in mind since apple is in control of the OS and the editing software, they get to communicate between groups to get the performance they need. Ergo, someone in the FCP group says, damn, we need some better performance on DVCPROHD, they could feasibly talk to the core video folks to optimize video performance. Either that, or I just made all that up. Nonetheless, I must say I was really impressed with how smoothly the 720P played in FCP, when thru quicktime, it suffered the occaisional stutter.
 
Apple is moving to Intel processors for their higher performance! Someone's gonna have to explain that one to me...


It's simple, MAC OSX has a FreeBSD core (which pretty much speaks for itself) and was built way more seriously than Windows' spaghetti core code. Multimedia on Windows was a thing that came way later than Macs that have a history of being Video and Audio workstations.

The Windows system is like a Jenga game, it's incredible how it all holds together and doesn't fall into pieces, I have huge respect for Windows Programmers working at Microsoft now, imagine the difficulties...They have improved alot of things, but still....

All this from someone making a living mainly from the Windows IT arena....
 
Barry_Green said:
Pelican, that avatar is priceless.

Yeah, I think to use Raylight properly you'd need a decently powerful computer. Which is no knock, of course -- Edius Broadcast recommends something like a dual 3.0GHz. I'm talking about getting 12fps playback from Raylight on a 2.66ghz P4 or a 2.00ghz Pentium M. So maybe a dual-core hyperthreaded system would deliver realtime performance?


The pentium chips of that era are not that fast. From my experience, there is a bottleneck somewhere on the P4 that does not allow it to run as the processor speed would suggest it should.

The P4 3 gig or higher run pretty well, as do the centrino processors over 2 gig.

Most Centrino processors over 2 gig will out run P4's up to and some over 3 gig. Don't ask me why, just what I have seen.

The hyperthreaded processors from intel don't run as fast as they should.
If you want Hyperthreaded, you want to go with AMD. They really do noticably run almost twice the speed with video apps. I never liked AMD untill now, and only after direct comparison.

The intel core duo is not even as fast as AMD, but I expect that will change once the processor speed goes over 2.0 gig THat seems to be the magic number with dual/hyper threaded processors.
 
Green Hornet said:
The pentium chips of that era are not that fast. From my experience, there is a bottleneck somewhere on the P4 that does not allow it to run as the processor speed would suggest it should.

Not trying to dispute anything you or Barry or the others are saying, but I am able to capture and edit DVCPro HD footage with no problems on the PC. I use Avid Xpress Pro HD running on a dual Xeon HP xw8000 (3.06 GHz) with 2.5 GB RAM, and on an HP laptop (Pentium 4 3.2 GHZ with 2 GB RAM).

I don't know if your computers are the issue for you or the editing application. The only thing I haven't tried yet is to capture from the HVX200 via P2 or direct hookup.

I am in Atlanta and would gladly get together with anyone who would like to try. Going to be at Sundance later this month if that is a better location for anyone who might like to get together.

Regards,

Cre8tive
 
It's the editing application that's the issue. Avid has integrated DVCPRO-HD support, as does Canopus. But for those of us who are using Vegas and Premiere Pro, there's no support, so we're casting about for workarounds.
 
Back
Top