-
is one workstation enough?
Well first of, this is my first post but I sometimes spend hours pouring over this site. There’s almost too much info if that’s even possible.
I am in the middle of putting together a post prod/audio and video editing suite. We’re a non profit and have been working with a lot of terrific manufacturers. I will not bore you with all the particulars, but I just received our workstation, Windows 7, 64 bit. It far surpasses all of the system recommendations of Adobe CS5 Production Premium. I don’t even have our copy of CS5 but wanted to make sure I was getting off on the right foot.
I also am throwing my entire Pro Tools system into the mix, sans Mac G4 that just can’t hold up to my sessions any longer. I have heard from folks who say I can do everything with the new workstation and those that say I need to dedicate the new workstation to the video side of things and get a separate workstation for Pro Tools and the other audio apps. I can raise the funds for a second PC but don’t want to unless I have to, certainly. I have no intention of keeping separate rooms so even if I add a second machine, everything is going to coexist in the same physical space.
I am looking for oppinions here. I am happy to provide a more detailed list of my computer specs plus all of the software and hardware I will be running. Thanks in advance for any input.
-
6 Replies
-
[Chris White] “I can raise the funds for a second PC but don’t want to unless I have to”
I always prefer a suite with both a Mac and a Windows machine, as long as both workload and workflow justify it and budget allows.
My opinion is that, depending very much on your needs in terms of both workload (amounts) and workflow (types, processes, turn times, etc.), if you can swing two separate stations, there are definite advantages. Most importantly, being able to run multiple of the particularly lengthy processes that are inherently part of video production especially, but also audio production to some degree. For example, if you have 12 hours of footage to digitize/ingest or a 6 hour render, you’re not dead in the water for those hours and can just slide your chair over to continue working on a machine with full resources. Or, if you have both of those or similar tasks that need to happen at the same time, you can actually pull it off.
Dual-platform suites also make the entire pool of editors potential candidates for you, rather than only those proficient on one platform or the other.
Multi-machine suites can also allow zero downtime when one machine is being upgraded or has some kind of temporary work-stopping issue.
Of course, such flexibility comes with the costs of outfitting two machines, but redundancy has saved my arse many times in my years in the biz. Hope my two pence is helpful.
-
Thanks very much for the reply. I am not in a position to have a Mac and PC setup. We are being donated quite a bit and are working within the strictest of budgets. What I was considering was not so much “redundancy” as much as having a Windows machine that strictly handles the video related tasks and a second Windows machine that strictly handles the audio recording related tasks, with some overlap of course. For instance, I would compose original music in Pro Tools and the transition that music into Adobe for use in our documentary. And since we are just putting things together in earnest, a workflow has yet to be established.
I look forward to bugging everyone here throughout the editing process 😉 Thanks again for the reply to my querry.
-
Sorry I guess I misinterpreted some of your original comments in that you mentioned a Win machine that “far surpasses all of the system recommendations of Adobe CS5”, which doesn’t come cheap, and a Mac. That basically is the “redundancy” I referred to … I understand your point that you’re considering two machines for separate tasks, but my point was that two machines inherently means that one can do at least some of the tasks the other is intended for if/when needed. And, it’s not much of leap to go from there to having both capable of most of the same tasks, which can be very beneficial in several ways. In other words, I consider two good stations better than one great station, but again, maybe that’s just me. Also, I’ve only used ProTools on Macs and all the ProTools folks I know are on Macs so when you mentioned the possibility of two machines, I guess I assumed you meant upgrading the G4 in addition to the Win7 you already have.
-
Thanks. Yeah I really wish our budget would allow for a Mac (or TWO). All of my Pro Tools experience has been on Mac and not to start a Windows vs Mac debate, I do think that Mac is more geared for post production. But my current Mac just isn’t adequate for Pro Tools anymore and it’s not “upgradeable” really. I do agree that the redundancy you were referring to is indeed a big benefit. One important thing to note is that I am working with a local computer retailer who was not only willing and able to help us with the cost of the build, but they are giving us two years warranty on parts and labor and they are a well established and respected local company. That was a big factor in using them. A 5 minute drive to take the system in is a little more appealing given our situation. I guess where I am getting somewhat confused is in the fact that the system can certainly handle all of the Adobe features plus the third party stuff we were able to get (Magic Bullet Suite, Topaz Labs Photoshop Bundle) and I know it can handle Pro Tools without any hiccups. I have just read some opinions that say not to try and run “dominant” editing software like Adobe Premiere and Avid Pro Tools on one machine. I don’t intend to try to have a track heavy PT session running with a full HD project running in the background on Adobe. That may be the limitation some opinions have referrenced. I was curious what others do who have intensive NLEs as well as DAWs in their systems.
One advantage I had considered right off the bat in having two separate machines is that if I am rendering something on the video workstation, I can still use the audio workstation to work on audio projects. Some programs I intend to install on both machines, should I get a second one, are things like Sony’s Acid and Vegas prograns, but they are just kind of intended to be extras and won’t be depended on heavily for the initial documentary project.
I am running Norton Ghost and will be backing my system drive or drives up on a regular basis and my projects, whether audio or video, are going to get backed up to death. I have already experienced one catastrophic loss of an entire original music composition in my early computer recording days. I don’t plan to have that feeling ever again.
So to clarify a bit, taking into account the fact that I do plan to regularly back things up and follow all of the “DUH” rules related to working on computers, am I good with one dual purpose PC? Having two obviously would be better, but aside from being down for computer repairs or drive replacements, are there any other pitfalls I should be aware of if I am only able to use one PC in our editing suite? Thanks again for your help.
-
Budget aside, I’d say it very much depends on your workload, and the type of workload. If you start doing AfterEffects projects, or lots of encoding or transcoding, a second machine to render would be a plus. This can be hefty in RAM and processing, but for a render-only machine, you can do away with a fancy graphics card (built-in graphics is fine). Share the drives from your main workstation, and you don’t need more than a boot drive, and once setup is done, you don’t even need a mouse, keyboard, or monitor: use something like RealVNC to remotely access the desktop of the render machine. However, that won’t be the sort of box you want to do an audio session with. On the other hand, if you are just editing and scoring, use one machine until you find yourself frequently waiting around to do the next task. At that point, budget should be easier, because you are more expensive than a 2nd machine (even in the non-profit scenario).
-Jeff
-
Well said and points taken. I had not even considered a machine to render. To be honest. I think that starting out, we will be fine with a single PC, especially after reading the responses here. Since the initial project is a documentary, we’re not doing any extensive effects but at the same time, I do intend to make this NOT look like we grabbed a video camera and started shooting. I have a ton of pics going back 30 years and I do plan to get a little fancy with some of them. I wonder if I could somehow use my 5 year old Mac G4 for rendering… My plan was to just set it up as a file server for music loops and some of the audio side of the work but I will have to look into that. Definitely want to use it for something.
Thanks again for the help everyone. I really appreciate it.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up