-
Hackintosh
-
[Bill Davis] “Whether Uncompressed HD or DV, H-264 or 265, MXF or ProRez RAW, the nature of the signals themselves are trending to do more with less.”
Huh? What does that mean?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Bill Davis] “Whether Uncompressed HD or DV, H-264 or 265, MXF or ProRez RAW, the nature of the signals themselves are trending to do more with less.”
Huh? What does that mean?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com”
H-264 to H-265 allows more perceived quality in a similar size data stream, and ProRez RAW allows expanded dynamic range in a signal nearly the same size as stream with standard dynamic range.
Those are both examples of the editor getting MORE capability – while the signals passing through our boxes generally stay within a pretty narrow range – and that means you don’t necessarily need to chase more computing capability to work effectively.
So the chase for bigger and bigger, faster and faster computers can, perhaps, slow somewhat in response.
That was my point, basically.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
OK, I see what you mean.
[Bill Davis] “H-264 to H-265 allows more perceived quality in a similar size data stream”
Although, with 4K-8K (and higher) being pushed, these are very taxing codecs, especially H265. To follow Shane’s point, if you are working with last year’s iMac and now want to do a lot of H265 8K exports, you might as well trash the machine and buy an entirely new one, because you can’t upgrade it. So, while codecs become more efficient, the industry demands/wants/pie-in-the-sky-wishes still outstrip the pace of the hardware development.
[Bill Davis] “and ProRez RAW allows expanded dynamic range in a signal nearly the same size as stream with standard dynamic range”
Well… no. An ARRI Alexa Log-C signal recorded in ProRes will have pretty much the same dynamic range. That’s a factor of the camera, not the codec. RAW allows a bit more versatility and less compression artifacts (and possibly less banding) for the equivalent data rate.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Bill…my point is that just because something works FOR YOU, doesn’t mean that it works for EVERYONE. This is always my point when talking to you, apparently. I’m glad that YOU no longer need to chase the hardware, and that Apple makes machines and software that make YOU more efficient and able to do what you need.
But YOU need to realize that there are OTHER PEOPLE out there too…people with different needs, different deliverables, different ways of doing things. Because of that, we have different hardware needs. Are we the minority? Sure, but we aren’t like 8 people. More like a few hundred thousand.
So YOU chiming in how everything Apple does is great and perfect and doesn’t need to change at all because YOU are happy and satisfied is pretty short sighted, and the center of my beef with you. Stop being self centered and only thinking about your needs. Be open to what others are asking too…and don’t try to shut us down because “Well, it works for ME so I can’t POSSIBLY SEE why YOU would need anything else.” If you could stop that…I might start respecting you again. But it’s that view, and your cult-like devotion to Apple that caused me to lose all respect for your opinion and POV.
But then here I am, responding to it. Stupid me…
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
But whether it’s LOG C or ProRez RAW – my point is the same.
Smart compression fights against the idea that everything will keep getting so much bigger that EVERY machine must be a flame thrower in order for a shop to do the work.
If networks keep getting faster — and proxy workflows continue to rule the day — then it’s easily conceivable that the editor will be able to work on something less powerful while STILL being able to make all the editorial and many of the creative judgements they need. Then they just send the metadata describing the edit to ONE (or a couple) of “print to video” workstation for QC.
Suddenly, you don’t need 10 monster workstations, but theoretically a couple – with the editorial stations feeding them. And those editorial stations can just as conceivably be laptops or more modest machines.
It’s just changing the perception from the old days – when if EVERY machine you worked on wasn’t as large or as capable as it could possibly be – it wasn’t an equally valuable player, to the video equivalent of no longer needing a printer at each computer – but merely one network attached printer to serve a host of editors.
Seems to make sense. Time will tell.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “Smart compression fights against the idea that everything will keep getting so much bigger that EVERY machine must be a flame thrower in order for a shop to do the work.”
Well, no. Smarter compression inherently requires newer, better hardware, which gets us back to the issue of ease of upgradeability. It doesn’t mean you need a new machine that’s at the maximum horsepower. But it does mean you need a new machine if you can’t upgrade.
I do realize that upgrades in hardware don’t always give you the results you strive for, but it certainly is a factor. At least for RAM, drives, and GPUs. Then there’s also the problem of the all-in-one design…
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Shane Ross] “Bill…my point is that just because something works FOR YOU, doesn’t mean that it works for EVERYONE.”
I think if you look back and actually read what I posted – you’ll find I said nothing like that. In fact, I acknowledged multiple times that others have different needs.
You apparently get angry everytime I post anything.
Sorry, but that’s not my problem. It’s yours.
[Shane Ross] “But YOU need to realize that there are OTHER PEOPLE out there too…people with different needs, different deliverables, different ways of doing things”
Again, acknowledged in my post. Read the actual words I write, not how they make you feel – and this might go easier.
[Shane Ross] “So YOU chiming in how everything Apple does is great and perfect and doesn’t need to change at all because YOU are happy and satisfied is pretty short sighted, and the center of my beef with you.”
That’s utter BS. Look back at my posts. I try never to tell anyone else anything about what Apple should or shouldn’t do for them. If you’re taking things that way – maybe read again for comprehension.
I write what Apple’s solution actually do for me.That doing so drives you crazy and makes you project your feelings on my posts has nothing to do with anything but your emotional state. It would be nicer if you could get that under control.
[Shane Ross] “But it’s that view, and your cult-like devotion to Apple that caused me to lose all respect for your opinion and POV. “
I’m not here to gain your “respect” Shane. It’s irrelevant to me. (Just as I would suspect mine is largely irrelevant to you.) My “cult like devotion” (lovely perforative personal attack phrase there) is based on one things and one thing only. The fact that Apple hardware and FCP X are getting my work done faster, easier and more efficiently than any other system I’ve ever used. That’s all I know. It’s all I post about. I don’t tell you how it should work for you. Only how it does work for me.
Stop being so constantly triggered by my every post – Stop thinking it’s about me dissing you. And you might find that all I’m doing is the same thing you are. Describing my experiences and letting the readers here judge whether they’re useful or not.
Seriously, this is NOT about your feelings – or mine. It’s about debate to help others decide whether there are tools out there that might be useful to them.
Period.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Oliver Peters] “[Bill Davis] “Smart compression fights against the idea that everything will keep getting so much bigger that EVERY machine must be a flame thrower in order for a shop to do the work.”
Well, no. Smarter compression inherently requires newer, better hardware, which gets us back to the issue of ease of upgradeability. It doesn’t mean you need a new machine that’s at the maximum horsepower. But it does mean you need a new machine if you can’t upgrade.
I do realize that upgrades in hardware don’t always give you the results you strive for, but it certainly is a factor. At least for RAM, drives, and GPUs. Then there’s also the problem of the all-in-one design…
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com”
That’s certainly ONE way to look at it.
Another is that across ALL the laptops I’ve ever owned – I’ve paid LESS in adjusted US dollars than I paid in the 1990s for ONE maxed out MacPro IIfx tower system. ($17,500)
The scale of “costs” has changed mightily over the past two decades.
I’ve said it before, I’ve had craft services bills for shoots that ran more than any maxed out MAC or PC costs today. Nothing wrong with saving a buck, certainly. But this is just a very different era.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “The scale of “costs” has changed mightily over the past two decades.”
Sure. It’s all a balancing act on the money side. However, from everything I see, the drivers are downward. Clients want cheaper and cheaper, so what you can afford to spend makes it harder to justify the top end.
[Bill Davis] “I’ve said it before, I’ve had craft services bills for shoots that ran more than any maxed out MAC or PC costs today.”
Higher thinner PAs! ☺
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
You know what? You’re right. I do get “triggered’ by your posts, and read them with my skewed view of you. I re-read and you are right, you didn’t do all the crap I accused you of. You were respectful…I flew off the handle.
Sorry about that.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up