-
Is this why the new Mac Pro has been taking so long?
-
[Tony West] “What kind of mac do you use?”
A mix, since I’m an independent contractor. But in general, several different machines, between clients’ and my own. Range includes Mac Pro towers (8 & 12 core, 2009-2012), iMacs, 2013 Mac Pro (8-core), and a MacBook Pros.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] ” Mac Pro (8-core),”
Does this one beach ball on your 4k stuff?
-
None of them beachball, but it depends on the format – RED or ProRes or FS7, etc. The absolute worst is 4K GoPro or DJI footage. Generally with ProRes, what I see is stuttery playback, but it depends on the app. A lot has to do with the media drives you are using. On this machine for effective 4K, you want something like an 8-drive SAS array, like the old MaxxDigital units. Or better. You’ll note that a number of the big films using Premiere were using all-SSD drive arrays, like those from Open Drives. But, if I were doing something like a feature film on this machine with all 4K ProRes or RED sources, I would definitely proxy it for the creative cut and do the 4K relink and finish in Resolve.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Bill Davis] “I understand that there are a few who must live on the edge of performance to get what THEY do done efficiently. And if you’re 3d modeling, Or chasing billions of polygons – bless you and I hope you get what you need.”
Shouldn’t Apple offer the best solution possible?
[Bill Davis] “Where my work used to be mostly for broadcast, today it’s mostly for on-line distribution. I work in 4k or lower masters, because I’m typically NOT delivering to motion picture theaters.
I thought this thread was about the Mac Pro not your workflow.
[Bill Davis] “For me, the old “chasing hardware” days are gone.
No time for it. Not when my “off the shelf” gear runs rings around anything I’ve ever had on my desktop before.”
I doubt your laptop will run circles round my system and I also doubt your system can edit native 8K R3D file at full resolution. In another six months from now you may have a client who needs you to edit 8K R3D files. Why trans-code to Pro Res? Wouldn’t it be faster and more effective to have a system than can playback the native R3D video files?
You claimed you started using FCPX from day one. That is fine but there are people who needed multi-cam, broadcast monitor support, closed caption and a lot of other things that FCPX lacked. It was not because the GUI was different but because FCPX could not fulfill the needs of many editors when it was first released. Just because your Apple laptop and FCPX work OK for your needs doesn’t mean Apple shouldn’t make improvements to meet the needs of others.
-
[andy patterson] “Why trans-code to Pro Res? “
Because most people will have to ultimately deliver in that anyway right?
-
[Oliver Peters] “2048×1152 ProRes 4444 for editing.”
You almost make this sound like a toss off. ProRes 4444 looks amazing and the Academy only wants 422 from you.
Many people’s computers would choke on 4444.[Oliver Peters] ” Both “Focus” and “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” benefitted from the fact that these were ARRI shows.”
A lot of people like ARRI. Many better than RED. I think they made a”smart” decision going that route.
I don’t remember seeing them complaining about the quality of their footage. They seemed super happy about the way things went and they didn’t even have .3 -
[Tony West] “I don’t remember seeing them complaining about the quality of their footage.”
I never said they did. People make a decision about cameras and formats for reasons that generally have little to do with post. In this case it benefitted the films, because ARRI designed a camera with a built-in workflow that was optimized on purpose for Apple and FCP (“legacy” originally).
I routinely work with footage from both cameras and there are pros and cons either way. From the standpoint of post, ARRI definitely makes it easier to get in and out with minimal fuss in between, assuming you shoot ProRes and not ARRIRAW.
At home I cut a series of corporate videos shot with Alexa in 2K size. I cut this fine in X on my 2009 8-core MP with media from a simple G-RAID connected via an eSATA card. The only issues I had were performance on unrendered greenscreen composites. At CES I cut 4K/UHD Alexa Mini footage on my 2015 MBP in X with media coming off of a Thunderbolt drive.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “This was still a proxy created for editorial, although “full quality”, but technically still a proxy. “
Proxy implies a much smaller, lighter weight file compared to the camera master. Maybe transcode would be a better term? Since we are talking about hardware required for the workflow, if someone told me the proxy workflow would require the same fast, expensive hardware as the online workflow I’d reply that their proxy workflow needed improvement. ????
With that being said, the Focus team did use actual proxies when editing on location so it’s not like they were trucking around big RAIDs with them all over the place.
-
[Tony West] “[andy patterson] “Why trans-code to Pro Res? ”
Because most people will have to ultimately deliver in that anyway right?”
Maybe maybe not. Some people use Red Cameras for commercials that will be output to 1920 X 1080i for broadcast. Some may output to Pro Res some may opt for AVCHD Intra or even MJPEG. There is the Cineform Codec as well as H.264. Some people are using the Red Cameras (R3D files) for YouTube videos. Even if you are to output (render) to Pro Res for delivery why trans-code 2-200 hours of video files to Pro Res? I wouldn’t do it. Trans-coding would waste time and would also be like skipping a generation in the world of analogue tapes. Some data would be lost from the original. Especially when going from an R3D file or Camera RAW file to Pro Res. Pro Res is a good codec but it is not as good as R3D or camera RAW files. It is easier for FCPX to playback Pro Res so trans-coding makes sense if you have an inept and low powered editing system.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Proxy implies a much smaller, lighter weight file compared to the camera master.”
Not in my frame of reference. It’s simply a”stand-in” for the original. I make a differentiation between proxy and ProResProxy. One is a substitute, the other a specific format. In fact, in Adobe’s “proxy” parlance, you can specify the size and codec of the “proxy” file. In other cases, a proxy file might be the same resolution as the original, but with a LUT and TC burn added.
Just like the terms offline and online editing. The de facto assumption is that offline would use lower-res media and online would use higher. But there’s nothing that says it can’t be the other way around.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up