-
MacBook Pro vs iMac for FCP?
-
Hi,
I know what I am like – I will want the portability at some point. But thanks for the different insight.
Interesting what you say about FCP X and Adobe. I think FCP X is a marmite affair – you either love it or hate it…
Olly Lawer
-
[Olly Lawer] “I think FCP X is a marmite affair – you either love it or hate it…”
It’s working out great for me. Finally, some software that can take advantage of my Mac hardware! It is different, so some study and training before diving in is appropriate. I’m glad I made the investment. FCPX has paid for itself many times over already in increased productivity.
Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production… with style!Check out my Mormon.org profile.
-
Hi Jason,
I’m in danger of turning this into a FCP X: the debate thread, but if you could give a few reasons why you prefer it that would be really helpful for me to decide. I am very tempted.
Olly Lawer
-
[Olly Lawer] “I’m in danger of turning this into a FCP X: the debate thread, but if you could give a few reasons why you prefer it that would be really helpful for me to decide. I am very tempted.”
Why I love FCPX:
#1 Power! I can do all my editing on my Macbook Pro and not feel restricted. Most stuff plays through without rendering. (My edits are not highly complex; I do that stuff in After Effects.) But, I can retime footage, scale it, color correct it, animate photos, etc… all with real-time playback.
#2 Speed! Skimming through footage and adding keywords to organize it is faster and more flexible than before.
#3 Some part of me enjoys being a contrarian! It’s a hoot to successfully use and enjoy something that has been so thoroughly maligned. FCPX is a lot like my religion; it’s given a bad name by those who haven’t tried it.
Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production… with style!Check out my Mormon.org profile.
-
[Jason Jenkins] “it’s given a bad name by those who haven’t tried it”
Probably very true!
It is true that FCP X doesn’t have a lot of the functionality that traditional professionals or high end professionals need (not as in quality, but functionality) and thus gets bad press, but it seems for the more main stream corporate video productions, its a real treat.
Olly Lawer
-
[Brent Dunn] “Adobe on the other hand have taken advantage of this opportunity and produced an amazing product that has great workflow and fast transcoding times.”
Thank you Brent. By transcoding, are you talking about rendering final outputs or converting footage to something else to edit?
Dennis – Adobe guy
-
Olly,
Seems that your main question is not on your future hardware but on your future software.
I don’t gonna waist my time explaining here why I don’t go FCPX. As you points, there is a whole Forum about that.
I think you should download the FCPX trial and see by yourself.
rafael -
No need to buy geek bench, just look at their score chart here…
https://www.primatelabs.ca/geekbench/mac-benchmarks
As you can see, currently the current iMacs and MacBook Pros pretty much line up in order depending on processor and processor speed. The i7s are faster than the i5s pretty much across the board. The new MacBook pros with i7s are faster than any iMac with i5, and many of the iMac i7s because I think it’s a newer processor line. The iMac 3.4 ghz i7 with a 6970 2GB graphics card and 27″ screen is where I’m headed. Just ordered from B&H. Only $50 less than Apple with the std 4 gigs, but it’s the fastest Mac out there with 4 cores. The six and 8 cores of late are still faster, but will cost ya twice as much, have no screen, and no thunderbolt. I needed to buy something this year. Hopefully there will be some sort of inexpensive mac mini pro with xeons and thunderbolt next year that I can trade the iMac in for. But if they don’t, well that’s a whole new problem for the industry over the next year or so.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up