-
Phillip Bloom goes to the dark side
-
[Shawn Miller] “How do you know that my non-editorial software is less efficient? Don’t you routinely criticize non-FCPX editors for commenting on software they’ve never used?☺”
Fair criticism, I suppose – but it’s based in the fact that I do have a casual acquaintance with some world class coders – who tell me that some long time software (they mentioned AE in particular) has a lot of legacy code that’s not particularly efficient doing things like still calling the CPU for tasks that would run a lot more efficiently on the GPU – one factor that makes it somewhat inefficient compared to more modern programs.
I think the general coding term is “cruft” – old inefficient code that complete re-writes like X did in 2011 and Resolve continues to write afresh – tends to eliminate.
But you’re right. I’m not a programmer and I have no real expertise in the area. .
It does make sense however that long running software that attempts to maintain every single feature users have become accustomed to over decades – might do that at a price regarding efficiency.
But I could be totally wrong.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “If EDITORIAL is a significant part of your work – you should add a Mac and FCP X to your toolkit. Because that’s the hardware and software combo that “edits” the fastest right now.”
According to who? How exactly is FCPX faster than say Premiere Pro?
[Bill Davis] “hobbling your editorial tasks, just for access to the greater horsepower required for running less efficient non-editorial software.”
Are you saying Premiere Pro and DR 14 are less efficient than FCPX for real-time playback and rendering?
[Bill Davis] ” So you’re just picking one compromise over another. Which is fine. But for how long?”
So are FCPX users. Depending on what codec you use an iMac might be a better option than the iMac Pro.
[Bill Davis] “As we saw with FCP X – tearing down a legacy program is a big risk. But a few years down the road – when those performance gains prove to be very significant – it’s one really good way to keep the efficiency curve ascending.”
What gains are you talking about? Quick Sync gives FCPX an advantage when editing h.264/AVCHD/MPEG4 but any other codec and FCPX has no great performance gains over Premiere Pro. I doubt FCPX has a performance gain over DR 14 either. I don’t doubt you can edit h.264 4K files with your laptop but let me see you edit camera raw formats or even the Cineform Codec on your laptop at 4K. Had you bothered to read and of my comments (which would be wise). I let people know why once you get Premiere Pro on a $1,400.00 desktop you would probably see a better experience than using FCPX on an iMac depending on what is being edited. Want proof?
Watch the video below at 16:45. I am not saying a fully loaded and beeefy iMac could not do it but this iMac did not. Having said that a $1,400.00 PC could do it. So much for the beefy PC requirement myth when using Premiere Pro : )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1321&v=nLF3g2zF3qs
-
[Bill Davis] “Fair criticism, I suppose – but it’s based in the fact that I do have a casual acquaintance with some world class coders – who tell me that some long time software (they mentioned AE in particular) has a lot of legacy code that’s not particularly efficient doing things like still calling the CPU for tasks that would run a lot more efficiently on the GPU – one factor that makes it somewhat inefficient compared to more modern programs.”
AE is not a NLE design to be used for the editorial process nor is MS Word or DreamWeaver.
[Bill Davis] “But you’re right. I’m not a programmer and I have no real expertise in the area. .”
I would agree with that.
[Bill Davis] “It does make sense however that long running software that attempts to maintain every single feature users have become accustomed to over decades – might do that at a price regarding efficiency.
But I could be totally wrong.”
Premiere Pro (2003) was a total rewrite of the code. Premiere Pro 1.0 can take advantage of multiple cores CPUs and in fact before the implementation of the Mercury Playback Engine Premiere Pro made use of the GPU for a few transitions. Did you know that?
The 2017 iMac in the video below at 16:45 failed to play back the R3D file at full resolution yet a $1,400.00 gaming PC can. I don’t consider a $1,400.00 PC a beefy system do you? Having said that if the 2017 iMac cannot play it back I doubt your laptop can. Wouldn’t you agree. The iMac Pro did play it back at full resolution but I would consider the system specs on the iMac Pro pretty beefy. Wouldn’t you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1321&v=nLF3g2zF3qs
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[andy patterson] “I think that is the problem. You don’t use a Windows PC or Premiere Pro but you will post about Premiere Pro and Windows being sluggish and problematic but the people that happen to use Windows and Premiere Pro don’t make the same comments. Why do you think that is? Why do Mac users who do not use a Windows PC or Premiere Pro complain more about Windows PC and Premiere Pro than the people who actually use them? Why do you think that is?”
Because I have used a Windows PC for over 33 years and I own and have used Adobe Creative Suite CS2, CS4, CS5, & CS6 (I refused to pay ransomeware for CC) and those that just switched to Premiere Pro have used a Windows PC for a year or two and haven’t experienced how sluggish they get over time or how unstable they get as you update and add more software. I’ve only used a Mac for 4 years but my experience has been so far superior to my 33 years of PC experience that I would never use a Windows PC or a track based NLE again. So I’m speaking from personal experience having used both platforms with a variety of workloads not just video editing (I’m also a software developer).
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com -
[John Rofrano] “Because I have used a Windows PC for over 33 years and I own and have used Adobe Creative Suite CS2, CS4, CS5, & CS6 (I refused to pay ransomeware for CC)”
Just for clarification I have used Apple computers for about 30 years but writing my term paper on a Mac is not the same thing as editing video is it? Could you do a short video of yourself using Premiere Pro CS2 and CS 6 on a PC? I am wondering if you used CS 6 on an old 64 bit Pentium 4 system and switched to FCPX using an i7 Mac. Could you do a video of your FCPX system editing as many layers of the Red R3D files as possible? There is a video of FCPX dropping frames when using an iMac while editing 4.5K R3D files at full resolution yet there are $1,400.00 PCs using Premiere Pro than can edit the 4K R3D files at full resolution. Do you understand why I don’t buy into the claim that FCPX and the Apple hardware combination is the greatest thing since slice bread? Do you at least see my point? On computers with low system specs FCPX does have an advantage but that advantage diminishes quickly as the system spec increase and at some point Premiere Pro might out shine FCPX. That is not to say they both don’t work well. I think they do work well but I am not going to over hype the performance of FCPX on an iMac when compared to Premiere Pro on a $1,400.00 PC. Why would anybody do so?
All I can say is you should stick with Apple but keep in mind many of us have had a totally different experience from yours. Why has your experience been so different from mine? As you can tell from my video I have been building custom PCs for 20 years. Do you think I would still do so if I had all the same experiences as you have? I could do a video of my Windows 10 system shutting down in less than a minute if you would like me to do so. It can be done.
-
[John Rofrano] ” [andy patterson] “My system never fails to shut down because of updates. Did you disable the updates as shown in the video below? I am thinking you did not. ”
Yes, I did and I can make a video of the problem if you don’t believe me because I use virtual machines every day in my testing and I don’t want any of them updating without me doing it and I disable update right after the OS is installed and shut down the machine and it’s fine. Then I turn the machine on again and check and update is still disabled. When I shut it down the second time, it tells me it has to apply updates. When I turn it back on, Windows Update is still showing as Disabled but the service is RUNNING!”
Is the Windows system updating or did the virtual machines update? My Windows 10 system does not update when shutting down ever. When I first build a new system I let it update for a couple of days and then disable the updates. As I stated my editing system is rarely connected to internet. When I had Windows 10 on my laptop it never failed to shut down because of updates. Are you using a genuine MS OEM version?
[John Rofrano] “It shocked everyone who updated their Windows XP machines to Vista and the desktop was gone and their PC looked like a Windows Phone with this big “Hello Kitty” boxes interface. The Start menu was also missing. Several vendors made money selling plug-ins that would add the start menu back again. The desktop could be enabled but then you would start a program that tried to open a link in a browser and instead of opening the desktop browser, it would switch back to the Metro interface with a full screen browser and you had to figure out how to get back to your desktop. It was horrible! Customers complained and eventually Microsoft made the desktop the default in Windows 7 and brought the start menu back. When a company like Microsoft has to admit they were wrong and change the interface back to how XP looked… I call that a debacle! Nobody wanted their PC to look like a Windows Phone.”
The start Menu was not missing with XP to Vista Upgrade. You a bit confused. I think you are thinking of Windows 8. Windows 8 had a start screen that worked just as well as the start menu. While even XP had touch screen support and there were touch screen XP tablets Windows 8’s Metro GUI was design to work with smaller touch screens. Windows 7 didn’t bring back the start menu. You are very confused about Windows XP, Vista, 7 and 8. Windows XP, Vista and 7 all used the Windows 95 paradigm. Windows 8 received the Metro GUI and was also the first OS by MS to go beyond the Windows 95 paradigm. You will have to trust me on that.
[John Rofrano] “I’ve personally owned a PC XT, PC AT, PS2 Mod-30, & PS2 Mod-80 (yes, microchannel!) before buying clones and building my own. So yea… now that I think about it… my experience is probably not the norm because I’ve seen everyone else problems including mine. lol ;-)”
Can you install Windows 95? Would you consider Windows 95 hard to install?
-
[andy patterson] “Can you install Windows 95? Would you consider Windows 95 hard to install?”
Well, this thread had taken a turn.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[andy patterson] “I am wondering if you used CS 6 on an old 64 bit Pentium 4 system and switched to FCPX using an i7 Mac.”
Actually, I was using CS6 on a Core i7 6-Core PC w/Quadro 4000 that I built before moving to a 12-Core Mac Pro w/ATI HD7950. I don’t edit RED footage so perhaps my experience would be different if that was the case. I get your point that different workflows may work better on different hardware/software combinations depending on your video editing format.
But speaking of inequity… (e.g, Pentium 4 vs Core i7) that’s exactly what the original video that started this thread is all about… comparing a modern PC to a 4 year old Mac Pro makes no sense. A modern PC is also faster than a 4 year old PC. So what’s the point? The only point I can see is that you can update a PC any time you want while Apple has made their computers non-upgradable and I can’t argue with you on that point. I voted with my wallet and did not buy the 2013 Mac Pro and still use my 2010 Mac Pro and have expanded it quite a bit.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com -
[andy patterson] “Is the Windows system updating or did the virtual machines update? My Windows 10 system does not update when shutting down ever. When I first build a new system I let it update for a couple of days and then disable the updates. As I stated my editing system is rarely connected to internet. When I had Windows 10 on my laptop it never failed to shut down because of updates. Are you using a genuine MS OEM version? “
I didn’t let it update for days because I don’t have days to keep it running. It’s just a test system that I run on occasion to check software compatibility. If you are not connected to the Internet it doesn’t try to install updates (obviously). This is how I got it to stop. I disabled the network card.
[andy patterson] “The start Menu was not missing with XP to Vista Upgrade. You a bit confused. I think you are thinking of Windows 8.”
You are correct. Vista was the poor performing one that aggressively cached everything into memory and Windows 8 was the metro debacle. A lot of the Vista problems were due to it introducing a new driver model that made a lot of peoples peripherals incompatible but that’s not Microsofts fault. At some point you need to move ahead and Apple does this all the time. As I said, I don’t remember clearly but I lived through it all and Vista and Windows 8 were versions that people avoided.
[andy patterson] “Can you install Windows 95? Would you consider Windows 95 hard to install?”
Not only can I install it… but I can run it in a window on my Mac Pro Desktop!
(That’s actually Windows 98 but you get the idea.) 😉~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasstsoftware.com -
I think AE is a fairly crowded interface and yet it’s pretty logical most of the time and I don’t spend a lot of time searching for stuff.
There are UI things I like about Motion, but I find organizing lots of assets in it cumbersome compared to AE. And you can argue whether the timeline or nodal paradigm is superior.
For motion graphics and animation, AE works really well and the tools are robust. Compositing could be improved; 3D could be improved; roto/tracking could be improved (they really need to give the Roto Brush some deep love). And collaboration is non-existent.
But my biggest beef is with performance. I still don’t see why a piece of footage with nothing done to it needs to be rendered in order to play back.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up