Andy Patterson
Forum Replies Created
-
I am guessing you will need intercom, cameras, character generator, switcher, audio board, teleprompter, camera control units, monitors including vector and wave forum monitors. Some companies have the mentioned items integrated into one system. Maybe a few of your local TV stations could give you a station tour. You would not have to get the same equipment but it should give you an idea. Blackmagic Design has the ATEM systems and Netwek has their Tricaster products. They may or may not be your best bet. There is also products from Grass Valley, Panasonic and Sony. I think Data Video has broadcast equipment as well. Having said that my guess is that you will be broadcast at 1080i.
-
Some how you are getting the luminance with out the chrominance.
-
It does sound strange.
-
[John Rofrano] ” [andy patterson] “Any cheap Apple laptop running FCPX will allow you to edit h.246/mpeg4/AVCHD with ease using FCPX. The same cannot be said about Premiere Pro. Why is that you ask? Because FCPX uses Intel’s Quick Sync.”
Well that’s the point isn’t it? I don’t need a beefy Mac to edit with FCPX but I do need a beefy PC to edit with PPro. ????”
You don’t need a beefy system to edit using Premiere Pro. A mediocre Desktop PC will work just fine.
[John Rofrano] “I’m pretty sure that FCP X takes full advantage of the D300-D700 dual GPU’s in the current Mac Pro and it will do the same with the Vega 56 in the iMac Pro. We will have to wait and see. I would be very interested in those results.”
I am sure FCPX will work great with the Vega GPU but Volta will be here soon.
[John Rofrano] “The problem is that Adobe uses the proprietary NVIDIA CUDA API instead of the open source OpenCL API and Apple and FCP X uses OpenCL which works better with ATI cards. So yea, Adobe works better on a PC unless you bought a PC with an ATI card, or you put an NVIDIA card in your 2010 Mac Pro (I realize you can’t do this with the 2013 Mac Pros). This is an Adobe problem which I don’t have because I use FCP X.”
You need to do your research. Premiere Pro works with Open CL and ATI GPUs just fine. Adobe writes code for both CUDA and Open CL. Apple does not. You must call a spade a spade. Adobe has to also worry about Mac and PC platforms.
[John Rofrano] “The newest Mac Pro is almost 5 years old now which is ancient in computer years. However, I am editing with a 2010 Mac Pro 12-Core which is almost 8 years old and I would never edit with an 8 year old PC”
Mac and PCs use third party hardware. Your 8 core CPU from 8 years ago is the same CPU a PC would have but generic ATX parts cost less and can be replaced and upgraded very easy.
[John Rofrano] “They just don’t hold up that well and they slow down terribly over time because the Windows registry.”
That has not happened to me.
[John Rofrano] “Same is true for laptops. Even the “gold standard” Lenovo/IBM Thinkpad laptops start rattling and come unhinged after a few years but I have a 7 year old 2011 MacBook Pro that is still solid as the day I bought it. I put an SSD in it and it’s like a new Mac and shows no sign of stopping.”
My laptops never fell apart.
[John Rofrano] “So yes, at any point in time, if you want the fastest editing computer, and Apple hasn’t refreshed the Mac Pro line in a while, a PC will be faster but only because it can use newer technology.”
It is the cost of the product and upgrade-able components that must be considered.
[John Rofrano] ” But as you pointed out, I can get FCP X to work great on a midrange Mac so why waste money on a beefy PC when you don’t have to?”
Actually Premiere Pro will be very speedy on a mediocre $950.00 Desktop PC. FCPX only has an advantage when using laptops and editing h.264. Actually an iMac will edit h.264 better than a Mac Pro.
[John Rofrano] ” I see lots of PC people here on the COW asking what CPU and GPU to buy so that they can edit 4K on their PC and then I see people with an 27″ iMac Retina 5K editing 4K like butter and I wonder why anyone would want to use a Windows PC in the first place when they can just buy a system that works with 4K right out-of-the-box?”
They asks those types of question because they don’t know. Having said that people do ask questions about editing 4K with the iMacs. Editing 4K is very easy on a $950.00 PC but editing full 4K Red One R3D files might require a $1,200.00 system. If you want to edit 8K at full resolution it might cost $8,500.00. Keep in mind the iMac user must get an external RAID to do so but the PC user just has to buy 4 or 5 hard drives and RAID them.
No one is saying the Apple products don’t work but some Apple users would like more options.
-
[John Rofrano] “The first part of that video attempts to show that the MacBook Pro 2016 is inferior to the Dell XPS but all it really shows is that Premiere runs better on Windows than a Mac because when you use FCP X it blows Premiere Pro out of the water on the same hardware.”
I think all the benchmarks that show FCPX outperforming Premiere Pro are done with mediocre laptops using AVCHD/h.264. FCPX does have better performance than Premiere Pro when using a mediocre laptop with those codecs. Do you know why that is?
YOU WANT THE TRUTH?
WELL YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH : )
If I disable the GPU on Windows PC (Premiere Pro) with a Quad Core Haswell i7 at 3.4 GHZ my 2.66 GHZ dual core Mac Mini (FCXP) will playback more real-time effects than the PC. Does that sound impressive? It should. Having said that if I enable the GPU on my desktop PC it will kick the snot of the Mac Mini. Any cheap Apple laptop running FCPX will allow you to edit h.246/mpeg4/AVCHD with ease using FCPX. The same cannot be said about Premiere Pro. Why is that you ask? Because FCPX uses Intel’s Quick Sync. Even if your laptop had a dedicated mobile GPU FCPX will still have an advantage over Premiere Pro when using an Apple laptop and OS X. That is because the Quick Sync probably does 90% of the processing. Some FCPX user think if you get a $4,500.00 Mac Pro the performance gap between FCPX and Premiere Pro will widen. That is not the case. Do you know why?
The Xeon CPUs do not have Intel’s Quick Sync. If you go from a dual core to a quad core when editing h.264 you will see a huge boost in performance using Premiere Pro but you will not see a huge performance boost using FCPX. Do you know why? Intel’s Quick Sync is the same for the dual core CPU and the Quad Core CPU. Let me put it to you like this. An 8 core i7 CPU does not have 8 Quick Sync cores. As the computer specs get better the performance between Premiere Pro and FCPX begin to even out. If you edit R3D codecs or camera raw Intel’s Quick Sync will not work with those codecs. It only works with AVCHD/H.264/mper4 codecs. One the PC side you can get double the performance for less money than the Mac Book offers.
If you want to run Premiere Pro a Windows 10 PC will be your best bet and cost much less than what Apple has to offer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sGtefBwv8Y
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.
-
YOU WANT THE TRUTH? WELL YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH : )
FCPX on a Mac rocks! End of story. FCPX on a Mac will not compete with a PC running Premiere Pro CC. End of Story!
Are you confused yet?
If I disable the GPU on Windows PC (Premiere Pro) with a Quad Core Haswell i7 at 3.4 GHZ my 2.66 GHZ dual core Mac Mini (FCXP) will playback more real-time effects than the PC. Does that sound impressive? It should. Having said that if I enable the GPU on my desktop PC it will kick the snot of the Mac Mini. Any cheap Apple laptop running FCPX will allow you to edit h.246/mpeg4/AVCHD with ease using FCPX. The same cannot be said about Premiere Pro. Why is that you ask? Because FCPX uses Intel’s Quick Sync. Even if your laptop had a dedicated mobile GPU FCPX will still have an advantage over Premiere Pro when using an Apple laptop and OS X. That is because the Quick Sync probably does 90% of the processing. Some FCPX user think if you get a $4,500.00 Mac Pro the performance gap between FCPX and Premiere Pro will widen. That is not the case. Do you know why?
The Xeon CPUs do not have Intel’s Quick Sync. If you go from a dual core to a quad core when editing h.264 you will see a huge boost in performance using Premiere Pro but you will not see a huge performance boost using FCPX. Do you know why? Intel’s Quick Sync is the same for the dual core CPU and the Quad Core CPU. Let me put it to you like this. An 8 core i7 CPU does not have 8 Quick Sync cores. As the computer specs get better the performance between Premiere Pro and FCPX begin to even out. If you edit R3D codecs or camera raw Intel’s Quick Sync will not work with those codecs. It only works with AVCHD/H.264/mper4 codecs. One the PC side you can get double the performance for less money than the Mac Book offers.
If you want to run Premiere Pro a Windows 10 PC will be your best bet. I hope this helps.
-
[Ronny Courtens] ” If you think that “iPad Pro vs Surface” is even remotely related to the essence of this forum, then I will happily start a “Porsche Carrera vs. Ford Taurus” thread here. And yes, I will post videos (-:”
Is posting about Affinity Design or Pixelmator Pro OK? Is posting about the iPhone OK? Is ranting about Adobe’s Creative Cloud OK? From what I can tell just about anything related to computers can be posted in this forum. Perhaps a post about a Ford Taurus that is running iOS or Windows 10 would be appropriate.
-
[Tom Sefton] “iMacs are used globally for desktop design for the print industry.”
That is incorrect.
[Tom Sefton] “The surface is cute and functions well, but show me 100 firms that design for print and web, and I’ll show you 100 iMacs.”
And I will show you 100 PCs. Actually there are some print shops that are windows only. I have never seen one that was Mac only. I am sure they are out there but to act as though it is exclusively for Mac is incorrect. No one is saying Macs are not used. What is being said is that the Surface Studio allows for an interaction between the user and PC that had not been there previously. Are they saying that about the iMac Pro? Learn to accept reality.
[Tom Sefton] “Posting video links isn’t the argument stopping win for crying out loud.”
?
-
[Steve Connor] “I agree, I know a lot of creatives and not one of them uses MS Windows as a touch interface, the unified OS is great in theory but so far a non-starter in practice, that’s not to say it won’t happen of course.”
Just because you don’t know anyone using the Surface Pro or Surface Studio does no mean people are not using them. There are Mac users that like the Surface Studio but have said they cannot afford to by one. If the Surface Studio was $2,500.00 I don’t doubt you would end up knowing someone who uses it. I don’t see people saying the interaction of the Surface Studio is horrible. In fact I see just the opposite. Having said that can you please post a video of anyone saying that the iMac offers a much better way to integrate with graphic design programs than the Surface Studio. You kind of sort of maybe have to do that for you comment that to be valid that Windows 10’s unified OS is worse than OS X for graphic designers. I will be patiently waiting for such a video link. Until then you can check out the links below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c10wWzfGKfc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blwZvNmTdJw
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.
-
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/titan/titan-v/?nvid=nv-int-tnvptlh-29191
Will it hit a bottle neck with Thunderbolt 3? If not will Volta hit a bottle neck with Thunderbolt 3? Volta should be the focus at this point considering it should launch in 2018.