David Cherniack
Forum Replies Created
-
[Oliver Peters] “Nope. You can turn it off and go software-only and it makes no difference on standard media playback. It affects effects processing and transform functions, so if you add filters in software-only or several layers with PIP, then you are taxing the CPU. It also affects the output using an external i/o.”
You could, and can, certainly turn GPU acceleration of effects and today I’m pretty sure that some codecs are GPU accelerated in decode-and-playback, but back then it was all CPU for decode. Joe is right, back then it seemed pretty fast but today it may be showing its age. It doesn’t yet look optimized for the new Mac Pro according to Puget Systems comparative tests.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Oliver Peters] “MPE is Adobe’s architecture for dealing with the GPU to accelerate effects. I’m not sure it has anything to do with the playback issues that are of concern.”
AFAIK it had all to do with playback…which was why it was called a playback engine. It worked in the first 64 bit build of PrPro as I recall. GPU acceleration worked with some effects, not with the actual decode of the codecs during playback.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Joe Marler] “It’s ironic the Premiere playback engine is code-named Mercury. It’s like having a pet turtle named “Lightning”.”
The Mercury Playback Engine is what, 12-13 years old? FCX and Resolve very obviously benefit from later development. Likely there’s a group of Adobe engineers working on an update.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Bob Woodhead] “[Herb Sevush] “other than the ability to run OSX”
And there’s the rub. I do NOT want to go back to Windows if I can ever avoid it. At this point, I’m still willing to pay the “Apple tax” to stay on OSX.”
As a Windows guy I can understand that…if it’s based upon your knowledge of, and use of, the OSX ecosystem. I have nothing against Macs (Apple Corp. is a different story) but I’d be horribly disadvantaged to even contemplate switching because of my reliance on utility software that only runs on Windows. In my editing and office work I use a macro program that saves me the drudgery of sometimes a few dozen keystrokes and mouse moves and clicks. It has 10 years of written macros for a dozen different apps and it don’t run on OSX. So there’s sympathy here for your point of view if it’s for the ecosystem reason. OTOH if your editing box is only a stand-alone, with no reliance on an ecosystem that only runs on Macs, then Premiere, Resolve, and Avid function the same on both platforms. But if it’s simply because the IDEA of Windows10 is anathema, then by all means, happily pay the additional money that Apple is equally happy to remove from your pocket.
BTW:
Windows 10 is an excellent OS. Not perfect but neither, I gather, is OSX
.The Mac Pro is a beast, aimed a production houses that need it and can afford it, and at fanbois who want it. I think it will sell a lot more than the ill-advised trashcan, but as it comes from the same (over) design ethos, there may be more than meets the eye lurking in them weeds. Wise, smallish houses will wait and see.David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Michael Gissing] “I note that many broadcasters world wide are dropping ProRes as a requirement and it is mostly an option.”
Quite possibly this is one of the reasons for Apple to release its codec to Adobe…to grab some cash before it becomes less valuable over the next few years. Of all the existing mezzanine, archival, and delivery codecs, the generally superior Cineform stands the best chance going forward because it’s non-proprietary. As a producer it’s a no-brainer for quality and once broadcast and streaming services technocrats realize they won’t be fired for accepting it the world will be a better place.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Craig Seeman] “Given the situation with ProRes Raw vs Braw I think Apple felt they needed to make ProRes encoding more accessible or lose the codec war in the long run.”
Well BRAW is an acquisition codec like ProresRaw only tied (so far, and probably indefinitely) to BM cameras. Not being a delivery codec like Prores, I don’t see how it might factor in A’s decision to license Prores to Adobe.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Craig Seeman] “Perhaps this is related to Apple’s “legacy” codec decision. It was to their benefit to allow Windows NLEs to encode to ProRes if they were to keep Apple viable in the Post market. If Windows users couldn’t deliver to people doing post work on Macs, then even more people would stop using Macs.”
Could well be….of course it can go the other way, too….that more people will switch to powerful Windows boxes….people who are running Adobe and not FCPX.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Gary Huff] “Thank you for still posting regardless.”
You’re most welcome.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
Personally, I couldn’t care less, long using powerful Windows boxes and not being forced to deliver in Prores. But for many in the industry this is big news and I suspect a cause for lot of celebration at places like Puget Systems.
It’s long been known that Adobe has wanted to license Prores but Apple wasn’t interested in giving it to them. I wonder what turned the tide?
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com -
[Andrew Kimery] “I’ve only watched the demo video but I assume the plugin is a vastly more simplified approach than Resolve’s built-in tools (which is something that’s required IMO if Resolve wants to have broader appeal).”
Why stop with Resolve?. Maybe they should release a version for Baselight, too. ☺
I guess they figure that those who are challenged by ability or time will buy it. Probably there will be a few of those and it’s a shame that they’ll miss all that wonderful, creative capability that exists in Resolve’s color toolset.
David
https://AllinOneFilms.com