[Jeff Meyer]

Above you mentioned two years. I see now that you meant you have been considering an upgrade for two years. I thought you were buying the computer to use for two years, which surprised me.

I think the iMac will leave you happy. You’ll always wonder if you should have gone for the new Mac instead, but if you need a computer now I think it will do everything you want it to do. How long will it last? I could see at least three years.

“Big iron” machine a phrase for a powerful computer. I borrow that phrase from Walter Biscardi, who has typed up several blogs for this site. This blog should be interesting for you:
https://blogs.creativecow.net/blog/11378/using-the-imac-to-replace-big-iron-desktop-workstations-a-consideration

[Jeff Meyer]

If you’re looking for two years out of the iMac I’d say buy tomorrow and call it good.

You could be waiting 12 months (although I’m guessing 6) for a new pro Mac. At that point you’ve spent 25-50% of the lifetime of the iMac waiting for a new pro Mac. And who knows how many hours you’ve spent letting the older computer catch up with you. Besides, the first generation of the new machine is bound to have some bugs that get ironed out.

My Mac Mini suggestion was based on thinking you want 4 or 5 years out of your big iron machine. I believe 16GB of RAM is the max, and I have no clue about the display capabilities.

[Jeff Meyer]

It sounds like you’re pretty sold on the iMac – you just need a nudge. If you need a computer today, I don’t think the iMac – with a Thunderbolt RAID and a pile of RAM – will disappoint.

Regarding the end of the run for MacPros – I think we’re there. The last “update” was a bad joke. Still no BluRay, still no factory CUDA options, no Thunderbolt, some serious option missing. The only display Apple sells has several dormant ports when used on a tower due to the Thunderbolt issue.
All indicators point to a new box for pros in 2013. No early/late timeline, just sometime next year. I’ve got funds at work for a new box, but I’m waiting it out.
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/apple-spokesperson-confirms-new-mac-pro-and-imac-designs-likely-coming-in-2013/

If you’re looking for something to hold you over until a new pro product, a MacMini might be worth looking into. With a Thunderbolt RAID, there’s a surprising amount of power in that little box, and for about $1300 USD you could have a well speced Mini. The 27″ iMac starts at $1800 USD. I wouldn’t recommend it as a MacPro replacement, but if you need some extra horsepower for a little bit it might just get the job done. Plus you could probably get a fair amount of your money back selling it when the pro product arrives.

Also, worth noting about the iMac, right now nVidia isn’t listing the GTX680 as CUDA compatible, but since it’s built on the Kepler architecture it will probably be CUDA accelerated.
https://www.adobe.com/products/aftereffects/tech-specs.html

I think the big question is do you need a computer today or tomorrow?

[Jeff Meyer]

Lots of people like the iMac line, but I still prefer a tower. After switching to using Premiere/After Effects primarily I dropped a Quadro card in the tower. Suddenly a 17 hour AE render dropped to a bit under two hours. That kind of flexibility can add a couple years onto the lifespan of a computer.

If you’re looking to buy for a couple years you need to decide if you’re betting on Thunderbolt or PCI-X. There are Thunderbolt -> PCI-X adapters, butThunderbolt isn’t fast enough for a Quadro/Redrocket – it’s the equivalent of a 4x PCI-X slot. The RedRocket wants at least 8x, and a Quadro wants 16x. If Adobe CS or RED footage are in your foreseeable future, opt for the tower if budget allows.

If Final Cut and HD footage are in the foreseeable future an iMac should serve you well. Make sure you stick with the 27 inch model with user upgradable RAM, and consider buying an external BluRay drive as the new generation lacks an optical drive.

[Jeff Meyer]

Warning: you have to jump through hoops to install FCP6 on a Lion system. I have no idea if it installs on Mountain Lion – which a new iMac would ship with.

Warning: new iMacs lack an optical drive. Make sure you buy an external drive – someday it’ll fiend you if you don’t.

Suspicion: I highly doubt you’re looking at 1/4 on the export time. I did this very thing with a 12 core MacPro moving files from one RAID-5 drive to another RAID-5 drive. New iMacs are faster, but my experience with a very well speced MacPro suggests that it’s Final Cut Pro that’s really dragging you down. This is why they made FCX, which probably lacks a timecode reader. If you go the iMac route make sure you get fast Thunderbolt storage, such as a G-Tech G-RAID – half the cost of the computer.

====

It sounds like you’re simply adding timecode to a talking head? Maybe talking heads?
• Consider using Final Cut’s Batch Export function to convert all your clips to ProRes/DVCPRO HD in one shot. Build a sequence for each clip/person, add the filter, then batch export the sequences while you go to lunch/leave for the night. Batch Export (by default) exports to the Render Files in your scratch folder. After you have QT movies with a timecode burn, the $100 Matrox card will make H.264 encodes in real time.

• Consider using Compressor’s Time Code Generator to add a timecode burn and compress your raw clips in a single step. The Timecode Generator is in the Filters -> Video area of the Inspector window. If you have fast storage and a lot of RAM, a QuickCluster might be helpful here. Google is your friend. Bear in mind this is a timecode generator, not a timecode reader.

====

Just as new iMacs have happened, a new generation of professional Mac is supposedly in the pipeline for the next calendar year. Perhaps one of the two workflow suggestions above can hold you over until Apple has a current, professional product on the market – hardware and software.

[Jeff Meyer]

If you’re working with ProRes LT media, a ProRes LT export (current settings on the export window) is about as good as you’re going to get. A 1080 ProRes LT export will easily hold 100% of the information that will make it to a SD DVD.

[Jeff Meyer]

Unless it actually creates a 60gb file I wouldn’t worry about it.

I will say that 720×1080 is a very obscure frame size though, which could be throwing it off.

[Jeff Meyer]

FCP will automatically scale the 1080 down to match the frame size, unless you manually push it in on the Motion tab. Frame size conversions work far better than frame rate conversions. (Cinema Tools conform isn’t a conversion.)

Also, I would suggest narrowing it down as much as possible on your source footage. You’re all over the place with two resolutions and three frame sizes. Is this really necessary? Without knowing the specifics on your project I’m suggesting that you simplify life and shoot at 1080/24 or 720/60, then follow Jerry’s advice and edit in 720/24.

Regarding frame rates and resolution don’t be too distracted by “we could” and instead ask if “we should.” Given GoPro’s niche, I think the answer regarding 1080/30 will become pretty clear.

I think you’re already on top of this, but be sure to convert everything to ProRes. You’ll have to in order to use Cinema Tools, and with mixed frame sizes it will make life better. Also, in the sequence settings there’s a resize quality option hiding under one of the tabs. Put that on best. I would make that one of your last steps, it does kick the render time up.

[Jeff Meyer]

I think you’re just running into a barrier that inherently exists with video compression.

Part of video compression depends on the fact that under normal circumstances the entire background of a shot doesn’t completely change from frame to frame. There are instances where this isn’t the case (concerts, sports, fast motion) but for a lot of the footage out there this holds true – interviews, dialogue, product demonstrations, screen captures, etc.

Compression algorithms take advantage of this by sending a “keyframe” or a complete frame, then the next several frames note what has changed since the last keyframe. The frames that are all children ofof the parent “keyframe” are referred to as a “group of pictures.” Codecs that use this kind of scheme are referred to as “Long GOP” codecs – long group of pictures codecs. I would recommend a Google search on the topic if you aren’t familiar.

With video at 800% the background changes much more than normal, so the MPEG4 algorithm can’t keep up. There are few things you can try:

• Deliver in a codec that isn’t long-GOP – ProRes, Animation, Uncompressed. You’ll pay a severe file size penalty this way, but the target will get a near perfect (or perfect) copy of your video.
• Turn your bitrate up and keep your keyframe interval at automatic. Youtube/Vimeo still have their set bitrate they’re going to use no matter what you deliver, but their output will never be better than your input.
• You might play around with some blurs on the fast motion. If the algorithm has fewer edges to worry about it might handle things a bit better. Consequently, you might see macroblocking where there should be smooth gradients. If I had to guess, it won’t be much different, but it might be worth a try if nothing else is working.

I work in sports. When we compress quick pans against a noisy stadium background the limits of compression fiend us all the time.

[Jeff Meyer]

Cloning won’t work. The software looks for duplicates of the same serial number while it’s running. Sometimes I forget I have Final Cut open on my desktop and try to open it on my laptop. Fail.

In addition, that isn’t an honest way to do business.