Rick Lang
Forum Replies Created
-
[Herb Sevush] “As a non attendee it seemed that Black magic once again had the most interesting new products. The Ursa Mini looks very interesting for the money, as does the mini 4K cameras – we use a remote high angle camera for shooting down into high sided pots during cooking and these would be perfect when we move to 4K (not this year.) Resolve 12 looks closer to being a competitive NLE as opposed to an editing module inside of grading software.
“I agree with Herb’s highlights. I’m in the process of of ordering the 5 lbs URSA Mini 4.6K (EF mount for me due to the cost of PL lenses and lack of accessibility to rent PL in my small town). Probably going with a more modest set of Rokinon Cine DS lenses (T2.2 16mm, T1.5 24mm, T1.5 35mm, T1.5 50mm, T1.5 85mm, T2.2 135mm).
Herb, I think you are referring to the Blackmagic Micro Studio Camera, BMMMSC:
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicmicrostudiocamera4kRick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
Set your project timeline setting to 24 fps before you import. Then the frames shot at 60 fps will lay down on the 24 fps track as you want, playback at 24 fps from the project timeline.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
[Andy Neil] “Is it wrong for me to be more excited about the curves than the wheels?
Andy”
Andy, I can’t speak for everyone, but some of us cavemen may be hard-wired to prefer the fairer sex to fast cars. So no, you’re not wrong if that’s what you mean!
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
He was running the entry-level 6-core Mac Pro with D500s I believe, which lists for $4K. My memory (haven’t wanted to sit through the video twice) was 16 GB RAM, 256 GB flash (which he calls SSD, for shame as the PCIe flash is better than the SATA SSD).
I expected the H.264 transcoding on the iMac to beat the 6-core Mac Pro as has been well documented elsewhere due to QuickSync. It was a little surprising to see the iMac beat the entry-level 6-core Mac Pro on most of his ProRes transcodes except when the going got heavier.
I think everyone here has a healthy regard for the amazing 5K Retina iMac considering the Mac Pro screen is arguably non-existent or limited to 4K as an add-on.
A fully tricked out busy 6-core Mac Pro very likely will trump a loaded busy iMac (okay forget about H.264 for a moment) but I think for many the iMac does a great job as we often hear from those using it. I think the differences were minimized as well because he was using FCP X that has been tuned for these machines. It would have been more interesting if he had added DaVinci Resolve in the mix at which point I suspect the loaded 6-core Mac Pro would be pulling away from the iMac. Still I think he did a decent test all in all.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
David, over the years there has been discussion about using the iPad to assist editing or as a control surface. Here’s an article about TouchEdit, which is in the App Store (free, lite, full version integrates with FCP X), but you can search for other references:
https://library.creativecow.net/kaufman_debra/TouchEdit-iPad-Editing_Lebental/1There is also ProCutX and CTLR+Console in the App Store which may be closer to what you may be interested in.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
You are using anamorphic lenses which squeeze the image horizontally. The monitor on the Blackmagic camera does not have an option to unsqueeze the image but you can add an electronic viewfinder (EVF) that does support a 2x or 1.33x unsqueeze to match the squeeze of the anamorphic lenses to help with your image framing. Also in DaVinci Resolve, you can unsquuze the image. Refer to the Resolve manual. Hope this points you in the right direction.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
The 8-core new Mac Pro should be able to digest your raw 4K CinemaDNG in DaVinci Resolve. For those who have the option of working on both the iMac 5K and the new Mac Pro, I do think the iMac would be a pleasure to use as the FCP X edit machine,
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
David, I don’t think Peter Chamberlain has commented on the iMac 5K 2014 yet, but as you probably know the recently updated Configuration Guide for Mac does not recommend a tricked-out iMac 2013 for 4K. He recommends a minimum of an 8-core Mac Pro with dual D700 GPUs for 4K. This iMac 5K at maximum configuration may well prove to be on the borderline of acceptable for ProRes 4K footage if not a lot of post effects. Especially for short work that can use the 1TB internal flash storage. The renders for h.264 deliverables will be accelerated by the Intel Quick Sync feature, but I have been told that is only used for a single-pass.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
Juan, I agree with your observations and the maximum of 4GB of GPU VRAM may end up being a limiting factor for the iMac to tackle 4K data effectively. Still we know for HD video, many people currently use the old high-end iMacs and this new iteration does appear to be impressive for that segment of the market. I think if you’re doing demanding work and certainly when it applies to 4K, the 8 core new Mac Pro is still a requisite.
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB
-
A few things do make that iMac maxed out fairly competitive:
– the computer comes with a free factory calibrated 5K monitor albeit probably still 8bit colour;
– the R9 M295X 4GB GPU provides an amazing 3.5 teraflops (same as the D700s;
– the four-core i7 starts at 4GHz and of course multi-threads and is turbo charged to 4.4GHz compared to the eight-core 3.0GHz multi-thread new Mac Pro; and
– intel Quick Sync does offer superior H.264 (also H.265?) decoding and encoding for distribution with no word when the Mac Pro will have that feature.Only downside is the iMac is still Haswell with two new platforms scheduled for release in 2015 so next year that iMac will be cooler and use less power and just as fast at a minimum. So wait for Barefeats to test the new maxed out iMac against a similar new Mac Pro?
Rick Lang
iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB