You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Best Computer specs for HD footage editing.

Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 7:20am

Post 1 of 41

nitrox

Force: 105 | Joined: 27th Dec 2007 | Posts: 160

Member

Hi Guys,

I was wondering if anyone would be able to give me some advice about what I should consider when buying my new computer. The computer will be aimed at HD video editing and post production. I have come to realise that my new 550D is amazing and that my current computer is in fact, pants.

Obviously I will be going for a lot of RAM and a s*it load of disk space, but I wonder what is my best choice for mother board, Processor, and graphics card.

Maybe this information might also come in handy for other Fxhomers as we have a trend of people switching to higher spec cameras (550D, 7D) but no thread on supportive systems to compliment the camera?

Any help would be greatly appreciated

Dan.
Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 7:24am

Post 2 of 41

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You're going to want an i7, that's for sure.
Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 8:19am

Post 3 of 41

nitrox

Force: 105 | Joined: 27th Dec 2007 | Posts: 160

Member

I've just spent the past 20 mins looking at the i7, that thing is a beast. with a beastly price tag too! However saying that I do think that it will be the one to go for, so thanks for the advice Ben.

I'm also wondering what other upgrades i will need to make as im sure you cant slap an i7 on any old mother board. I'm guessing other components will need upgrading too?
Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 9:43am

Post 4 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

The only bits you'll want to keep will probably be the case and keyboard, so you may as well go for an all new system - cheaper than adding bits at retail price.

Basically you will need all higher end components to get the most out of them, so go for the best package you can get for $x00. The most important bits of the package will be processor, RAM, OS, Storage, Monitor, software (in no particular order). There is no ideal system, but plenty of pretty good ones. If you're spending quite small or want an easy life, a 32-bit OS is fine. If you want to use more than 4GB RAM go 64-bit and accept a few minor niggles with compatibility. Probably worth having a decent video card, but it needn't be staggering unless you're a heavy gamer. Software choice will be crucial as a lot of software runs single-threaded, and that means it will only ever use one core of your processor, no matter how many cores you've got. Keep your eyes peeled for multithreaded software to make best use of your machine.

DVStudio is waaaaay more up on this than I am , but those are my thoughts for what they're worth.
Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 10:15am

Post 5 of 41

nitrox

Force: 105 | Joined: 27th Dec 2007 | Posts: 160

Member

Yeah, I agree with you completly Pdrg, I'm looking at Adobe CS5 as premier and after effects have been designed for a 64bit OS. I already run windows 7 ultimate which is great, I just want a bit more "umph" to my system.

I think i will only need to upgrade my tower, as I already have a sweet samsung monitor and sound system for the PC. I guess my price range is upto around $2000 for the tower. Hopefully that should cover me.
Posted: Sat, 19th Jun 2010, 6:35pm

Post 6 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

In which case, 4 core, 64-bit, upper-mid range graphics card (2 graphics cards? Or one with 2 outputs? Allows you multiple monitors so one to watch the film itself, one for the app/controls), plenty of USB ports (USB3 if there is an option - not many devices supporting it yet but you'll be grateful one day if it's not much more - it's like 10x the speed. 500G disc is probably fine, but you can extend later, or use external drives via that USB3 wink If you go 64bit, make sure you've got slots to extend the RAM. RAM is always cheaper in the future, so upgrade only if 4GB isn't enough. Just another collection of thoughts actually, but if they're useful, they're all yours smile
Posted: Sun, 20th Jun 2010, 12:16am

Post 7 of 41

DVStudio

Force: 4983 | Joined: 22nd Nov 2007 | Posts: 1845

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Yo, great thoughts guys. I'd echo most of what PDRG said, solid advice as always man. As for the computer, my thoughts would almost certainly lie with the i5/i7 line up of CPUs. I mention i5 if the budget is an issue, because they are both superior processors. I happen to own one of each, albeit the i7 one is my mobile computer, and it's a beast.

Very important to remember is to get high speed DDR3 RAM- the i7 and i5 lines are tanks because of their RAM speed. Slap 4-6 GB of DDR3 RAM @ 1333 MHz or 1600 MHz and your golden. If your programs work (and the Adobe Creative Suites do) with a 64-bit OS, go with Windows 7 Premium or a version of Vista.

As far as video card(s) are concerned, I have found the moderately price Nvidia GeForce 9800GTX to be a great option for enthusiast gamers and for HD editing. I have a pair of them in my desktop and paired with the i5 Quad, it is wonderful. That's really all the power you need, and then some. I hooked up two monitors and a projector to it, and it runs great.

Hard drives- make sure you have enough space, although 500-750 gigs is plenty for now. Keep in mind that it is sometimes quite nice to have a seperate boot drive for the OS and programs (maybe SSD if budgets allow). if you go that route, SSDs are notoriously bad for video editing and rendering. Slow write speeds but amazing read speeds. Not a necessity, just a nice touch. wink They can always be added internally later or just slap on the external drives using the USB3 (as PDRG says) or even eSATA which is becoming mainstream on many motherboards for the time being until USB 3.0 takes off. Many boards include a PCI unit with 3-4 USB3 ports on them which is quite convenient. Also be sure to get Firewire if you have an HDV camera.

Also, check out my Building a PC Guide here on FXHome for detailed tutorials on everything from building a PC to installing the operating system. There's also a specific post with links to other topics where I've covered HD editing in more depth.

Happy computer shopping.

Cheers,
DV

Esdit: 2 grand is a very generous budget, no problems there. (Jokingly), have you seen the 6 core CPUs? smile
Posted: Sun, 20th Jun 2010, 6:41am

Post 8 of 41

nitrox

Force: 105 | Joined: 27th Dec 2007 | Posts: 160

Member

So much useful information here guys. DVstudio, thanks bro a lot of really useful things there for me to chew over. I'd +1 both you and pdrg if i could. I guess a fictional beer will have to do. Cheers!
Posted: Sun, 20th Jun 2010, 10:45am

Post 9 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Sterling advice there from DVStudio, sounds like you've got a good system in the making, nitrox. And perfect weather for that virtual beer, too smile
Posted: Sun, 20th Jun 2010, 1:38pm

Post 10 of 41

DVStudio

Force: 4983 | Joined: 22nd Nov 2007 | Posts: 1845

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

nitrox wrote:

I guess a fictional beer will have to do. Cheers!
Absolutely. Cheers to you too mate wink
Posted: Sun, 20th Jun 2010, 10:23pm

Post 11 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

The most important aspect to any editing platform isn't graphics cards (most modern gpus will have 2 outputs), processor or ram - it's the hard drive. Because it doesn't matter how fast your computer might be, the drives will only spin so fast and data will only be read off them at a certain speed.

This doesn't invalidate any of the current advice you've been given, aside from that you need an i7 - you don't. But simply, looking a raid drive configuration. If you can dramatically increase the speed you can read files it really allows for the advantages that come with a better cpu/more ram.

Buuut, given that the 550D files aren't so bad if you encode them to a decent format to edit with then a huge amount of upgrading might not be in order. This is why offline editing exists - create a much smaller, lower quality proxy to edit with, then swap in the full res files when you're done and refine it in an "online edit" and it solves most problems that accompany editing HD.

-Matt
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 3:34am

Post 12 of 41

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, but- no disrespect- offline editing sucks ass. So does trans/encoding. So does half-assing what you're doing because you won't take the plunge.

Now I'm not saying 'go spend money!', but if the man's after some new spec- saying 'you could always offline edit' just sound awful- to me, at least. Which I know isn't how it's supposed to sound, and it is helpful/mindful advice to mention. Just sayin'.

Also, I work on a beast of a computer with 5 hard-drives at different speeds/qualities and run into relatively little problems with slowed processing or changes, so personally I would be more mindful of your RAM, processor, and graphics card- and how those are going to work in-conjunction with eachother- than I would what hard-drive you're using. By far.

But again, that's just me. My buddy who built the computer just swapped out two of the hdd's in our editing computer (nicknamed Speed Racer, because it's unparalleled-ed-ly fast and used on all the videoraces wink) for ones we got from a burnt-out old Dell- and, again, I've run into relatively little/no slowing or changes in performance.

The one thing hdd-wise I would caution towards is SATA and what kind you're going to get. Some of them wearing out and down unimaginably fast. Or so I've seen.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 12:06pm

Post 13 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Atom wrote:

Yeah, but- no disrespect- offline editing sucks ass. So does trans/encoding. So does half-assing what you're doing because you won't take the plunge.
I guess my years of experience as a runner for some pretty major edit facilities (Ahem, the BBC) count for nothing then. Offline editing exists as a standard part of the film and TV industries - because it makes sense and doesn't require expensive upgrades.

My experience also suggests that nothing sucks more than wasting money unnecessary, and the idea that expensive equipment makes good films. Spend the money on equipment - Lenses and Lighting. Editing is easy when you've planned well and shot the right footage.

The Sata issue of drive burnout is another reason a lot of facilities use Raid setups - the data constantly being read and written off them means they wear out faster than you would expect them to at home, but having say - 2 drives striped and then mirrored means if one drive goes, you can replace and rebuild it without losing data.

-Matt

Last edited Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 2:37pm; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 2:31pm

Post 14 of 41

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Yeah, the "throw money at it" strategy isn't often the best one when it comes to indie filmmaking. smile
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 3:38pm

Post 15 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

http://www.lacie.com/us/products/range.htm?id=10061

You can get RAID external drives, with the benefits of portability and mirroring (RAID1) too.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 8:20pm

Post 16 of 41

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Atom wrote:

Yeah, but- no disrespect- offline editing sucks ass.
Atom, Atom, Atom... What ever will we do with you?

Trust me, as you get older and start working on more complex projects, you'll understand why offline editing is a *vital* piece of the jigsaw. Maybe when you're making one short film every few months, it's not that important - but when you're churning out content day in, day out, you'll find that an offline is basically the only way you can get things done. It's an established system which is there for a very good reason.

I agree with Matt about not needing to upgrade to the latest, greatest systems to edit HD effectively. An offline/online edit will mean that you don't have to break the bank. Getting into the headspace of offline/online editing will also future-proof your editing skills, and make you much more employable - and there's never been a more competitive job market in the industry, ever. Now I know that not everyone who edits as a hobby is going to want to get into it as a profession - but for those that do, anything that will give you the edge over the competition is totally worth it. Most edit facilities will have their own kit worth hundreds of thousands, so forking out for your own beast of a machine isn't that much of an advantage when applying for a job - compared to say, someone who has a working knowledge of the way professional editing works.

All imho, of course!

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Mon, 21st Jun 2010, 10:49pm

Post 17 of 41

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

I guess my years of experience as a runner for some pretty major edit facilities (Ahem, the BBC) count for nothing then. Offline editing exists as a standard part of the film and TV industries - because it makes sense and doesn't require expensive upgrades.
Yeah, but something to think about if you're an auteur is that an online edit, whilst potentially more expensive at time of purchase, allows you to see the quality of the film you're editing that you, ostensibly, made.

Doing hired editing work for others at a constant pace and editing on larger formats (scanned 16mm, RED 4k, etc) is a different task entirely, but shooting your own short films and/or feature projects you may find that a system that can handle an online edit is what you want.

Personally, at Atomic Productions home-base, we enjoy editing raw, untranscoded HD files on our beastly machine. It didn't cost us very much to assemble, and we get to see the full quality, real time grading on our raw footage as we're editing. That's something that, if you're into further developing your 'production company' and who you are as a filmmaker/auteur, is pretty indispensible.

Doubtless, come July 6th, when we begin to shoot a feature on the RED w/ Mysterium X, the editing will be handled using the QT proxies roughly, then exporting EDL to be rendered/mastered in either an AutoDesk or Avid system at school. But even then, having a computer that can ALREADY handle 2K HD (even if they're proxies) is still a huge advantage. Because, face it, if you're doing BIG industry stuff, you're probably not using Final Cut, you're using Avid. Maybe Smoke and Lustre. And not on a system you could ever, ever buy. So........yeah offline is all good to make money. But employable in what 'industry'? The TV industry? Editing local/regional commercials?

All I'm saying is that if you want to be a stronger filmmaker, think more personal and less commercial. You will get farther in your craft. While not as employable, you may just become more talented. And, after that, being employable comes easier.

Industry experience I would say doesn't matter as much - it's pretty much down to whether or not the computer does what you want it to. Having worked in the graphic design industry for about 2 years, I can say that while it's nice to have others who like to work in Quark on Linux machines, me working in Illustrator and Photoshop on Vista still is my most comfortable workflow that produces, from the offices that I've worked in, better results than those other guys.

I'm not saying don't do things the 'employable way'. Just, if you want to produce YOUR OWN STUFF to a certain quality (which, granted, is sacrificing potential professional versatility) an offline system is not the best idea.

Just my 2 cents!
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 10:07am

Post 18 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Just for clarification - the proxies are not 2k - that's the very offline/online workflow the guys are referring to. You edit the proxies and conform the 2k version (which is effectively 1080p with a few extra horizontal percent anyway smile )
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 4:28pm

Post 19 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm not sure what you're getting at Ben, you're flat our disagreeing with both me and Arktic and then declaring, quite clearly that you'll be using the exact workflow we advised in the near future.

Sounds like you're half assing it because you don't want to take the plunge razz

Nothing about offline editing implies you can't see your edit at full quality - the edit doesn't change, even if the image is lower resolution. Grading and Finishing come later, online when the bulk of the work is done. But, if you're happy working slowly at full res because you feel it's important to your artistic process, stick with it.

However, I hope you're not working with files natively off of the 550D. They're bloated, slow to read files - if you're not transcoding these to a lossless codec to edit (online) with then something at Atomic Productions parents house/HQ needs to change. There are plenty of articles online about this you can find easily.

-Matt

p.s. 2K Proxies? See pdrg's post above.
p.p.s. Also note - there's a chance your NLE is displaying proxies of your footage anyway. It may be down-rezzing on the fly, in which case if you use proxies you may see little/no quality difference and still get a speed boost.
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 4:32pm

Post 20 of 41

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

In my experience, speed is vastly more important than image quality during editing. Sure, you need to be able to check that a shot is in focus, but beyond that the core thing you need is a responsive timeline, so that you can easily check cuts and edit with frame accuracy.

Full res, super duper quality is only needed once you hit the grading and VFX stage, really.

Having said that, during our 48 hour contest we actually didn't have time to convert the 550D footage, so had to work natively with it, which was seriously painful in Premiere. In the end, it was hard to judge whether we lost as much time doing it that way as we would have if we'd just let the files batch convert over first.
Posted: Tue, 22nd Jun 2010, 11:16pm

Post 21 of 41

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'll just stay out of this as I (clearly) don't edit like you guys do. Talking about 'when you get older' or 'when you work with/on so-and-so' I don't think really matters when we're talking brass tax about a guy just wanting something that will work best for (what I assume) are just his own things/movies.

But like I said, I obviously go a different route working on stuff, so. unsure
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 1:44am

Post 22 of 41

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

To clairfy, I'm saying that on our computer we can edit 2K footage natively, in limited RGB colorspace, and master to 2K in the end without conforming - because the footage is 2K to start. The proxies are created in-camera using the metadata from the RAW as a guide for what data (white balance, contrast) is included in the RGB profile.

So yeah, I could also edit r3d files natively in Vegas on our computer at 4K. Here, offline editing is a wiser idea but my bottom line is that our computer was still cheap to assemble with an i7 and a ton of RAM, and has THE ABILITY to do things like edit our T2i footage RAW, with no slowness in editing or playback; or edit 2K just to produce a SXSW film at print quality all on one machine.

Say what you want, but what we have works and we know what we're doing. With the T2i, using raw footage isn't bad because of slowness in workflow, but because the NLE is likely to misinterpret the native h.264. In this case, we would gain better, more dynamic range footage by actually converting to ProRes. And we still need to find a good program to convert this without loss, quickly, yes. But for now our machine can handle things professionally for others, and our own DSLR and RED footage.

Industry or not, advice is apt - fantastically fast machines with i7's can deal with a LOT of things if you invest a little money.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 2:06am

Post 23 of 41

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

CS5 can edit H.264 natively. That would be nice, but I don't mind converting with Compressor.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 3:05am

Post 24 of 41

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

One thing about T2i and 7D footage though, because Vegas 9 edits it natively as well, is that you actually do get more image fidelity upon conversion to ProRes or other high-end format. All I've tried so far is NeoScene transcoding to avi (non-ProRes profile) and I liked editing the raw h.264 better over that (in both CS5 and Vegas 9).

But watch the Zacuto shootout, even ASC/BSC guys were surprised that transcoding yielded BETTER files. Crazy.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 3:12am

Post 25 of 41

DVStudio

Force: 4983 | Joined: 22nd Nov 2007 | Posts: 1845

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:


Industry or not, advice is apt - fantastically fast machines with i7's can deal with a LOT of things if you invest a little money.
Exactly. I’m with Ben/Atom/PDRG on this one.

The whole point of having a super fast computer is so that you don’t need to use proxies or converted video files in the first place. The computer can, and is designed, in such a way that you can edit the full, uncompressed file (NLE permitting) from the T2i or the 2K RED footage, whatever. If you put a bit of money up front (and it’s not that expensive if you build it yourself- completely custom, any parts/brands you want), the i7 stocked with some fast DDR3 RAM will handle anything you throw at it. The time you could potentially save using this system with compressed or proxy files is pointless because it would take longer to convert everything and then render it out in a better resolution than if you stuck with it from the start.

It makes no sense for someone starting out to want to get involved with proxies and down converted footage. Just make it simple and he’ll have a computer that can be used for gaming, editing, anything. He’s got a great budget, don’t influence him to purchase something that isn’t as great to save a buck with more work attached. That’s my 2p. If you haven’t used an i7 or i5 CPU then you of course are going to make conclusions like that. With the i7 you *don’t* want to use proxies. The raw power of these CPUs is unbelievable. Period. Don't get me wrong, everyone contributed helpful advice, I just think that here you may be mistaken.

For what it's worth,
DV
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 4:22pm

Post 26 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

DVStudio wrote:

It makes no sense for someone starting out to want to get involved with proxies and down converted footage. Just make it simple and he’ll have a computer that can be used for gaming, editing, anything.
Fair point. I don't think it a necessity to conform to whatever is the industry standards - that's not the basis of my argument away from that the offline concept is widely adopted because it works. But I do advocate saving money so that it can be spent on making your films look good.

Ultimately, the editing process is an invisible step in your film making. Get an edit right, which can be done on almost any level of computer, using proxies or not - and your audience will only be paying attention to the image.

And if you've spent all your money on an amazing machine that can edit raw files, albeit not as quickly or smoothly as it would proxies, and this has meant you can't afford good lighting equipment, sound equipment, lenses, interesting props, actors - then jumping into the deep end is all for nothing.

There's nothing wrong with Ben/Atom's workflow, but I don't really doubt mine is faster and yields the same results for less money, as well as teaches you more about the professional editing process (which may or may not interest you). Examine your intentions with film making and the amount of money your future projects will require, and how they might be affected either positively or negatively by spending big on a machine now - then make the decision that makes sense for you.

-Matt

p.s. If I haven't used an i7? Pleeeease. Have you forgotton where I work?

Last edited Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 4:29pm; edited 3 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 4:28pm

Post 27 of 41

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Yeah, while it's great that some of you guys can afford top-spec i7 machines, that's not the case for a large portion of filmmakers, for whom conserving money is vastly more important than having real-time HD playback.

If you've got the cash, then go for it. But, then, if you've got that much cash every decision you make is going to be a whole lot easier. smile Where things get interesting is when people don't have money, and have to get clever.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 4:52pm

Post 28 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

Tarn wrote:

Yeah, while it's great that some of you guys can afford top-spec i7 machines, that's not the case for a large portion of filmmakers, for whom conserving money is vastly more important than having real-time HD playback.
True, but worth noting that professional studios often run on extremely fast machines - I've worked in places equipped with the highest level of equipment, with render farms and raid network drive setups way beyond what I could afford at home - And in every place, the workflow is used because it is the fastest and most effective. Was it a sincere consideration that I wouldn't have worked on an i7? Pleeeease! smile

It doesn't matter what the system *can* do, but how it can achieve the same end results, faster or more fluidly. Whatever machine you buy, you'll see benefits by working with smaller files.

Getting clever with your film making isn't something you should have to be forced into. It should be something you practice all the time, every time.
Posted: Wed, 23rd Jun 2010, 6:27pm

Post 29 of 41

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

rolleyes

I haven't seen you so repeatedly pull the industry card in a thread here since, well, the first time you pulled it. smile

All I'm speaking from is experience. I don't work for BBC in render farms, and I haven't edited a professional feature- but that also makes me a more apt candidate for 'average joe' advice, doesn't it? I mean, I do my fair share of editing on my fair share of different projects. Maybe I know what I'm talking about and am not just blowing hot air out of my ass, ya know? wink

Just something to think about. I'm not speaking out of ignorance or retaliation to get some guy to overspend- I'm just speaking on behalf of what has worked best for me as a guy who edits his own movies. To play the 'oh, I'm sorry-last time I checked I WAS THE ONE WHO KNEW MORE' sort of line right off the bat was really assy, too. But you already knew that. wink
Posted: Thu, 24th Jun 2010, 2:00pm

Post 30 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Atom wrote:

All I'm speaking from is experience.
Me too. But Apparently I broke some sort of rule in doing so.
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 7:27am

Post 31 of 41

nitrox

Force: 105 | Joined: 27th Dec 2007 | Posts: 160

Member

After reading all the advice here, I think I would have to side with Atom. I dont think that Hybrid is wrong, However for my needs I think offline editing would be something I would look into at a later date.

Right now, as Atom said "I'm an avarage Joe" looking for a better than avarage setup.

Thanks for all the advice everyone, some of it has been exactly what i needed, some of it taught me something new, and learning is always good!

Nice one Guys

Dan.
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 8:36am

Post 32 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Nitrox, glad you got what you wanted and have made a decision you're happy with, but it's worth taking heed of the other camp too, if only to help you understand the process you're getting into.

This time, technology may come to the rescue, throwing hardware at a problem until it is diminished enough to not impact you too badly. Hardware vendors love this approach, of course, as there will always be another round of heavy lifting to be done, and so they sell their premium lines. Of course, as opposed to heavy lifting, you could use pulleys and tracks etc to shift the heavy load (a cheaper processor and offline/online workflow in this analogy), but it requires a bit more planning/thought than just sheer muscle power. Some say that's a smarter use of resources, others like to buy cutting-edge with the premium price and performance. Neither is wrong, neither is right per se. Times change, technology shifts - we no longer need a Steenbeck and no longer work on onelight workprints. What once took a render farm is now done in realtime in a cheap games console.

Of course, the offline/online workflow has many advantages - it can be done on a domestic laptop, you can edit on the loo, you use exactly the same workflow for 3D or shooting/conforming 35mm, etc. Many (most?) NLE's use this workflow anyway as H.264 is not an editing codec (it's designed to play forwards, not backwards, and in editing you *need* backwards!), and as Ben mentioned, working with proxies (so not the raw footage, but a low-res version). So this time, technology to the rescue - but if you don't own shares in Intel you may want to look at how workflows can save you buying premium hardware in the future. In the meantime, you'll have a rockin' system which will last you a good few years smile Have fun!
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 9:14am

Post 33 of 41

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

pdrg wrote:

technology may come to the rescue, throwing hardware at a problem until it is diminished enough to not impact you too badly. Hardware vendors love this approach, of course, as there will always be another round of heavy lifting to be done, and so they sell their premium lines.
Hey, now. I know you're just offering some cautionary advice- but watch the way you're wording yourself there, pdrg. There's nothing wrong, unimaginative, or 'throwing hardware (or money, more-appropriately) at the problem' sort of ignorant about wanting good specs for everyday things. You can buy a great computer that does everything you need- without having to 'be creative' (which I think is a whole other kind of silly condescension, not on your part, just in-general rolleyes ) or cut corners still, in the grand scheme of things, for relatively cheap.

There's no need, from anybody, to treat that like it's blindly throwing something at a problem because you can't otherwise figure out or are lazy. Such is not the case.

I dunno, I feel like I'm pretty creative with how I work and edit, and that I regularly do completed things- not technical bits, not monotonous work, but actual little projects. No, nothing terribly big- but enough to where I know I enjoy online editing and have the power to do it. And that's not ridiculous or bad of me to do. When did we go from a point of telling people what is the best and what we use to telling people how to settle? Again, I dunno- I know I'm just rambling. I just feel like on here it's become these polarities of either offering grossly expensive overkill of advice, or something completely settled and safe. Just something I feel like I've noticed that frustrates me.

Also:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Atom wrote:

All I'm speaking from is experience.
Me too. But Apparently I broke some sort of rule in doing so.

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Atom wrote:

Yeah, but- no disrespect- offline editing sucks ass. So does trans/encoding. So does half-assing what you're doing because you won't take the plunge.
I guess my years of experience as a runner for some pretty major edit facilities (Ahem, the BBC) count for nothing then.

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Apparently I broke some sort of rule in doing so.
Yeah, you did. You got all snooty and high-and-mighty, even if you didn't realize it. The moment you responded you tried to be elitist in a snarky 'I guess my....count for nothing' sort of way. And hey, again, maybe you didn't realize it. But there it is.

Or am I being 'classic playbook of overly sensitive and hotheaded' like 'ol Atom always is, again, and just speaking from ignorance? wink
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 9:35am

Post 34 of 41

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Atom wrote:

Or am I being 'classic playbook of overly sensitive and hotheaded' like 'ol Atom always is, again, and just speaking from ignorance? wink
You're not speaking from ignorance, but you do have a remarkable ability to find fault and see conspiracy and criticism in anything anybody says. smile

pdrg's comment were perfectly valid and I didn't read them as a dig against anybody in the slightest.
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 12:31pm

Post 35 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Atom wrote:

There's nothing wrong, unimaginative, or 'throwing hardware (or money, more-appropriately) at the problem' sort of ignorant about wanting good specs for everyday things.

There's no need, from anybody, to treat that like it's blindly throwing something at a problem because you can't otherwise figure out or are lazy. Such is not the case.
I wasn't just referring to home users with a bit of cash to build a new system, rather more the general case, say if you've got a data farm and want more power or to consolidate, or add more apps, or whatever. It's a real-world problem with big implications. Adding more hardware may be the right answer, and I think I mentioned neither side being right or wrong. But it may also be used as a patch to a problem where the problem is greater. Take that data farm instance - is the business managing its capacity well enough already? Do they really just need a surge in processing power once every 4 weeks for a payroll system (so non-critical apps could be shelved for a day) or could some smart load balancing work. Could the heavy lifting be processed overnight, not in core business hours when the networks are saturated. You get the idea, it's planning for economical use as opposed to just peak use (which leaves a lot of processing/whatever power unused and wasted, which is a shame if it's costing money).

You're smart, you can see how basing an infrastructure around peak usage is not always the best way to go. It could be electricity generation, internet download capacity, etc - there's often an advantage to spreading peak loads, and that may extend to editing too...

I dunno, I feel like I'm pretty creative with how I work and edit, and that I regularly do completed things- not technical bits, not monotonous work, but actual little projects. No, nothing terribly big- but enough to where I know I enjoy online editing and have the power to do it. And that's not ridiculous or bad of me to do. When did we go from a point of telling people what is the best and what we use to telling people how to settle?
Lazy, ridiculous, bad, settle? Dude, I don't remember saying those things! Those words have connotations that were absolutely not intended. I'm happy Nitrox has got the information and has made a decision he's happy with. That totally rocks. It's awesome news. Why would I think he's lazy because he's able to get a good computer?

I do remember saying how technological advances move things along, and how that can change the game or change historical workflows. That's totally *pro* your argument in this case.

I did also mention how an offline/online workflow can have advantages, and so be a useful thing to at least understand. I think FXHome community has often taken effort to help people who may read these threads how to get a great bang-for-buck (aka 'settle'?) with the HV20/30/40 as opposed to insisting on HDCAM-SR, for instance. Or Vegas vs a Quantel EQ. That's an extreme case, of course, but it's still the same ethos. How to get good results if you haven't got a few grand to drop on the 'best'!
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 1:35pm

Post 36 of 41

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Easy now pdrg, Atom doesn't like it when you speak from experience. Especially if that experience involves working in the industry.

Just chiming in to say I'm glad nitrox has made a decision he's happy with, and also to congratulate pdrg on making such a diplomatic analogy. razz

-Matt
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 7:45pm

Post 37 of 41

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I just don't like it when big pages are written about validation of an opinion and or experience instead of practicality of advice, is all. Like when someone says 'oh, you're gonna wanna go with the so-and-so, no question about it' and validates it with some long statement on their usage (which is great, don't get me wrong) but then completely sideswipes/dogs a different option because their experience favors another way. Sort of like how I use Vegas- yeah, I think it works best and would recommend it to many other people as the best choice in my opinion; but I'm not so stupid to think that Final Cut isn't equally as powerful and still a great option for many people, you know?

The only fairly decent and defensible exceptions to this are, ironically, when it comes to overwhelmingly-acceptable cameras, I feel. Of which, again, I have been a big proponent of 'selling' on here myself. (The GL2 and now T2i- two great and blindly-obvious choices of their respective times) But even then, I acknowledge I should offer more options in my advice.

Anywho, it's just something that's been on my mind, is all. Pdrg, I wasn't basing what I said on your comments solely (as I think I mentioned in my previous post), just on a trend I see lately on the forums. At the end of the day I see no conspiracy- I know everyone is trying to help. I'm just voicing some of my frustrations from what I see as (somewhat) clouded opinions. Of course mine is no different and I'm equally part of the problem- I'm just noting it. smile

Also, agreed- glad nitrox found what he wanted/works for him. That is, undoubtedly, what all of us want from this thread: nitrox to find what works best for him.

Good good.
Posted: Fri, 25th Jun 2010, 11:54pm

Post 38 of 41

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Atom wrote:

I just don't like it when ... [someone] completely sideswipes/dogs a different option because their experience favors another way. Sort of like how I use Vegas- yeah, I think it works best and would recommend it to many other people as the best choice in my opinion; but I'm not so stupid to think that Final Cut isn't equally as powerful and still a great option for many people, you know?
Sorry to jump back in on this when it's all fairly settled - but I just want to point out that you did basically sideswipe the whole offline/online process because your experience favours working online-only... Or maybe I just read 'offline editing sucks ass' wrong? wink

Ok, I'll quit bitching razz, but in all seriousness I think it's a bit odd for you to get on the defensive at Matt and PDRG when you've basically done the same thing to the guys who recommend something that you don't endorse.

Anyhow, PDRG has basically summed up the discussion in a concise and accurate manner than any of the rest of us could smile Neither way is 'right' or 'wrong'. There's more than one way to skin a cat and all that smile

And to the OP, glad you've made your decision and the discussion has been useful!

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Sat, 26th Jun 2010, 12:24am

Post 39 of 41

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

But there isn't more than one way to skin a cat- it totally depends on what breed. I mean, you should know that! biggrin
Posted: Sat, 26th Jun 2010, 12:34am

Post 40 of 41

nitrox

Force: 105 | Joined: 27th Dec 2007 | Posts: 160

Member

pdrg wrote:

Nitrox, glad you got what you wanted and have made a decision you're happy with, but it's worth taking heed of the other camp too, if only to help you understand the process you're getting into.
You are very right Pdrg, and to be honest I'd never considered offline editing before this thread was started. This thread has not only helped me form my choice for what is right for me in the here and now, but also its given me something to think about for the future.

Also don't worry...... I never thought you were saying I was lazy or anything else.

Once again thanks for all the advice from everyone, even though your opinions have sometimes clashed, the different points of view have been great for me to consider...... and provided some mild amusement. razz
Posted: Sat, 26th Jun 2010, 9:48am

Post 41 of 41

pdrg

Force: 5405 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 4143

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Atom wrote:

But there isn't more than one way to skin a cat- it totally depends on what breed. I mean, you should know that! biggrin
Funnily enough a friend who has a Quantel EQ in Soho, offering an excellent onlining service, has a company named 'Cat Skinners'. If you ever need a world-class online and grade, etc (he did the camera test Blu-Ray for the British Society of Cinematographers - it had to be amazingly accurate, he's very good!), try Cat Skinners. Really lovely bloke, too. And his brother wrote Fatal Attraction and invented the whole 'Bunny Boiler' concept. Funny, small world.

Ps - I heard the other half of the saying fairly recently - There's more than one way to skin a cat - it depends if you want to keep the fur or the meat.

PPs - Nitrox, you're sorted, that's what counts smile