Jump to content


Photo

what computer do you guys use for Editing


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Wajahat A

Wajahat A

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 11 July 2008 - 11:53 AM

just bought a Canon XL2 and would like to edit my vidoes for a TV show using Avid or Adobe ... my question is what computer should i get ? what configration? because i think a decent Home use PC wont do the job ...

i might build it .. or buy it find a good deal .. but i need to know what processor and video card , and memory do i need ...

i want to create a lot of nice effects in the video ill be editing....

Thanks
  • 0

#2 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7115 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 12 July 2008 - 09:52 AM

Any off the shelf computer now a days (new) will handle DV footage just fine.
PCs will be chepaer, but be careful as there can be reliability issues if you don't take care of it (more fickle to get spyware).
Macs are more expensive, and "better," only inasmuch as they don't get viruses as often.
Adobe is great for going to web with it's integration in CS3 with the macromedia products.
FCP is a de-facto editing system on a mac IMHO and supports most things.
AVID is industry standard, from what I'm told, and Media Composer is supposedly pretty suite. I'd recommend learning avid.
  • 0

#3 Wajahat A

Wajahat A

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 12 July 2008 - 01:59 PM

Any off the shelf computer now a days (new) will handle DV footage just fine.
PCs will be chepaer, but be careful as there can be reliability issues if you don't take care of it (more fickle to get spyware).
Macs are more expensive, and "better," only inasmuch as they don't get viruses as often.
Adobe is great for going to web with it's integration in CS3 with the macromedia products.
FCP is a de-facto editing system on a mac IMHO and supports most things.
AVID is industry standard, from what I'm told, and Media Composer is supposedly pretty suite. I'd recommend learning avid.

so any off the shelf computer PC will be able to handle Avid ?? i thought i need to have specific kind of Videos card... ?
  • 0

#4 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7115 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 12 July 2008 - 03:39 PM

NO, AVID is a special case, but that's the program, not the codec.
AVID does have specific video cards which it works with, consult your avid retailer or the like.
But ant off the shelf PC/Mac could handle a software (such as premier/vegas/fcp/avid (hardware spec accomodating). Just check out the sites for any of those programs and it'll list the minimals system reqs for them.

you'll need a firewire card, just to capture off of a camera/deck as that's how they interface but more computers there days come stock with them.
  • 0

#5 Andres Pardo aka Gral Treegan

Andres Pardo aka Gral Treegan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 176 posts
  • Director
  • Mexico DF

Posted 14 July 2008 - 10:10 PM

i recomend to buy a portable computer. gor for a macbook pro or an alienware, expensives but good for work in all formats.
bye!
GT

Edited by General Treegan, 14 July 2008 - 10:10 PM.

  • 0

#6 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 15 July 2008 - 06:05 AM

I disagree completely. Laptops are expensive, comparatively slow, and expensive and difficult to upgrade. There's a thread open on this forum right now asking about recommendations for an external drive for editing - my recommendation is "don't use an external drive for editing!"

Macbooks are sexy and cool and fashionable and all that stuff, but they're not actually terribly practical devices.

P
  • 0

#7 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 15 July 2008 - 01:57 PM

I'm with Phil. A new desktop MoBo with lots of SATAII plugs on the board is good. Being able to pick and choose/upgrade plug-in boards is an excellent thing as well. I love my old Toshiba laptop. But all laptop's performance makes them the retarded little brother of desktops.
  • 0

#8 Jim Keller

Jim Keller
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 290 posts
  • Producer
  • Fresno, CA

Posted 15 July 2008 - 04:10 PM

I have no complaints with Apple computers running Final Cut Pro. If mobility is important, a MacBook Pro is a fine computer for DV work. If you can give up mobility, the Mac Pro is a very robust machine that is easy to upgrade and will give you much faster performance than a laptop.
  • 0

#9 Tom Hepburn

Tom Hepburn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago-land

Posted 25 July 2008 - 02:19 PM

Another something to consider, I just had some super16 scanned high def (1920x1080). They used the HDV quicktime codec as it's a more reasonable file size (compared to an AVI). I live in Chicago and this film developing and transfers house, does very little HD transferring to formats that will be edited on a PC. This is not a small company either. It's been a real hassle to even look at this footage. I have yet to find a player to play this on a PC and will probably pull my old G4 back out and see if that can handle it. I've used both Macs and PCs and have edited with FCP, AVID, Media 100, and Premier Pro. I know it's expensive (which is why my fastest box is a PC), but I have run into more problems with the format issues lately. If I had the cash, I would go ahead and buy a Mac. My experience is that with a Mac, I can just work and forget about hardware, software, and format issues. I'm sure others have had better experiences with a PC, but this is mine.

Good luck,
Tom
  • 0

#10 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 July 2008 - 04:21 PM

> used the HDV quicktime codec as it's a more reasonable file size (compared to an AVI).

The fact that it's Quicktime or AVI has nothing to do with it; either is capable of storing HDV.

It's more usually stored as raw MPEG-2 files, though, which anything will play.

Phil
  • 0

#11 Tom Hepburn

Tom Hepburn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 341 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago-land

Posted 28 July 2008 - 11:35 AM

[quote name='Phil Rhodes' date='Jul 25 2008, 04:21 PM' post='243932']
> used the HDV quicktime codec as it's a more reasonable file size (compared to an AVI).

The fact that it's Quicktime or AVI has nothing to do with it; either is capable of storing HDV.

Hi Phil,
I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing here. I have had no success playing an HDV (format) Quicktime movie on my PC.

The point of my post was more in response to the question about computers being used for editing. I'm researching a new computer myself and I'm finding that the mac seems to be more ubiquitous when it comes to High Def film/video editing and formats (outside of Avid). I'm sure individual results vary, but hey that's me :)

Tom
  • 0

#12 Timo Klages

Timo Klages
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 39 posts
  • Other
  • Germany

Posted 11 September 2008 - 03:12 AM

The fact that it's Quicktime or AVI has nothing to do with it; either is capable of storing HDV.

Hi Phil,
I'm not sure if we're talking about the same thing here. I have had no success playing an HDV (format) Quicktime movie on my PC.

The point of my post was more in response to the question about computers being used for editing. I'm researching a new computer myself and I'm finding that the mac seems to be more ubiquitous when it comes to High Def film/video editing and formats (outside of Avid). I'm sure individual results vary, but hey that's me :)

Tom


hey tom,

what computer to get for editing is kinda connected to what kind of video formats you are going to edit on it...
a mac-pro is a neat machine in combination with fcp... but not very cheap as well imo.
if you want to have more options considering the software you use, i would go for a pc. avid is available for both platforms once again i think, but i would go for a pc here as well. if you can spend the money, get a avid certified hp-workstation.
although you can really put together a system on your own.
my system at home, 2 years old i think by now, is an core-duo 2.1ghz, 2gb ram (more would be nice), lot´s of HDD, an nvidia7600gt and firewire ports... works pretty fine for PAL editing. and even compositing with some 1920x1080clips is working, but rendering takes time.

i even use an external (esata) hdd for some pal-editing since i need to carry those things around from time to time and that works very fine as well (dunno how that would perform with usb or firewire).

greets,

timo
  • 0

#13 Andrew Koch

Andrew Koch
  • Sustaining Members
  • 243 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Burbank, California

Posted 11 September 2008 - 03:40 AM

If you get a PC, get Windows XP Professional Edition Service Pack 2 (not 3) instead of Windows Vista. A lot of professional video software such as Avid has problems with Vista. I believe certain versions of Protools also have problems with Vista


Also, Wajahat, you need to go to "My Controls" in the upper right link of this page and change your screenname to your FULL first and last name as this is a requirement of this forum
  • 0

#14 timHealy

timHealy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1252 posts
  • Other
  • New York

Posted 11 September 2008 - 08:20 AM

I disagree completely. Laptops are expensive, comparatively slow, and expensive and difficult to upgrade. There's a thread open on this forum right now asking about recommendations for an external drive for editing - my recommendation is "don't use an external drive for editing!"

Macbooks are sexy and cool and fashionable and all that stuff, but they're not actually terribly practical devices.

P


I'm with Phil too. Especially if you are doing anything reasonably "professional". I use my Powerbook with my little Mini DV projects and an external drive but that is it and I have "abort on dropped frames" turned off. It is highly recommended to use a tower with internal drives to avoid dropped frames and other issues. You'll also have to check out the hardware requirements for different formats. I understand for Apple Pro Res 422 HQ you will need a tower with some speed.

Best

Tim
  • 0

#15 Jorge De Silva

Jorge De Silva

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • Other
  • Portugal

Posted 16 September 2008 - 07:59 PM

The New "INTEL" iMACS are real fast, i own now a 24" and edit 1080P HDV, AVCHD, even 2k/4k (red One Samples)... just using Apple ProRes Codec.

Best Regards,
JDS
  • 0

#16 Tenolian Bell

Tenolian Bell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 907 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 15 October 2008 - 07:03 PM

I'm with Phil too. Especially if you are doing anything reasonably "professional". I use my Powerbook with my little Mini DV projects and an external drive but that is it and I have "abort on dropped frames" turned off. It is highly recommended to use a tower with internal drives to avoid dropped frames and other issues. You'll also have to check out the hardware requirements for different formats. I understand for Apple Pro Res 422 HQ you will need a tower with some speed.

Best

Tim


Dropped frames can depend on several factors.

You are dealing with a PowerBook. Today's MacBook Pro is an entirely different machine from a PowerBook. Far better chipset and graphics card. Its actually over kill for mini-DV.
  • 0

#17 Mitch Lusas

Mitch Lusas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Director
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 16 October 2008 - 12:00 AM

Definitely go for a Mac Pro. On top of the usual reliability, FCP userbility, and general build quality factors, here are my reasons:

1. Snow Leopard will be coming out shortly; that will allow for 64-bit processing power to be fully used. We will probably see a new version of FCPStudio within the year that will also be able to take advantage of the speed boost.
2. Macs, unlike PC's, can effectively use more than 4GB of RAM. PC's apparently can only use 4GB of RAM, which if you have a 512 VRAM only translates to around 2.5GB of RAM. Even if you load up your PC with 6GB of RAM, you won't be able to use all of it.

Mix Snow Leopard with the use of RAM, and you're looking at a killer combo in performance. Something PC's just can't touch right now (though I've heard that some extremely expensive server versions of Vista can use more than 4GB of RAM).
  • 0

#18 Tenolian Bell

Tenolian Bell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 907 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Brooklyn, NY

Posted 16 October 2008 - 12:31 AM

A Mac Pro is a beyond a basic computer. Its a workstation with 8 processors.

The original poster doesn't need all of that to edit footage from the Canon XL2. Any current computer can handle that.

Snow Leopard does add 64bit computing. The main advantage of 64bit computing is to be able to use up to 16TB of RAM.

The real advantage Snow Leopard will bring is being optimized for Intel processors and chipsets so that the OS runs more efficiently and takes up less space on the hard drive. Allows applications to use multiple processors more efficiently, and allows applications to use the graphic card processing for non-graphic purposes.
  • 0

#19 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 16 October 2008 - 07:32 AM

> PC's apparently can only use 4GB of RAM

A limitation common to 32-bit operating systems and absent on 64-bit operating systems, including OSX, variations on a theme of Linux, and either XP or Vista in their 64-bit varieties. Most 32-bit OSs won't see all of the 4GB as RAM.

You certainly don't need a Mac Pro to cut straight DV, although they're actually not a badly-priced way to get eight cores in a box. My biggest problem with them is the severe lack of internal accomodation for more hard disks, which is a bit of an oversight in a powerhouse machine like that. The problem as a previous poster mentioned is that to apply 64-bit to its best advantage really requires the applications to be written for it, and the availability of Your Favourite App Here in 64-bit really is in the lap of the gods. Photoshop CS4 is reputedly intended to be released as a 64-bit app for Windows but reworking the principal desktop stuff - FCP, After Effects, Premiere, and so forth - is a very big job subject to much risk of delay.

A 32-bit application can still address more than 4GB of RAM if it runs on a 64-bit OS, however, so it's still somewhat worthwhile. I very occasionally brush up against RAM limits on 32-bit Windows XP with particularly complicated After Effects comps.

P
  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Opal

Abel Cine

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC