FORUMS: list search recent posts

remember the old days!

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bret Williams
remember the old days!
on May 3, 2011 at 3:47:15 pm

While we're all speculating on the new, why not remember the old?

Some highlights of version 1.2.5... circa November 2000

"manipulate video and images easily with graphical control of acceleration, velocity, and keyframes. With more than 75 built-in filters and keying effects and 60 predefined transitions, a text generator, support for qualified third-party Adobe After Effects plug-ins"

"High-definition Television Support — By simply adding a new breakout box to the Pinnacle’s TARGA Cine card, Final Cut Pro editors can increase their system’s capabilities to deliver high-definition editing. "

And this one to all those that have said for 10 years that Apple never suggested digitizing to your onboard hard drive on a laptop or otherwise...

"Portable Movie Studio — A PowerBook with Final Cut Pro allows you to create broadcast quality video almost anywhere. The PowerBook’s built in FireWire, large capacity internal hard drives, and brilliant display are perfect for on-site rough cuts, capturing footage or reviewing dailies. Full EDL support means your edit can easily transfer to traditional edit bay systems. "

read on here - http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/'>http://replay.web.archive.org/200011100106/http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: remember the old days!
on May 3, 2011 at 4:10:08 pm

. . . and I remember all the Avid editors/facilities who laughed at the toy, thinking it would only be a "home" toy (kinda iMovie ish) and never a competitor . . . almost like all the FCP hand wringers are saying about FCPX.

I remember convincing the Avid based facility I was engineer at, to get one FCP copy which they used for some of there simple "in house" low end work. Although I was gone before the changeover I believe they are an FCP facility now.

The new "home toy" will be facilities setting up FCPX on the new Thunderbolt Quad Core iMacs to save costs.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: remember the old days!
on May 3, 2011 at 4:23:52 pm

[Craig Seeman] "The new "home toy" will be facilities setting up FCPX on the new Thunderbolt Quad Core iMacs to save costs."

And it's gonna be AWEsome!


Return to posts index


Ariane Fisher
Re: remember the old days!
on May 3, 2011 at 5:25:57 pm

jaw-dropping!


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: remember the old days!
on May 3, 2011 at 4:34:55 pm

I never understood all those comments. I was using EditDV at home to edit my demo reels back in 1999. I was a freelance Avid editor and would take my XL1 to edit suites and dub the final project to mini dv to take home and add to my demo. I even started doing small DV productions with EditDV. When FCP came out I quickly realized it was a competitor, and actually had more high end features than composer. It had compositing modes, resolution independence, precomposing (nesting) , and even some animated text like animated tracking. Plus I could use my BorisAE in FCP. It had it's limitations and gotchas, but so did Avid. If you were a little savvy, you could hook up a beta deck thru the svideo of a camcorder and digitize betacam as DV with full TC support. For 2-3k I had a system that was pretty similar to AVR77 or 2:1 meridian media composer suites which were still prominent. In some ways, better image quality. For the longest, Avid didn't have any FireWire support. I was editing some broadcast work at local PBS where they shot on DVCam, then ingested it at 2:1 compression. They were running DV through compression making lesser quality, but more than doubling the file size. And that was considered broadcast quality. I had a G4 laptop that was better than that with FCP.


Return to posts index

Richard Dee
Re: remember the old days!
on May 3, 2011 at 9:10:11 pm

I never upgraded past FCP 1.0. Did I miss an update?


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 3, 2011 at 9:10:20 pm

[Craig Seeman] "The new "home toy" will be facilities setting up FCPX on the new Thunderbolt Quad Core iMacs to save costs.
"


The new 27" iMac has TWO Thunderbolt ports. With the built in monitor, it's possible to have a 3 monitor setup. Of course TWO Thunderbolt ports is a major connectivity gain, sorta like two PCIe slots but better.
I certainly think we're going to see facilities with this along with FCPX.

I really do think this is another chink in Avid "attraction" given the already limited I/O options they have. Given that one wont be able to install an nVidia card in an iMac, it can make FCPX look very attractive for speed compared to Premiere.



Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 6:03:35 am

[Craig Seeman] "I really do think this is another chink in Avid "attraction" given the already limited I/O options they have. Given that one wont be able to install an nVidia card in an iMac, it can make FCPX look very attractive for speed compared to Premiere."

Avid supports AJA and Matrox in addition to their own hardware, so I'm not sure that this is valid anymore.

As for Adobe, CS5 was already 64-bit enabled and already took advantage of Grand Central Dispatch and all of the RAM - FCP X promises to catch up in that regard, so you're applauding Apple for finally supporting their own platform 3 years after they made a 64-bit OS and hardware.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 12:48:46 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "Avid supports AJA and Matrox in addition to their own hardware, so I'm not sure that this is valid anymore."

Not on an iMac. Remember COST is a big factor for many.
Price of Avid plus MacPro
vs
Price of FCPX plus iMac

Matrox and Blackmagic showed Thunderbolt products nearly ready to release.
AJA showed that they are working on something.

For many smaller facilities as well as others under budget pressure, FCPX, iMac with Thunderbolt willbe cost effective.
This is in addition to MBP with Thunderbolt as well for those who need to edit in the field.



Return to posts index


Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 2:26:23 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Not on an iMac."

Craig, what is preventing Avid or anyone else from running on an iMac? If Avid supports Matrox now and a thunderbolt version comes out, I think it a pretty good expectation that Matrox and Avid will support it. And as others have pointed out, it's the talent of the editor and the quality of the tools that count not just the price.

Sheesh, I've seen everything now. I'm an Adobe guy defending Avid on an Apple forum. Oh, the irony! ;-)


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 2:43:38 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "If Avid supports Matrox now and a thunderbolt version comes out, I think it a pretty good expectation that Matrox and Avid will support it."

Avid's history is SLOW to "certify" things. Avid may well be slow to "certify" Lion compatibility. Lion and FCPX may take advantage of things that will take some time to adopt.

Adobe, on the other hand, will be right there from the start but Avid specifically has ALWAYS been SLOW to officially support new hardware as well as new OS.



Return to posts index

Ben Holmes
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 5, 2011 at 3:05:49 pm

Dennis - AVID support minimal third party IO devices like the AJA IO Express, which only offer embedded audio, and are therefore not a challenge for their own, expensive Nitris DX boxes for installation and broadcast work. I note they've been very slow to support anything like a Kona 3 or Matrox MXO2. I'll not hold my breath for this whilst hardware remains important to them, as it surely should. As soon as AVID becomes effectively a software company (as this could make them) they'd have to get into a price war with a competitor about to release a $299 product.

I'd hope the FCP pricing could make AVID and ADOBE think again about their ridiculous pricing (which in Adobe's case leads to massive piracy and DRM so restrictive it took me a week to get a working serial number on my CS3 upgrade) but again - won't hold my breath....

Edit Out Ltd
----------------------------
FCP Editor/Trainer/System Consultant
EVS/VT Supervisor for live broadcast
RED camera transfer/post
Independent Director/Producer

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/community/communitydetails/?UserStoryId=87...


Return to posts index


Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 9, 2011 at 9:18:49 am

[Ben Holmes] "I'd hope the FCP pricing could make AVID and ADOBE think again about their ridiculous pricing (which in Adobe's case leads to massive piracy and DRM so restrictive it took me a week to get a working serial number on my CS3 upgrade) but again - won't hold my breath...."

Well, you have to consider that for at least Adobe we have a different business model than Avid or Apple. In their case, they both sell hardware which in Apple's case is a prerequisite to using their software.

With CS5.5 we introduced a subscription model which allows for a month-to-month usage at a lower price. For the video suite specifically, I'm also excited to mention that the 30-day trial now includes ALL of the codecs we license, so people can truly used it and evaluate.


Return to posts index

Chris Borjis
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 5:41:25 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Given that one wont be able to install an nVidia card in an iMac,"

do the new iMac's come with a powerful nVidia chipset?
(suitable for gpu acceleration?



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 5:59:19 pm

[Chris Borjis] "do the new iMac's come with a powerful nVidia chipset?"

ATI/AMD GPU. Keep in mind Apple's approach to GPU acceleration is different and I think the real test would be comparing Premiere Pro using nVidia to FCPX on ATI/AMD fastest GPU.

Given that the iMac can't have it's GPU swapped (at least not authorized) I think it may give FCPX an edge which means one may chose FCPX over PP if you're putting an iMac Thunderbolt workstation together. Again this makes sense given how Apple likes to tie software and hardware.

I think that given both Avid and Premiere will have disadvantages to FCPX on iMac it's another way to push FCPX as a choice.

I do think some post houses are going to look at FCPX and iMac Thunderbolt as an affordable way to add seats even it may be limited to the kinds of jobs it can handle at first.



Return to posts index


Chris Borjis
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 4, 2011 at 9:05:14 pm

[Craig Seeman] " do think some post houses are going to look at FCPX and iMac Thunderbolt as an affordable way to add seats even it may be limited to the kinds of jobs it can handle at first."

thats what I'm doing :)



Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 8, 2011 at 11:03:53 am

[Craig Seeman] "I think that given both Avid and Premiere will have disadvantages to FCPX on iMac"

Like what?


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 8, 2011 at 2:11:09 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "Like what?"

No GPU acceleration on ATI GPUs.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 9, 2011 at 9:11:43 am

Try this.

http://blogs.adobe.com/genesisproject/2011/03/premiere-pro-on-a-mac-%E2%80%...

I'm curious if there are any other reasons or thoughts about why FCP X might be faster.


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 9, 2011 at 9:46:11 am

[Craig Seeman] "...Premiere will have disadvantages to FCPX on iMac"
[Dennis Radeke] "any other reasons or thoughts about why FCP X might be faster."

Because PPro - at least at first, until a rewrite - will still be stuck with the old 32-bit QuickTime legacy way of doing things?
(That's a question, not a statement.)



Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 9, 2011 at 10:02:28 am

No, Adobe Premiere Pro works around Quicktime whenever possible, which is significant when you're discussing overall performance. So for example, H.264 we don't need Quicktime whereas FCP 7 does. With something like ProRes though where the codec doesn't reside anywhere but within Quicktime, Premiere Pro must use it. However, I will note that several people (and my own findings) have said that Premiere Pro performance on ProRes is better than FCP 7. At worst, it is on par. Hope this helps.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 9, 2011 at 2:54:41 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "I'm curious if there are any other reasons or thoughts about why FCP X might be faster."

Err... that article is frankly a little questionable. It breaks down the Mercury Playback Engine into three components -- 64-bit memory addressing, 64-bit processing, and GPU acceleration, and then insists that you still get two of the three even without an NVIDIA GPU.

This is fairly screwy.

64-bit addressing offers no performance benefit unless performance was previously limited by RAM available to the app. Now, there are some algorithms where the ability to use more RAM during processing can speed things up... but this mostly doesn't apply to video. The post seems to be kind of vaguely implying they need the extra RAM to enable multithreaded processing, but frankly that's a little questionable. Most processing of video can work with frames one at a time, and individual video frames aren't all that big. There might be some significant benefit here with a few filters, but I doubt the overall difference is very large. Think about it like this: do you really think throwing 8 GB of RAM at Premiere Pro makes it even twice as fast as it is with 4 GB? While there are rare exceptions (e.g. databases where more RAM means you never have to hit the disk), most software tends not to work like that.

Meanwhile, 64-bit processing can result in significant speedups... if you're processing lots of 64-bit integer data. Which is not common, and not really applicable to video processing. The highest quality at which video is commonly processed is 32-bits/channel, and that's usually 32-bit floating point data, not integer data at all.

x86-64 does have an odd quirk relevant to this, however. x86 has always been register-starved, and AMD (everyone forgets AMD came up with x86-64 while Intel was off fooling around with Itanium) took the opportunity to add more registers with the new spec. This provides certain general performance benefits, but they're not huge. We're talking in the range of 10-20% here for the most part -- not the difference between "spend all day staring at progress bars" and "you do't have to render anymore".

And then there's the GPU, which for tasks suitable for GPU processing can result in processing dozens or even hundreds of times faster. That really can be the difference between "spend all day staring at progress bars" and "you do't have to render anymore".

So while you might be getting 2/3 of the "bullet points" of the Mercury Playback Engine without GPU acceleration, you're probably getting less than 1/10 of the performance enhancement.

Meanwhile, FCP X will offer GPU acceleration on every Mac with discreet graphics, e.g. the Mac Pro plus the iMac, and the 15 and 17" MacBook Pro models. And next year with Ivy Bridge, OpenCL should even be supported on Intel's integrated GPUs, which means every Mac Apple sells will be able to benefit from GPU acceleration in FCP X before too long.

Now, maybe Adobe is at work furiously creating a parallel implementation of Mercury for OpenCL. But, well, we'll see.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 10, 2011 at 11:12:13 am

[Chris Kenny] "Err... that article is frankly a little questionable."

I apologize because I made an assumption here. I am the author of that 'screwy post' and I work for Adobe. I incorrectly figured everyone already knew that...

[Chris Kenny] " It breaks down the Mercury Playback Engine into three components -- 64-bit memory addressing, 64-bit processing, and GPU acceleration, and then insists that you still get two of the three even without an NVIDIA GPU."

Well, I hate to be dogmatic, but this is a fact - including the last part. If you have a problem with it, then well...there's no point in continuing the discussion. ;-)

[Chris Kenny] "The post seems to be kind of vaguely implying they need the extra RAM to enable multithreaded processing"

I didn't mean to be vague. More RAM = better performance in most cases, whether directly or indirectly. In a 32-bit app world people were used to having 8 cores and 4gb of addressable memory (like FCP 7). With 64-bit applications and computing, you want to have plenty of memory so that your CPU's can work at peak efficiency. Here's a nice article from Adobe's Todd Kopriva about starving your CPU's in AE: http://blogs.adobe.com/toddkopriva/2009/12/performance-tip-dont-starve-yo.h...

[Chris Kenny] "There might be some significant benefit here with a few filters, but I doubt the overall difference is very large. Think about it like this: do you really think throwing 8 GB of RAM at Premiere Pro makes it even twice as fast as it is with 4 GB?"

Twice as fast, no. Increase the overall edit experience, smoothness, ability to use your CPU's at 100% usage 100% of the time, etc.? Yes. Actually, I recommend 16GB of RAM for many situations. Also, there have been tests by users (on the Windows side) that with some codecs there is a directly correlation to performance to memory. So in some cases, yes twice the memory means twice the performance...

I could go on but lets agree that you're not going to buy in to what I'm saying. It's obvious that you've not tried a native 64-bit editing application and until you do (FCP X), you won't see the benefits.

You are pre-disposed to FCP and that's okay. For others that may have questions about Apple/Adobe workflows, I am here to answer questions.

Dennis - Adobe guy


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 10, 2011 at 2:30:00 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "I didn't mean to be vague. More RAM = better performance in most cases, whether directly or indirectly. In a 32-bit app world people were used to having 8 cores and 4gb of addressable memory (like FCP 7). With 64-bit applications and computing, you want to have plenty of memory so that your CPU's can work at peak efficiency. Here's a nice article from Adobe's Todd Kopriva about starving your CPU's in AE: http://blogs.adobe.com/toddkopriva/2009/12/performance-tip-dont-starve-yo.h....."

I'm aware of the general principle, I'm just very skeptical about whether being able to use, say, 4 vs. 8 GB of RAM really makes much difference for multithreaded rendering of things like color correction filters, lower thirds, etc. -- the nuts and bolts things that editors want to be faster.

[Dennis Radeke] "Twice as fast, no."

Well, this is my point. Even "twice as fast" is a pretty small speedup compared with the typical performance increase associated with moving a suitable task to the GPU, and the performance benefits associated with 64-bit addressing and process don't even provide that. I'm not saying you guys shouldn't have been bragging about being 64-bit before Apple, but it's misleading to sort of imply you get 2/3 of the Mercury Playback Engine without an NVIDIA GPU, when you don't get anything close to 2/3 of the performance enhancement.

[Dennis Radeke] "I could go on but lets agree that you're not going to buy in to what I'm saying. It's obvious that you've not tried a native 64-bit editing application and until you do (FCP X), you won't see the benefits."

I expect most of the performance benefit of FCP X also won't be directly related to the fact that it's 64-bit.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 12, 2011 at 2:05:25 am

[Chris Kenny] "I'm aware of the general principle, I'm just very skeptical about whether being able to use, say, 4 vs. 8 GB of RAM really makes much difference for multithreaded rendering of things like color correction filters, lower thirds, etc. -- the nuts and bolts things that editors want to be faster."

You're right - so try it for free then... http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/tdrc/index.cfm?product=premiere_pro

The above trial includes ALL codecs for 30 days so you can do a side by side comparison of Premiere Pro CS5.5 with FCP 7 and eventually FCP X. Build the same timelines on all and see which comes out on top. Then you can be informed.

[Chris Kenny] "but it's misleading to sort of imply you get 2/3 of the Mercury Playback Engine without an NVIDIA GPU, when you don't get anything close to 2/3 of the performance enhancement."

Regardless of whether you think it's misleading it is FACTUALLY TRUE and I can't be any clearer than that. Like I said, give it a fair try and if nothing else, you'll be more informed about your decision.

More importantly, I think you miss the main point - it's about balancing your tasks between the CPU and GPU. If you dump everything to a GPU, you've just moved the problem. So, this is why we moved effects over to the GPU but left the bulk of decoding and playback to the CPU.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: remember the old days! - and now for the new days
on May 8, 2011 at 2:31:19 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I do think some post houses are going to look at FCPX and iMac Thunderbolt as an affordable way to add seats even it may be limited to the kinds of jobs it can handle at first."

Probably not even all that limited. You'll be able to do anything up to 2K 4:4:4 over Thunderbolt, in terms of both video I/O and storage bandwidth. The 27" 3.1 GHz iMac is only ~15% slower in terms of CPU than a 3.33 GHz 6-core Mac Pro from last year. And, of course, FCP X, with GCD and OpenCL, is going to run a lot faster than FCP 7 ever did.

A 2011 iMac running FCP X will almost certainly be a significantly better all-around editing system than a 2010 Mac Pro running FCP 7.

Video editing is quickly moving down the "used to require expensive high end hardware, but not really all that challenging for modern systems" path that so many other types of software have followed over the years.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]