FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 5:09:09 pm

The tea leaf readers have been dissecting the recent images from last weeks Apple Event - and in both the FCP.CO story and the B-roll images from the Guardian (London Newspaper) story - appear to include image caps of Dean Devlin in LA working on what appears to be a high end multi-cam edit where they have 16 cameras of 4k content being served from the new MacPro for real time editing.

If this is accurate, we're about to see a massive increase in production speed and capacity at a pretty astonishing price point - thanks to Apple's new hardware and the modern code in FCP-X.

The photo cap of Devlin working at his edit station and seeing that relatively tiny little black tube - and knowing that it's likely that the tube is what's processing those massive content streams is a bit like seeing "The Jetsons" come to life.

Wow.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 5:20:24 pm

No one has any idea what that image means. There is zero indication that this is a multi-cam clip made up of original or optimized 4K clips. Could easily be 1/2-res proxies or even 1/4-res (assuming Apple is doing additional codec options for 4K variations). We'll see, Seems to me it's much closer to Avid's 9-way splits using m-resolutions in 1999 for SD multi-cam cuts ;-) Remember - all you are seeing is a multi-angle viewer.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 7:04:43 pm

[Oliver Peters] "No one has any idea what that image means."

Well, I'll disagree there.

I can feel confident that it means that at least one experienced Hollywood TV producer has had the chance to work (in advance of it's public release) with some version of the new MacPro running FCP-X code - and at some point tested it in terms of Multi-cam workflow on top tier professional footage.

I agree that all the subtleties of the results are unknown. But at least we know the tests have happened. And whatever the results, Apple is comfortable with their marketing department using the images for public consumption.

The fact illustrated thusly can only go a couple of ways in the long run.

When the new Pro comes out - people can find it exceeds, or it meets, or falls short - of their expectations.

One of those will be true for everyone.

But the images are instructive if for nothing else in shoring up Apple's contention that they never abandoned a strong focus on creating and marketing tools targeted at professional visual content creation.

The rest is guesswork - as I plainly noted in my original post.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 5:31:42 pm

Sounds interesting but a screen shot does not always tell the whole story. Interesting times are ahead.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 8:00:16 pm

[Bill Davis] "n both the FCP.CO story and the B-roll images from the Guardian (London Newspaper) story - appear to include image caps of Dean Devlin in LA working on what appears to be a high end multi-cam edit where they have 16 cameras of 4k content being served from the new MacPro for real time editing."

Am I missing something here. Apple claims no more than 3 streams of 4K "a merger that delivers the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once" - are you now claiming that the Tube can run 16 streams of 4K? Because running a multiclip requires the same bandwidth to run a stream, if not more. Running a 16 angle multiclip is very cool, but other computers can do that. Running 3 streams of 4K is way cool and I don't know if any other current NLE can do that. Running 16 angles of 4K - even Apple isn't claiming they can do that.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 8:44:05 pm

We're just in terminology confusion.

The Apple published specs as I understand them are as follows.

The new Pro will allow you to monitor and switch 16 sources of content. Those can be 4k original imported uncompessed clips - but the presumption is (due to simple math) that it requires that you let X do some form of conversions. Those "might" be ProRes of some type and may or may not be the built in Proxy type that X has employed from the beginning - but that's unclear (at least to me) right now.

The way X is constructed around metadata references back to both your original, and proxy caches (a capability demonstrated by how rapid it is to switch back and forth from Original to Proxy mode) - suggests to me that it's possible that while you work with proxy's - X still maintains links back to your sequestered original media.

This is important because you can make your editing decisions simultaneously having access to multiple "resolutions" of viewer display. When you're watching those 16 multi-cam clips - you're undoubtedly watching compressed copies. But when you drop them on a Storyline, the references may change to full ProRes (the potential is there) and when you go to SHARE, the same metadata that houses all your editing decisions at all levels, just swaps to point at the original Uncompressed frames. The result is the resolution you need, when you need it - rather than a system that "sets" resolution at the start and forces you to work in it throughout your workflow.

This system (if I'm describing it technically accurately and not just trying to justify the way I've experienced it operating but getting something fundamentally wrong!) is one of the joys of working with X. It presents the resolution you need for the job you're currently doing.

I mentioned the observed capability of the system to "re-rez" even the viewer display on the fly. When you first import footage, depending on it's nature and codec - you might have some scenes that playback "fuzzy" at first. This is because the referenced file is a low rez thumbnail video "quick copy". As X processes the original footage either to ProRes Transcodes or Proxy files, those original temporary files disappear and you no longer get any sort of fuzzy playback. But even when you have those thumbnails in play - parking your playhead on a frame typically "snaps" it into a full rez viewer display. Obviously, X is sourcing the higher rez sequestered original to help you see your work - even before it's processed the stream for live playback use.

This system construction has massive implications (IMO) about how X might work with massive streams of high raster originals.

Essentially, it can display multiple resolution references in multiple parts of the interface - simultaneously.

I think that's a pretty big deal as we see the data streams we have to process grow ever bigger.

And it also explains partly why, for example, X rocks on a laptop. Often you don't NEED to be monitoring your full rez original streams in order to do effective editing. You just need to be able to reference the full quality immediately when you want to.

It's a system thing.

: )

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 8:50:42 pm

Bill, if your correct, then that's very impressive. I will say that for now I'll list it as an interesting conjecture; we will have the answer when the first Tubes roll out.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 9:40:07 pm

This is the advantage of ProRes is that it can scale, easily, on the fly.

Along with the Dual GPUs we will get, I am sure there's a lot going on in these, what seems to be, purpose built MacPro tubes.

Here's some more musings on Tube pricing, by the way of GPU: http://architosh.com/2013/10/the-mac-pro-so-whats-a-d300-d500-and-d700-anyw...


Return to posts index

David Eaks
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 28, 2013 at 9:09:39 pm

Herb, I think your confusing the Tube being able to support three 4k monitors, with, FCPX being able to edit 16 angles of 4k when running on a tube.


Return to posts index


Bob Zelin
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 12:57:13 am

what a funny thread. Uncompressed 10 bit standard def can require more bandwidth than compressed 4k. It all depends on your codec.
Many of you should download the free AJA Data Calc, and take a look at bandwidth for each codec, 4K, 1080, etc.

But someone will say "I want to do 16 streams of 4K dpx files, all at full resolution". Sorry, but not even a Quantel Pablo or Clipster can do this (insanely expensive boxes).

Low res editing and conforming your job to hi res, has long been part of our industry - long before non linear editing even existed.
Only the innocent are unaware of this (and I meet plenty of innocent, that has no idea of what conforming is).

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
maxavid@cfl.rr.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 1:52:22 am

[Bob Zelin] "Low res editing and conforming your job to hi res, has long been part of our industry - long before non linear editing even existed. "

Granted, Bob.

But my interest is that how we all define and implement "low rez editing" has changed a huge amount over the past decade.

Once upon a time I could always tell when I was working with down-rezzed or proxy files.

Today, I often can't.

Essentially, the operator can be "hidden" from the type of stream you're working with. Which is absolutely marvelous if it lets you do more work, on more systems, in more places, without being tied down to a "big desktop" environment. But makes it challenging when the editor simply chooses "Export a 4K master" and discovers that without thinking, he or she is trying to do that out of a system that only has Proxy source files available!

One more small trap in the modern era.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 5:11:16 am

What's to say other software besides fcpx won't be able to achieve similiar results on the tube once optimized?

Neil Goodman: Editor, The Esquire Network - NBC/Uni


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 5:45:33 am

I'm behind on the rumor mill so my apologies if this is old news, but does the following info answer any questions?

From the footnotes of Apple's Mac Pro page:

"Streaming tests conducted using a 10-minute project with 16 unique 3840x2160p23.98 ProRes 422 clips. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac Pro."

(the purists will point out that is Ultra HD, not digital cinema 4K)


Under the "editing" section the page also says this:

"Work pixel-for-pixel in 4K without slowing down, thanks to dual AMD FirePro workstation-class GPUs and the latest Xeon E5 processors in Mac Pro — a merger that delivers the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once (or many more streams of HD video)."


What am I missing? Why does the bullet point say 3 streams of 4K while a footnote says 16 streams?




Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 1:21:02 pm

[Andrew Kimery] ""Streaming tests conducted using a 10-minute project with 16 unique 3840x2160p23.98 ProRes 422 clips. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac Pro.""

Without knowing the methodology of the tests, it's really hard to discuss.

I will mention that 4K UHDTV (quad-HD) ProRes 422 at 23.976 fps runs 471 Mb/s. 16 streams of that is roughly 1 GB/s -- right near the saturation point for the PCIe flash storage.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 7:23:24 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I will mention that 4K UHDTV (quad-HD) ProRes 422 at 23.976 fps runs 471 Mb/s. 16 streams of that is roughly 1 GB/s -- right near the saturation point for the PCIe flash storage.
"


Any guess why Apple mentions 3 streams of 4K in place but 16 streams in another?




Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 8:31:51 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Any guess why Apple mentions 3 streams of 4K in place but 16 streams in another?"

Wild, crazy, speculative and unsubstantiated guess: they can push 3 streams of full 4K through the normal rendering pipeline (key, color, transform, crop, distort, composite) in real time at full res, but multicam clips are scaled down before processing?

Or someone in PR made a mistake somewhere?

Another couple months and we'll know for sure, I guess.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 8:51:14 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Wild, crazy, speculative and unsubstantiated guess: they can push 3 streams of full 4K through the normal rendering pipeline (key, color, transform, crop, distort, composite) in real time at full res, but multicam clips are scaled down before processing?"

I think you guys have it wrong. There are 2 GPUs. Essentially one handles connected displays and one handles processing. So the 3 x 4K streams most likely refers to 3 computer displays. This still leaves room for the second processor handling real-time effects in FCP X. Even full-res 4K files could be sliced like RED files are sliced in order to stick up a 16-way split to the multi-angle viewer. At this point, it's more a factor of disk i/o.

My bet is that it's not all that cut and dried. Most likely if you are hanging 3 x 4K displays off the machine, you will have difficulty also running 16 x 4K video streams. At least on the 4-core or 6-core base machines.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 9:03:10 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I think you guys have it wrong."

Totally possible. I disclaimed my guess as wild, crazy, speculative, and unsubstantiated on purpose :)


[Oliver Peters] "There are 2 GPUs. Essentially one handles connected displays and one handles processing."

I wouldn't be so sure of that -- if one were dedicated to display and one to processing, it'd be an enormous waste for the display GPU to have so much GPGPU horsepower.

I believe that the load will be distributed; otherwise, an asymmetric GPU system like Resolve configs feature would make a lot more sense.


[Oliver Peters] "So the 3 x 4K streams most likely refers to 3 computer displays."

Here's the quote from the Apple mini-site [link]:

"Work pixel-for-pixel in 4K without slowing down, thanks to dual AMD FirePro workstation-class GPUs and the latest Xeon E5 processors in Mac Pro — a merger that delivers the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once (or many more streams of HD video). Combine that with the power to drive up to three 4K displays, process effects in real time, and even edit 4K multicam clips, and you have a video editing powerhouse."

We know from here that this system can drive up to three 4K displays; but if "the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once" is something different, it's quite poorly written -- which is why my alternative theory is a confused agency.



[Oliver Peters] "My bet is that it's not all that cut and dried. Most likely if you are hanging 3 x 4K displays off the machine, you will have difficulty also running 16 x 4K video streams. At least on the 4-core or 6-core base machines."

That makes a lot of sense.

I think it's worth reiterating that we are constantly talking here about the price of the low-spec systems, but the performance of the absolute highest-spec system.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 9:13:17 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I think it's worth reiterating that we are constantly talking here about the price of the low-spec systems, but the performance of the absolute highest-spec system.
"


Indeed.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 9:15:52 pm

[Walter Soyka] "We know from here that this system can drive up to three 4K displays; but if "the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once" is something different, it's quite poorly written -- which is why my alternative theory is a confused agency.
"


Of course, it's worth noting that most NLEs have easily run up to 7 streams of HD (uncompressed, ProRes or DNxHD) for several years now in real-time. That's on fairly average machines. So running 3 streams of 4K ProRes doesn't sound far-fetched - especially if that's the top-of-the-line version of the Mac Pro.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 9:45:38 pm

[Walter Soyka] "We know from here that this system can drive up to three 4K displays; but if "the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once" is something different, it's quite poorly written -- which is why my alternative theory is a confused agency."

I still think this is 3 4K display streams. One of them will be the HDMI out, and then you'll get two saturated TB2 ports.

Yes, it is poorly written. You will literally be able to pipe out Qty. 3, 4K (QuadHD) streams of video out of the tube to Qty. 3 4K (QuadHD) displays.

Instead of playback 3 (or 16) streams of video scaled down on one display.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 10:14:39 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I still think this is 3 4K display streams. One of them will be the HDMI out, and then you'll get two saturated TB2 ports.

Yes, it is poorly written. You will literally be able to pipe out Qty. 3, 4K (QuadHD) streams of video out of the tube to Qty. 3 4K (QuadHD) displays.
"


But right after 3 streams of 4K it says "...(or many more streams of HD video)". That doesn't sound like it's talking about feeding monitors. Or maybe it's just poor written copy by marketing.




Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 10:21:00 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "That doesn't sound like it's talking about feeding monitors. Or maybe it's just poor written copy by marketing."

Why not?

Why not hook up 7 monitors (6 TB2, and an HDMI)?

I guess that since TB2 is technically a display pipe, as well as a data pipe, you could stream a 4K display, and then have multiple HD video signals coming in and out via Thunderbolt2 devices (T-Taps, ioXT, whatevers).

I don't know, it starts to get weird, and that's why it is probably written that way because it is weird.

We are no longer limited to a capture card, a GPU that has some DVI dongles.

Perhaps they really do mean a stream of video that you can do whatever you want with, hook it up to a display, or another video device.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 11:00:47 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Why not?"

Because the next sentence is "...Combine that with the power to drive up to three 4K displays..." If the 3 streams of 4K means sending content to 4K monitors then saying, in the very next line, that you can drive up to three 4K displays comes straight from the department of redundancy department. ;)

Here is the text in context from Apple's page:

"Work pixel-for-pixel in 4K without slowing down, thanks to dual AMD FirePro workstation-class GPUs and the latest Xeon E5 processors in Mac Pro — a merger that delivers the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once (or many more streams of HD video). Combine that with the power to drive up to three 4K displays, process effects in real time, and even edit 4K multicam clips, and you have a video editing powerhouse."

Again, this could all just be poorly written copy but it's not very clear, IMO (16 streams here, 4 streams there, etc.,).




Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 11:04:33 pm

I see your point.

Perhaps you can send 3 4K streams of video AND drive 3 4K displays, for a total of 6 4Ks!

Combined with the other 16 4Ks, you now have 22* 4Ks!!!

(and many more streams of HD Video)










*i cant math


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 11:52:43 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Combined with the other 16 4Ks, you now have 22* 4Ks!!!"

22K for $22K!

Obviously all these questions (and more) will be answered when the tube ships. I wonder what shape the box will be? Time for a new thread!




Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 11:58:51 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I wonder what shape the box will be? Time for a new thread!"

Rectangular. It's on the web site. And BTW, you only get a power cord, no keyboard or mouse included with it.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 30, 2013 at 12:18:06 am

[Oliver Peters] "Rectangular."

Can't innovate anymore, my ass!

-Phil Schiller


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 8:43:17 am

Neil,

The support for that idea comes from the WWDC when Phil Schiller said that X was being "optimized" to take advantage of the new MacPro hardware. I suspect that perhaps having Grand Central Dispatch might boost X 's efficiency in taking full advantage of the twin GPUs? After all, everyone trumpeted how Premier benefited from the Mercury Engine - something not accessible by FCP. So isn't it reasonable to suppose that Apple would want to preserve a similar competitive advantage with their new flagship editing system?

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
on Oct 29, 2013 at 9:40:59 am

[Bill Davis] " So isn't it reasonable to suppose that Apple would want to preserve a similar competitive advantage with their new flagship editing system?"

[Bill Davis] " So isn't it reasonable to suppose that Apple would want to preserve a similar competitive advantage with their new flagship editing system?"

Apple is in the hardware business though, so it wouldn't seem to be in their best interest for them to put up artificial barriers limiting how well non-Apple software can perform on Apple hardware. Whether or not other companies can/will code their software to take advantage of it is another question.

Adobe didn't block FCP from accessing NVIDIA's CUDA technology, it was just that Apple didn't write FCP in order to take advantage of it (which obviously would've entangled Apple with another 3rd party hardware maker and I'm sure they wanted to avoid that).




Return to posts index

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