FORUMS: list search recent posts

iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Steve Connor
iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 3:25:41 pm

So the new iMac Pro should be available in the next couple of weeks, is anyone thinking of getting one? I'm very interested but also intrigued by next year's Mac Pro as well

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 6:50:21 pm

Have yet to see what the new Mac Pro looks like, if it even exists.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 7:19:02 pm

A production company I freelance at is looking at the new iMac Pros. Even the base model will be more powerful than previous Macs. We would replace a couple of old towers and maybe one underpowered iMac. Who know when the next Mac Pro will be released. I doubt it will be 2018 and right now there seem to be Apple supply chain issues (HomePod). I suspect Apple will weigh the sales of and response to the iMac Pro before getting too deep into the Mac Pro. That being said, the 2013 Mac Pro is still a good purchase today, if you need a new machine and don't need an all-in-one.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 9:02:06 pm

I struggle to comprehend what a new MacPro in today’s Apple, eGPU, and the power of commodity hardware, would even look like, and more importantly what it would cost and to what benefit? The only thing it would add is a modicum of “upgradeability” which starts to make sense after the computer is 4-5 years old, and user added display monitors.

The iMac Pro at 18cores, 128GB of Ram, 16GBs of GPU memory, 4TB SSD, 10Gb Ethernet, Thunderbolt 3, is a tried and true snazzlecore, and approaches sizzlecore levels.

If and when the MacPro comes out, will it even be worth it for what I imagine is going to be a hefty price tag?


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 3:02:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Who know when the next Mac Pro will be released. I doubt it will be 2018 and right now there seem to be Apple supply chain issues (HomePod). I suspect Apple will weigh the sales of and response to the iMac Pro before getting too deep into the Mac Pro. "

If the iMac Pro performs as expected I don't think I'll bother waiting for the new Mac Pro, as you say chances are it might be 2019 anyway.

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 9:18:58 pm

All I know is I will be getting a Coffee Lake 6 Core i7 8700K in a couple of months for about $370.00 and a 300 series chipset motherboard for about $100.00. Add about $120.00 for RAM and I will have an awesome system for less than $1,000 even when you include my GTX 1060 GPU.

On a side note will the newer Xeons support Intel's Quick Sync? If not the basic iMac might be a better option depending on what type of video files you edit.


Return to posts index


Bob Zelin
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 10:42:07 pm

disclaimer -
I have NEVER build a Hackintosh, and I know this is a FCP X forum (so dare I mention anything that is not FCP X related) -
but -
https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/13/maxed-out-imac-pro-cost/
potentially a blown out iMac Pro will cost $17,000 (the starting price $4999 won't do much for a power machine).

I read the Davinci Resolve 14 specs for building a Win 10 PC (which of course can run Premiere, Media Composer, etc.) with the ASUS X99 Delux motherboard. So while many people are now saying "#1, I am not building a computer, and #2 it won't run FCP-X" - you are going to want the Vega 64 (or some GPU card) and a lot of RAM and a fast processor (and if you say "why would I need that " - then keep using your Thunderbolt 3 iMac that you bought last week !). So if a powerhouse iMac Pro will cost this much HOW MUCH is Apple planning on charging for a 2019 killer Mac Pro (compared to a HP Z840 with NVidia, Dell Precision or ASUS home made system).

At some point, Apple has to say "there is no way we can charge 20 grand for a computer, no matter what it does".
Maybe I am wrong.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 11:24:06 pm

I DID build a Hackintosh...and I can tell you I am very spoiled with having 5 internal drives (with room for 4 more)...two slots for ANY compatible GPU I want to put in there. With having everything (except my IO box and my RAID) contained in a small area, not strewn about and connected by squid-like tentacles. It is so nice to have it all in one place.

So while the iMac pro is tempting me, I'm waiting to see what Apple deems we need with the new MacPro...see if they are right, or like last time, very very wrong.

The main use for this computer, should I get it, would be Resolve, and the need to deal with and deliver 4K, so as nice as the iMacs specs might be, I'm concerned about GPU power, and heat issues. And I'd really like a bigger machine that allows stuff to be put inside it rather than a small machine with peripherals all over the place. Not sure how "feng shui" that really is.

Although really, the only thing keeping me running Apple is the damned ProRes deliverable. That and it is an easier OS to deal with, but really, it's the ProRes deliverable.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 11:39:50 pm

[Shane Ross] "Although really, the only thing keeping me running Apple is the damned ProRes deliverable. That and it is an easier OS to deal with, but really, it's the ProRes deliverable."

The fact that Fusion 9 delivered real ProRes rendering on a WIN machine is interesting to me. I'm expecting Resolve on Win to include real ProRes any day as well. If Blackmagic can do this in Fusion, then I'm not sure why not in Resolve too.

I'm also finding more and more that Dnx is an acceptable deliverable. If not I make the Dnx masters and use Cinec to then render ProRes versions. But more and more DNx is fine. As for OS, most of the time I am in the software and the OS makes little difference.


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 11:47:33 pm

Lately I've been delivering OP-1A MXF and it's surprisingly simple, and low file size. 20GB for 46 min, 8 tracks of audio...very simple output. And yes, one network did relent and say they would take DNxHD as a deliverable, but I have four others who still insist on ProRes.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 11:50:18 pm

"Lately I've been delivering OP-1A MXF.."

Yes me too and it is simple. I always give the client a master file to archive or make other smaller files for web etc which is now DNx based.


Return to posts index

Don Scioli
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 12:35:13 am

For Shane Ross-
Shane in your latest post you said " Lately I've been delivering OP-1A MXF". Are you doing this via FCPX or Avid?
Since we have been delivering shows for PBS thru West link satellite, they want OP-1A MXF with closed captions, which FCPX won't do. So I have to master in FCPX, get the CC into an AAF file, place the Pro Res file and AAF file into Avid and output to OP-1A MXF. It's clunky but that seems to be the only way to do this. Do you know of an easier way?

many thanks

Don

don@zanmedia.com


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 1:43:48 am

[Don Scioli] "Shane in your latest post you said " Lately I've been delivering OP-1A MXF". Are you doing this via FCPX or Avid?"

Avid. VERY easily done from Avid. I think Resolve will do this too. I'll check tonight.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 1:57:23 am

MXF OP1a is also a default option within Adobe Media Encoder.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 5:56:14 am

[greg janza] "MXF OP1a is also a default option within Adobe Media Encoder.
"


And also selectable in FCPX. You can even deliver ProRes mxf if you’d like.


Return to posts index


Don Scioli
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 5:52:54 pm

Not with Closed Captions, I've tried this in FCPX and Compressor, unless you know of another way. (Avid does)


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 2:00:02 am

[Don Scioli] "Not with Closed Captions, I've tried this in FCPX and Compressor, unless you know of another way. (Avid does)"

Very true. Not with captioning.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 12:21:10 am

Oh gosh this thread is so painful to read.

Such a reminder of the years and years I spent calling Master Control’s and trying to interpret between the “deliverables spec sheets” that various Media Sales Teams delivered to me and what the ACTUAL people at the stations really needed in order to get my stuff on the air properly.

It schooled me to believe that the difference between what is ACTUALLY required - and what asked for - is so often VERY different, just because people find it so hard to evolve and change as technology changes.

I just delivered one of my 4 end-of-the-year pieces - yesterday at 4pm.

It’s due Saturday, but as usual, I’m done days early, thanks (in my opinion) to X.

It was behind a password on Frame.io for the approval loop. When the Agency head marked it as APPROVED I got emailed. I went on my phone and made one menu choice - and it was instantly mirrored From FiO to our Vimeo Pro Master File playout account - and within 30 seconds therefore available for pull distribution to any client stakeholder - at any resolution necessary - from SD to 2k - anywhere in the World.

“Delivery” for me now takes less than ONE second and requires ONE menu selection.
And via Roles and FCP X, that same trigger could have cued FCP X to generate 25 mix minus versions, various station tagged files or alt splits just as easily.

I understand that others work in environments where people are SUPER skittish about the new disruptive digital distribution platforms. And I can also see how large operations might worry about how they can maintain security and professionalism across a system where a guy like me in Arizona can feed Hi-Def content to the whole planet in a second.

But Thanksgiving was last week, but I’m still VERY thankful this stuff has changed so much for me.

Life was SO MUCH more needlessly complex in the days my deliverables we’re ruled by those aweful TV Station delivery standards sheets - (the ones that were usually out of date two weeks after they were typed up!)

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index


greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 2:34:46 am

[Bill Davis] "It’s due Saturday, but as usual, I’m done days early, thanks (in my opinion) to X."

What do you want, a medal?

[Bill Davis] "It schooled me to believe that the difference between what is ACTUALLY required - and what asked for - is so often VERY different, just because people find it so hard to evolve and change as technology changes. "

Just the opposite is actually true. The business has made huge technological changes. When I began in the business I was creating tv show masters on 2 inch tape and delivering BetaSP or Digibeta to networks and all of this process occurred on a massive switcher/edit system. I now deliver tv show masters from my PC as a digital file uploaded to the web in 20mins.

[Bill Davis] " I can also see how large operations might worry about how they can maintain security and professionalism across a system where a guy like me in Arizona can feed Hi-Def content to the whole planet in a second."

You and everybody else.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59:58 am

[Bill Davis] "It’s due Saturday, but as usual, I’m done days early, thanks (in my opinion) to X."

I've had to online, grade, (well, redo as they were done before, but poorly, by another company) and deliver 6 shows. And I've been able to grade and blur (blurs that TRACK very well) each hour long episode in about 10 hours. Thanks to Avid Symphony and having grades I apply to one clip be applied to all instances of that same clip name. And thanks to Boris Continuum and MOCHA for the tracking of a lot of blurs with a lot of movement. Because of those tools, I was able to get the shows onlined and graded and blurred in a fraction of the time it's taken me to do other shows of similar length.

And I was able to output an MXF XDCAM OP1a VERY easily and very quickly and passed QC on 4 of the episodes thus far, the only ones I need to redo are because something that was blurred turns out not to need it.

Right tool, for the right circumstances. X is good, Avid is good...depends on your needs.

[Bill Davis] "I understand that others work in environments where people are SUPER skittish about the new disruptive digital distribution platforms."

Not sure how many of those places are left. 5 years ago my deliverable was tape, tape, tape. Now...a variety of digital delivery options. No one seems to be skittish about this.

[Bill Davis] "people find it so hard to evolve and change as technology changes. "

I'm not seeing that at all. I'm seeing all sorts of people shifting to Premiere, shifting to FCX, updates in Avid coming every month with new features every time. New deliverable options, new tools to help get done what needs to get done quickly. Now, just because we all don't use FCX and think it's god's gift to the NLE and the answer to EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN doesn't mean we find it hard to change. It means FCX doesn't address the needs we have. SO GLAD it helps you and many many MANY others. You really need to let go of this obsession with FCX being the best thing since shaved ice and the answer to every single post workflow need in existence.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 3:59:54 am

[Bill Davis] "I understand that others work in environments where people are SUPER skittish about the new disruptive digital distribution platforms."

Aside from already established media distribution companies (like cable companies) who's super skittish about digital distribution platforms these days? Certainly not people that work in content creation because these new platforms need content and that's generally good for people that work at creating content.

Almost 10 years ago exactly I was sitting in a hotel room in Vegas editing post-event packages for a UFC fight and the Video Game Awards show that took place that weekend. I went to town w/a FW800 hard drive, an HDV deck and a MBP. Edited videos were uploaded to the company's FTP where Episode made all the versions and then they were automatically published to our website. Aside from swapping the deck for a card reader the workflow hasn't changed much (though the upload speeds are thankfully way faster these days). Oh, and this was for a website owned by Viacom (old dog, new trick).


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 6:57:38 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Nov 29, 2017 at 7:03:00 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Aside from already established media distribution companies (like cable companies) who's super skittish about digital distribution platforms these days?"

Sorry. I thought that was the main point of Shane’s posted rant.

The difficulty of getting his deliverables out.

The way he described it just seemed utterly foreign to my experiences these days and it seemed strange.

Must have mistaken his text.

(This specifically: Lately I've been delivering OP-1A MXF and it's surprisingly simple, and low file size. 20GB for 46 min, 8 tracks of audio...very simple output. And yes, one network did relent and say they would take DNxHD as a deliverable, but I have four others who still insist on ProRes.)

That sounds like the nightmares I used to face and generated my post about my workflow. Which simply doesn’t involve that stuff any more. That’s all.

Sorry.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 7:09:25 am

[Bill Davis] "Sorry. I thought that was the main point of Shane’s posted rant."

No, the point is that a few networks I deal with demand ProRes QT deliverables. Won't take DNxHD...won't take OP1a MXF. NO, they aren't backwards and still want digibeta or HDCAM tape...they want digital delivery, so they are hip to the current trends. But only want ProRes.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 1:18:01 pm

[Shane Ross] "No, the point is.."

I thought this thread was about computer hardware, not how Bill delivers to the world, while sipping a margarita in Arizona ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56:57 pm

I think back in the day deliverables for video were pretty straight forward. NTSC or PAL? Beta, 3/4" or VHS? Once a few basic questions were answered there was no room for confusion. Now codec, wrapper, frame size (including square), frame orientation (portrait is a thing if you are doing social), frame rate, bit rate, etc, are all up for grabs. What's the line, the great thing about standards is that there are so many of them? ;)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 5:47:15 pm

[Shane Ross] "But only want ProRes."

That was kinda my point, Shane.

The digital delivery services are kinda collapsing this into a non-issue.

The Frame.io or Vimeo Pro or Extreme Reach (or whatever) services should be handling this now.

Every one of them does an internal capture and serves out a variety of transcodes from low res-low bitrate to essentially uncompressed - depending only on the available Rez of the initial delivery upload.

It seems to me the need to even *think* about delivery codec is rapidly diminishing.

For me it’s gone away totally.

I’d expect that to spread to all levels of production pretty quickly simply because it’s work better suited to machine learning than human choice.

(Given this target playback - reencode this way - if enough resolution isn’t available - warn the client.)

Doesn’t seem that hard from where we are now.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 6:14:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "It seems to me the need to even *think* about delivery codec is rapidly diminishing. "

If all one is required to do is deliver a simple file to Frame or Vimeo or YouTube* then, yes, that's pretty dead simple these days. If one is delivering to Hulu or Amazon or Netflix or HBO or Vudu or NBC or Discovery or Snapchat or a DCP, etc., then just using any old file won't suffice because these companies handle and deliver their own content internally (or via their own sub-contractors). One delivers a master file(s) to their specs and then they do all the transcodes to make all the different versions they need.


*If you deliver to YouTube's paid streaming service then you have to adhere to their delivery specs same as you would for delivering to other streaming services like Amazon or Netflix.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 6:38:43 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "If one is delivering to Hulu or Amazon or Netflix or HBO or Vudu or NBC or Discovery or Snapchat or a DCP, etc., then just using any old file won't suffice because these companies handle and deliver their own content internally (or via their own sub-contractors). One delivers a master file(s) to their specs and then they do all the transcodes to make all the different versions they need."

Yep.
Excellent description of the problem.

Multiple organizations all doing basically the same thing in different ways “because that’s the way we’ve traditionally done it.”

I’m just asking WHY. What’s the point?

Again, this driven by my learning 15 years ago that the production guys at the local network affiliate weren’t following their OWN submission standards - because it was unnecessary and inefficient.

They wanted their paying clients to complicate things they had simplified internally.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 7:07:36 pm

[Bill Davis] "Multiple organizations all doing basically the same thing in different ways “because that’s the way we’ve traditionally done it.”

I’m just asking WHY. What’s the point? "


Quality control, automation, and simplicity.

There are tons of variables to consider when you make an h264 movie - profile, level, bit rate, VBR or constant, 1 or 2 pass, key frame distance, multiplexing, audio format/bit rate, etc... Each one can affect the overall quality of the file.

With ProRes and DNxHD/HR, that complexity disappears. It's easier for an organization to accept one codec in very specific frame sized/frame rates and transcode that file to fit their systems than design their system to accept a 100 possible deliverables, which may or may not be good quality.

Plus, if an organization knows it will be getting a 1080p 23.976 ProRes file but will need an SD, 720p, and 1080p streaming files for their playback system, they can automate those transcodes using software from companies like Telestream.

And because they control the transcodes they can guarantee the quality of them, so clients don't come to them wanting to know why their files look bad on their website. Plus, recompressing ProRes or DNxHD to a delivery codec like MPEG or h264 isn't an issue like it is if they were given h264 files.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 7:10:00 pm

[Bill Davis] "I’m just asking WHY. What’s the point? "

Because Snapchat doesn't want a DCP, HBO doesn't want a vertical video and Netflix thinks it can deliver superior quality and performance to its customers by handling encoding and distribution inself rather than 'rebranding' a YouTube/Frame.io/Vimeo stream and sending that to your house when you fire up the Netflix app?

[Bill Davis] "Multiple organizations all doing basically the same thing in different ways “because that’s the way we’ve traditionally done it.”"

You mean like Frame.io, Vimeo, YouTube, Whipster, Kollaborate, Media Silo, etc.? 😉

Even the new companies you mention are part of the 'problem' because you must deliver files to their servers and their servers alone. By that I mean, my YouTube, Vimeo and Frame.io accounts aren't interlinked and interchangeable. I can't 'drag' a video from Vimeo over to Frame.io.

Having been on the content receiving side, not just the creation and send to the client side, it's pretty obvious that a one-size-fits-all solution isn't practical.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 8:35:11 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "By that I mean, my YouTube, Vimeo and Frame.io accounts aren't interlinked and interchangeable. "

Check again.

Frame.io and Vimeo Pro appear to be co-located and linked.

That’s based on my current workflow where I can mirror from FiO to VimPro with a single click and the file appears instantly.

The only delay is when the flag hits to Vimeo to further process the server version already in storage - their side kicks in to do additional transcodes since those files will face clients and viewers who need differing versions that FiO doesn’t need to function.

That’s my point.

Producer exports a reference file. The distribution services handles the individual customer needs.

This is what we’ve done in the commercials area for a years now. Master to Extreme Reach or equivalent - they do the rest.

That model will win in the long run for everything distributed, IMO.

Time will tell.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 9:25:45 pm

[Bill Davis] "This is what we’ve done in the commercials area for a years now. Master to Extreme Reach or equivalent - they do the rest"

Extreme Reach does not supply the same services as Vimeo or Frame. They are an actual spot delivery service. In addition, they dictate to the broadcaster a very limited number of formats and broadcasters either accept the service or don't. That's not the same thing as sending a 23.976fps ProRes file and having 60i (NTSC) and 50i (PAL), with and without captions, supplied by the service, based on 100 different end user specs.

So, yes, in theory your concept could work, IF and only IF, the end users' specs are standardized and limited. Which they aren't.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 7:47:14 pm

[Bill Davis] "I’m just asking WHY. What’s the point? "

Why? Talk to them. It's below our pay grade. Why do some networks want embedded closed captioning, while others want sidecar SRT files?

And I'm not entirely sure about your description of file delivery services. If I upload to a service, it gives the user the option to download one of their transcoded versions and/or the original. So if I upload a ProRes master, they'll generate MP4 viewing files at several resolutions. Depending on the service, I can download one of the MP4s or the original ProRes. But if my requirement is an MPEG2 or Avid DNxHD in an MXF wrapper, I don't believe the service will generate that from the ProRes master. Is your experience different?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 8:41:54 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But if my requirement is an MPEG2 or Avid DNxHD in an MXF wrapper, I don't believe the service will generate that from the ProRes master. Is your experience different?"

It’s the party requesting that deliverable I’m questioning.

If Telestream Episode can fix this on your desktop - shouldn’t a virtual Episode-like system be able to fix it better, faster and more directly in the cloud?

Why should it be your job? It’s “automatable.” Right now.

Asking EVERY editor to become a transcoding expert is silly.

It’s work better suited to the machines.

My 2 cents.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 9:19:25 pm

[Bill Davis] "It’s the party requesting that deliverable I’m questioning.
If Telestream Episode can fix this on your desktop - shouldn’t a virtual Episode-like system be able to fix it better, faster and more directly in the cloud?
Why should it be your job? It’s “automatable.” Right now.
Asking EVERY editor to become a transcoding expert is silly."


Sure, I completely agree. But, that's not living in the real world. I can barely get clients to give me the real specs of what they want/need. Therefore, expecting them to do it correctly is a real long shot. And that includes a lot of broadcasters/networks/studios. The bottom line is that what you envision doesn't currently exits via Vimeo, Frame.io, Wipster.io, etc.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 9:21:07 pm
Last Edited By Andrew Kimery on Nov 29, 2017 at 9:21:50 pm

[Bill Davis] "Check again."

Will do. Thanks Bill.

[Bill Davis] "If Telestream Episode can fix this on your desktop - shouldn’t a virtual Episode-like system be able to fix it better, faster and more directly in the cloud?

Why should it be your job? It’s “automatable.” Right now.

Asking EVERY editor to become a transcoding expert is silly."


But what file do you send to Telestream-in-the-cloud to begin with? That's the crux of this. In this scenario the editor isn't tasked with creating a bunch of different transcodes, just one file out of the NLE that will then be sent to the client so they can generate a bunch of different transcodes.

If the client wants a 23.976 4K ProRes 4444 and I export my 'master' as 720p60 MPEG2 then upload it to Telestream so it can make the 4K ProRes file the client's probably not going to be too happy with the results. Unless clients start supplying export presets that can be imported into NLEs (or Compressor/AME) then editors will still need to have enough technical knowledge to generate a master file out of their NLE that adheres to client specifications (or pay someone w/that knowledge).


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19:16 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "But what file do you send to Telestream-in-the-cloud to begin with? "

I see this as a temporary issue that will be solved pretty quickly.

The clear trend is two-fold.

The first is metadata instructions against mirrored footage pools. Both X and Premiere have gone there via their Proxy plumbing. It’s trivial and expected now.

That sets up the key factor as the nature of the Original Media pool - wherever that may reside. Right now I have the most experience with how Frame.io handles this - but basically, I work initially with h.264 encodes for ease in the early stage content creation and review. Then I upload full Rez out of X - which just replaces my source pool.

But “full res” can vary, at will, as well.

The “pixel density” of that source media pool is determined by me when I determine my Project settings. But that can easily be revised later.

The clear trend is that cameras are capturing both larger pixel rasters AND improving their color depth capture abilities rapidly - so this seems like a process built for an easily foreseeable future.

So the simple answer is that you send to your distribution service a “digital master” created from the largest, pixel densest, least destructively encoded footage pool you can - and then let the big processing guns in the cloud handle the rest.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 6:58:36 pm

[Bill Davis] "The clear trend is that cameras are capturing both larger pixel rasters AND improving their color depth capture abilities rapidly - so this seems like a process built for an easily foreseeable future. "

I agree that the trend towards higher spatial resolutions is trending upward, and I expect 6k and 8k capture devices for consumers to be 'the thing' by 2025 (maybe), but I don't expect that highly compressed, in-camera, 8 bit capture from mainstream camera manufacturers to go away anytime soon... a lot people just don't see the difference between 8bit and 12bit images... including (unfortunately) a lot of professional media creators.

Shawn



Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 8:46:12 pm

[Shawn Miller] " I expect 6k and 8k capture devices for consumers to be 'the thing' by 2025 (maybe)"

A big maybe. So far there's no viable argument for any resolution higher than 4k in regards to image quality and the human eye being able to detect a difference and even 4k is a long way from being adopted as the default broadcast format.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 9:53:21 pm

[greg janza] "A big maybe. So far there's no viable argument for any resolution higher than 4k in regards to image quality and the human eye being able to detect a difference and even 4k is a long way from being adopted as the default broadcast format."

I completely agree - in terms of spatial resolution and image quality, 1080 makes for a great distribution and viewing experience, so 4k broadcast doesn't even make sense to me... but from a marketing standpoint, more k's are easy to sell. A few years ago, I didn't think anyone but filmmakers really cared about 4k, now, it seems that you're behind the curve if you don't have a smartphone that shoots UHD. I just have a sinking feeling that 6k or 8k will become the new UHD sooner rather than later, even if there's no real need for it. ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 8:23:29 pm

[Bill Davis] "So the simple answer is that you send to your distribution service a “digital master” created from the largest, pixel densest, least destructively encoded footage pool you can - and then let the big processing guns in the cloud handle the rest. "

Nice in theory. Too bad it's only theoretical for the near-term, unless you can work within very narrow guidelines.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 8:54:45 pm

[Bill Davis] "So the simple answer is that you send to your distribution service a “digital master” created from the largest, pixel densest, least destructively encoded footage pool you can - and then let the big processing guns in the cloud handle the rest. "

For :30 spots this seems viable (aside from Oliver's concerns). For long form content you are talking about uploads that can span the range from hundreds of gigs to over a TB depending on the settings (ex. a 90min 23.98 UHD movie in ProRes XQ is 1.2 TB). Most people will need faster Internet pipes for that. 😉

Of course the genesis of this branch of the thread wasn't that file delivery is inherently complicated, it's that FCPX/Compressor currently can't export a common format w/closed captions like the other major NLEs can which makes Don's current workflow unnecessarily complicated.

I was half kidding when I said it, but I'm digging my idea about companies sending export presets for editors to use. Obviously this wouldn't be viable in all cases (like Don's or where the client doesn't have the tech knowhow to do it), but if Netflix can write up a 53 page deliverables guide I'm sure they can make some export presets to go with it. ;)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 9:05:56 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I was half kidding when I said it, but I'm digging my idea about companies sending export presets for editors to use. Obviously this wouldn't be viable in all cases (like Don's or where the client doesn't have the tech knowhow to do it), but if Netflix can write up a 53 page deliverables guide I'm sure they can make some export presets to go with it. ;)"

That would actually be a great idea. Pretty easily done for Avid, Adobe, and Apple compression. But they would also need to supply other spec info that affects the master before encoding, like loudness compliance, as well as captioning.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 9:23:52 pm
Last Edited By Andrew Kimery on Nov 30, 2017 at 9:39:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But they would also need to supply other spec info that affects the master before encoding, like loudness compliance, as well as captioning."

Exactly, still lots of pre-export details to comply with, but having an "Export for Netflix" button would, to Bill's point, simplify things for editors/AEs.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 10:18:25 pm

Yep.

I’ve had that for six years for basic YouTube and Vimeo delivery directly out of the Share Menu - and that “plumbed in” automated one-click system has improved by leaps year-over-year as those tech systems have grown.

It should not be lost that Frame.io just got that new $20 million round of VC financing - and that Emery Wells and the team there said a priority was enhancing transfer security - presumably to allow the big content players like Hollywood to use it fluidly.

That tells me they don’t view file size as a stopper.

And as someone lucky enough to have Consumer fiber at home - I can vouch that bigger pipes make a multi Gig video upload faster and easier for me today than a 30 min audio upload was in my youth.

There’s nothing I’d enjoy more than consigning the competing delivery specs battles to the past. They are an awful distraction from the creative work that should actually drive project success.

My 2 cents.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 11:14:49 pm

[greg janza] "I just exported a tv show for a local channel today and the encoder preset I used to make the master for them was a custom preset that the station sent me."

That's awesome. I wish more people would do that.

I had something similar a few years ago where I was trouble shooting a very weird playback bug with the deck op. Long story short, after lots of trial and error he made a custom setting in AME that worked w/his playback system and emailed it to me.

[Bill Davis] "That tells me they don’t view file size as a stopper.

And as someone lucky enough to have Consumer fiber at home - I can vouch that bigger pipes make a multi Gig video upload faster and easier for me today than a 30 min audio upload was in my youth."


If Frame isn't concerned about file sizes then they really need to get rid of the file size limits on user accounts. 😉

With regards to fiber, only about 10% of the users in the US have access to fiber so the 'just get a bigger pipe' solution is a none starter. I think the vast majority of users would find 100gig-1TB uploads problematic considering the current state of Internet access across the US (and it's about to get much worse) both in terms of upload speeds (which for cable tend to top out around speeds of 'up to' 20Mpbs and much less for DSL) and data caps. Of course you could upgrade to a business account to avoid the caps, but then you've got to pay a lot more money to get the same upload speed.

Again, for short form this isn't really an issue, but when you go from content lengths of 60sec to 60min to 120min then all of a sudden problems of scale start to appear.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 12:17:30 am

[Andrew Kimery] "but when you go from content lengths of 60sec to 60min to 120min then all of a sudden problems of scale start to appear."

Just as a frame of reference, a half-hour TV episode - HD, 25-30 min, ProRes/HQ/4444 - is around 30-35GB. If you have to deliver a master, a split-track/textless master, and in both NTSC and PAL variations, you're looking at around 120GB+. That's a long up or download for most folks. And without Aspera or similar, generally unreliable and failure-prone.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 12:41:26 am

[Oliver Peters] "If you have to deliver a master, a split-track/textless master, and in both NTSC and PAL variations, you're looking at around 120GB+. "

See, that’s what I just don’t get.

The way X works right now - those splits and M&E versions are just pointers to the original files that your desktop computer renders out on demand.

Seems to me that with a depository if the original frames in the cloud to link to - it would be massively faster to have the big iron behind the cloud apply the version metadata against the stored frames - rather than to replete upload the same underlying data again and again and again..

Why would you ever need to re upload multiple versions of the same exact frames? It makes no sense to me.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 1:17:44 am

[Bill Davis] "The way X works right now - those splits and M&E versions are just pointers to the original files that your desktop computer renders out on demand."

This is another difference in our worlds. I don't do the final mix, a sound mixer does, and then they provide the various audio stems required by the network. And then I cut them into my final sequences. It appears you do the final mix, and there's nothing wrong with that. just saying it's different. When I cut promos from show masters, I did deliver the final mix, as the audio provided to me was already mixed, and in the separate stems I needed.

[Bill Davis] "Seems to me that with a depository if the original frames in the cloud to link to - it would be massively faster to have the big iron behind the cloud apply the version metadata against the stored frames - rather than to replete upload the same underlying data again and again and again.. "

I'm sorry, do you mean that you load ALL of the audio into the cloud? That seems..odd. If that's one of those new-fangled things...OK then. Still seems odd to have all the source files on a delivery platform.

[Bill Davis] "Why would you ever need to re upload multiple versions of the same exact frames? "

Because the shows I online, that are cut in FCX originally, BTW, need 8 deliverables. An HD Cut-To-Clock version with commercial blacks, texted. And then the same textless. Then an international SEAMLESS version that has 5 min of additional material, and no act breaks. Texted and textless. And then 4K versions of these, so four more. And the audio config on them is the same....10 channels of audio. And then we deliver separately the 32 different stems they require.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 4:24:08 pm

[Shane Ross] "Because the shows I online, that are cut in FCX originally, BTW, need 8 deliverables. An HD Cut-To-Clock version with commercial blacks, texted. And then the same textless. Then an international SEAMLESS version that has 5 min of additional material, and no act breaks. Texted and textless. And then 4K versions of these, so four more. And the audio config on them is the same....10 channels of audio. And then we deliver separately the 32 different stems they require."

Thanks for posting this Shane. It brings back memories for me for when I used to work on Discovery Channel shows. These tech specs sound very familiar and as I recall it was quite an exhausting process to create those masters.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 4:44:46 pm

Shane,

This to me is a logical progression of the changes I’ve experienced over the past six years.

I do VERY little the same way I did it back then.

(And yes, to Olivers point, this is not just about X - it’s about the entirety of the new era of digital delivery.)

Maybe it’s my lucky fiber line access - but I simply think about digital files differently now.

They aren’t a fixed “thing” to me anymore. They are part of a living connected stream that I can touch and change any time.

The old way I’d do that was to “load up” my project on my machine and basically master a stand-alone file to send to someone. Actually, as you indicate - lots and lots of standalone versions, often. That’s less and less how it works for me anymore. While I don’t face the same delivery needs that you do, my deliverables are basically all now connected files on-line.

I don’t “push” them to clients - they “pull” them as needed.

And increasingly, I’m starting to see that things I expected to need to do BEFORE the upload - like versioning - can be more efficiently done in the cloud responding to metadata I apply against already uploaded content.

Right now this type of thing is still somewhat unusual, I’ll grant - and I’m no big pioneer in it - I’m just noticing how what I’m being pulled toward today works much better and faster than what I used to do - and it seems to me that the benefits are so HUGE I have to believe it’s going to grow in this direction.

My delivery is an ephemeral connected file on a server. (The “connected” part is the key)

There is no actual MASTER or VERSION as a stand-alone thing - just an expression of what somebody needs in the moment - exported for the moment - revisable in 10 minutes if a flaw is discovered or a new idea is useful to the work.

It’s a change in my thinking.

And I’m just trying to figure out what’s going to be important in this new system. At least what’s important that’s distinct from what’s been important in the past - when a master was a fixed thing on a tape or disk - that was relatively unchangeable past the moment of its creation.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 6:55:23 pm

[Bill Davis] "This to me is a logical progression of the changes I’ve experienced over the past six years. "

I think it boils down to Shane's point that different parts of the industry require different solutions. I think for people working in commercials, trailers, corporate, etc., you are correct that 'locked' means more 'locked for now' as opposed to 'locked for good'. I used to work at a place that did a lot radio and TV commercials for touring artists and the same basic spots, with minor tweaks/updates, would get used for years and years. It's was a continuous update cycle as opposed to starting from scratch every time.

On the flip side, once a movie, TV show, episode of web series, etc., goes out the door it's done. Iron Man 2 isn't a re-release of the first Iron Man with a few changes, it's a whole new movie from the ground up.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 7:12:51 pm

[Bill Davis] "There is no actual MASTER or VERSION as a stand-alone thing"

Bill, I get what you are doing and in many ways it's pretty neat. Unfortunately the real world is simply too unreliable to depend on that.

For example, look at my Flow transition comment in the regular FCPX forum. I get unreliable and unpredictable results with this effect, simply based on how long X has been open and working. If I generate a standalone master file, then I can QC it, be responsible for its specs, and know that when I make copies from it, I'm always starting from a known, 'good' starting point.

Plus, what happens to your master export when Apple does something like the change between 10.0 and 10.1 with Libraries? Then, all of a sudden, your raw, unmastered sequences are FUBARed? Sure would be nice to have a standalone master, as well as textless, split track masters to fall back on. ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 1:29:12 am

[Bill Davis] "See, that’s what I just don’t get.
The way X works right now - those splits and M&E versions are just pointers to the original files that your desktop computer renders out on demand."


1. It's generally a deliverable requirement.
2. Not everyone uses X.
3. Most often, original files are archived and not available. But if you still have to make changes, it's often very easy to do this from split track textless masters.
4. Based on your description above (which I understand and also use), every other NLE is capable of exactly the same thing, albeit maybe with a bit more manual intervention.

[Bill Davis] "Seems to me that with a depository if the original frames in the cloud to link to - it would be massively faster to have the big iron behind the cloud apply the version metadata against the stored frames - rather than to replete upload the same underlying data again and again and again.. "

That doesn't exist today and may never exist, because files sizes are increasing and not decreasing. It's nice in theory, though I would have a hard time trusting it and I think most people feel that way. What about something as simple as having the right third-party plug-ins? To date, no one has successfully demonstrated this theoretical cloud-based online editing concept - at full resolution (like 4K ProRes4444XQ) - with anything other than very simple demo projects.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 1:11:13 am

[Oliver Peters] "If you have to deliver a master, a split-track/textless master, and in both NTSC and PAL variations, you're looking at around 120GB+"

Well, lately it's HD and then UHD masters. I haven't had to deliver SD in 5 years. So the file sizes are LARGER.

[Oliver Peters] " And without Aspera or similar, generally unreliable and failure-prone."

Which is why typically Aspera is used. Except for the 220GB UHD files...those I ship on a hard drive.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 12:33:37 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Again, for short form this isn't really an issue, but when you go from content lengths of 60sec to 60min to 120min then all of a sudden problems of scale start to appear."

Yes and no in my experience.

You only need ONE entity to upload the master content bucket to one location - one time. Theoretically, that could be happening over a week while The whole team is cutting away on matching ProRez, DNX or even H264 versions.

And there’s nothing to stop someone from setting up a rules based upload system where small chunks of the master timeline “o-neg” are uploaded as parts of the project are approved - or they go off to full Rez required processes like VFX.

There’s no functional reason I can see to wait to do one big massive upload after everything is finished.

It’s how rendering works already. Why not upload?

Just thinking out loud.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 1:32:32 am

[Bill Davis] "And there’s nothing to stop someone from setting up a rules based upload system where small chunks of the master timeline “o-neg” are uploaded as parts of the project are approved - or they go off to full Rez required processes like VFX."

I think we are talking past each other and I think your comments have changed from the original post. We are talking about delivering finished masters to the cloud and having a zillion variations generated on demand, BUT, from a single, self-contained master file. You seem to be talking about an online-quality editing system with all the media in the cloud. That's quite a pipe dream.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 3:43:31 am

This thread just makes me want to buy large quantities of alcohol for all my past present and future assist, coordinators and finish teams. Ive been very fortunate to work with great support teams as I would be very very bad at doing all this kind of stuff.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 7:35:11 am

[Oliver Peters] "You seem to be talking about an online-quality editing system with all the media in the cloud. That's quite a pipe dream."

I don't think Bill is talking about that. Going back to his rendering example, I think what Bill's brainstorming is a function where you can selectively export portions of the timeline at 'master quality' resolution and have them uploaded to a cloud-based service in the background. The service would need to sync w/the NLE to make sure all the chunks ended up in the right order (and older chunks were correctly replaced by newer versions if changes were made). Once you upload your audio splits (either made by you or given to you by a rerecording mixer) you can set your audio configs, choose the texted/textless version, etc., and queue up all the different versions you need then hit the 'go' button.

It's an interesting idea, though still very impractical for long form projects given the current state of Internet service in the US and the limitations of cloud hosting companies (ex. Vimeo Pro only lets you upload 20gig/week). Also, there's no way for you to QC the final output without downloading it and watching it yourself, which pretty much negates the whole point of having a cloud-based service generate and deliver your files for you.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 4:55:38 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Also, there's no way for you to QC the final output without downloading it and watching it yourself, which pretty much negates the whole point of having a cloud-based service generate and deliver your files for you."

Well, right now the FiO Approve/Needs Work tagging system could easily grow into something to manage versions - and really, all you’d need for QC is for someone to watch the deliverable version on line and vet that the file confirms to your requirements. No need to download it, really.

Further, if it’s just matching a distribution requirement checklist - a machine learning system should easily be able to compare the deliverable to your last export and only flag it if it differs.

Fun to think about.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 6:47:08 pm

[Bill Davis] "Well, right now the FiO Approve/Needs Work tagging system could easily grow into something to manage versions - and really, all you’d need for QC is for someone to watch the deliverable version on line and vet that the file confirms to your requirements. No need to download it, really.

Further, if it’s just matching a distribution requirement checklist - a machine learning system should easily be able to compare the deliverable to your last export and only flag it if it differs. "


QC'ing a relatively low res proxy stream of the high res master wouldn't allow you to catch things like banding, gamma shifts, sync, odd motion characteristics, etc., because you wouldn't know if those anomalies existed in the master itself or were only present in the proxy stream you were monitoring. A person, and possibly machine learning in time, could certainly compare a low res reference export to the final master export the cloud service creates to make sure there are no discrepancies in the edit, L3rds, etc.,.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 7:03:09 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I don't think Bill is talking about that. "

Wish all due respect to Bill, it's sometimes hard to tell when he's talking about the current real world and when he's drifted off into how he imagines the world could be, extrapolating from existing processes and technologies. ☺ Hence my question. (No offense meant, Bill.)

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 3, 2017 at 4:09:01 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Dec 3, 2017 at 4:09:49 am

[Oliver Peters] "Wish all due respect to Bill, it's sometimes hard to tell when he's talking about the current real world and when he's drifted off into how he imagines the world could be, extrapolating from existing processes and technologies. ☺ Hence my question. (No offense meant, Bill.)"

None taken.

This is the “conceive it, believe it, achieve it” process in action.

I’ve learned that if I don’t start by imagining working a different way - I never will.

What’s shocked me so much in the past half decade - is how few actual dead ends I’ve encountered when I’ve allowed myself to stop thinking the way ai used to and tried to move on to something better by altering my process.

It’s spooky how much better things appear to be now (at least in my working processes!) than they’ve ever been before.

Better, faster, cheaper tools - that are a LOT more fun to use - combined with new ways to reach audiences that were undreamed of not that long ago.

What an amazing time to be involved in Creative Arts!

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 3, 2017 at 1:43:57 pm

[Bill Davis] "What an amazing time to be involved in Creative Arts!
"


Amen to that!

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Dec 1, 2017 at 5:05:56 am

[Andrew Kimery] "If Frame isn't concerned about file sizes then they really need to get rid of the file size limits on user accounts. 😉"

That's my number 1 complaint against it. I like Frame.io alot and use it alot but they are incredibly tight with their storage and that makes for a very challenging work environment.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 30, 2017 at 10:22:00 pm

I just exported a tv show for a local channel today and the encoder preset I used to make the master for them was a custom preset that the station sent me.

I love the idea of custom presets for all delivery.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 12:01:15 am

[Shane Ross] " With having everything (except my IO box and my RAID) contained in a small area, not strewn about and connected by squid-like tentacles. It is so nice to have it all in one place."

I'm hip. My Windows 10 PC work station is free of squid-like tentacles : )







Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 5:27:26 am

[Shane Ross] "the only thing keeping me running Apple is the damned ProRes deliverable. "

That was the last item keeping me tethered to my mac as well but throughout 2017 I've been delivering DNxHD and more recently MXF OP1a. I think the pro res requirement will soon be replaced with these equal options.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Bouke Vahl
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 4:45:00 pm

ProRes CAN be made on PC.
If you use Adobe stuff, it's a simple plugin that catches the uncompressed video down the pipeline, and uses FFmpeg to output ProRes.

If you use Avid, you can render to an inbetween and transcode to ProRes with FFmpeg.

ProRes as input is supported by close to all PC NLE's afaik.

hth,

Bouke
http://www.videotoolshed.com


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 6:06:13 pm

[Bouke Vahl] "If you use Adobe stuff, it's a simple plugin that catches the uncompressed video down the pipeline, and uses FFmpeg to output ProRes."

Yup, and that ProRes file will get kicked back by QC as an "incorrect encode." It's not licensed by Apple, so several components that make is a "correct encode" are missing. What? I don't know, I'm not an engineer. But the engineers say "sorry, this is wrong, please provide a correct encode" so...

The only apps ProRes on Windows is licensed for are ultra high end systems.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 7:08:42 pm

[Shane Ross] "The only apps ProRes on Windows is licensed for are ultra high end systems."

Scratch does ProRes on Windows and can be had for $650 a year, but if you're willing to spend that just to make ProRes you'd do better to buy a Mac Mini and use it as a transcode station. So it's not super expensive, but is overkill for a simple transcode.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 29, 2017 at 6:57:32 pm

[Bouke Vahl] "If you use Adobe stuff, it's a simple plugin that catches the uncompressed video down the pipeline, and uses FFmpeg to output ProRes.
"


I know about the Aftercodecs plugin but is there another? Aftercodecs only works in AE.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Gabriele Sartori
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 25, 2017 at 11:59:33 pm

I built many Hackintosh for fun but I would never do a serious job on them. All it takes is a driver and you can be without machine for days

Gabriele - California


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 12:06:57 am

[Gabriele Sartori] "I built many Hackintosh for fun but I would never do a serious job on them. All it takes is a driver and you can be without machine for days"

True, which is why I make sure I have the correct drivers, and don't update anyting. Been using this Hack for nothing BUT professional work for over a year, on a couple dozen projects. But yes, they do take babying for sure

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 12:55:06 am

[Bob Zelin] "the starting price $4999 won't do much for a power machine"

Well... The comparable 8-core 2013 MP is also $5K and I would say it has plenty of power for graphics, editing, audio post and color correction. That's without the display, Thunderbolt3 and built-in 10GigE. So I think we'll find out in the real world that's a damn fine machine.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Don Walker
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 3:33:56 am

After years of waiting to replace my 2008 8-core MacPro, it looks like December will be new computer month for me. I do a lot of FCPX and Motion work, (some with 4K footage), very little After Effects, and I have not yet gone down the Resolve path. It seems to me, that even though I'm tempted to go for the entry level iMac Pro (perhaps with a bigger SSD), my best bet would be to buy a top of the line iMac, with 3rd party RAM, and then have enough money left over to buy a modest laptop for those on the road jobs. Can anyone argue that I would be better off with the iMac Pro?

don walker
texarkana, texas

John 3:16


Return to posts index

Gabriele Sartori
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 7:17:56 pm

Take the highest possible clock and probably you have the most bangs for the bucks. Consider also the support for Quicksync that is not available (yet) on Xeon CPUs.

Gabriele - California


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 3:44:35 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Bob Zelin] "the starting price $4999 won't do much for a power machine"

Well... The comparable 8-core 2013 MP is also $5K and I would say it has plenty of power for graphics, editing, audio post and color correction. That's without the display, Thunderbolt3 and built-in 10GigE. So I think we'll find out in the real world that's a damn fine machine."


I don't think he said it would not work. The question is would a Windows 10 system make more sense if you are using DR 12, Premiere Pro or Avid.

Never under estimate the performance of a $1400.00 gaming PC for video editing. Who knows what performance increases Volta will offer?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 1:48:40 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Nov 26, 2017 at 1:53:45 pm

[andy patterson] "The question is would a Windows 10 system make more sense if you are using DR 12, Premiere Pro or Avid"

And I didn't say that he did. With all due respect, going PC or not is your question. Yes, I know Bob brought it up, but it's doubtful if that's what Steve was asking in his original post. Very few professionals are going to go away from a mainstream PC if they go Windows, which generally means Dell or HP.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 7:04:52 pm

[Oliver Peters] "And I didn't say that he did. With all due respect, going PC or not is your question. Yes, I know Bob brought it up, but it's doubtful if that's what Steve was asking in his original post."

I know Steve is not going to switch to Windows but your response was for Bob. Bob's question was worth mentioning. Keep in mind for Graphic Designers the MS Surface Studio has offered a option that Apple cannot match. If a Mac user does not use FCPX at all switching to Windows might be something they are considering especially if Apple is asking to much over the competition.

As I stated some Apple users have given up on their iPad Pro in favor of the MS Surface Pro with good reason. I am not saying the iPad Pro does not work. I will say what if Apple made OS X with touch screen support and they offered an iPad Extreme with OS X and an i7 CPU. Would the iPad Pro that everyone loves become obsolete within 2 months after the release of the iPad Extreme?

Shane has mentioned he might make the switch Windows 10 on his blog http://lfhd.net. Will he do it? Who knows? I will say that if Apple offered a generic ATX system with a six core Coffee Lake CPU and a GTX 1080 Ti for $1700.00 I am sure the Mac Pro trash can would become obsolete with in two months. Why do I say that? When I see Apple users with iMacs, Apple laptops or even the Trash Can make use of an External GPU I see them using an Nvidia GTX 980 Ti or a GTX 1080. Why can't Apple just offer better products? I know Apple will never release a Generic ATX system because Apple does what it is best for Apple not the consumer. The question is how long can Apple continue to do this? I think that is what Bob was hinting at.

Apple users should not have to build hackintoshes or buy external Nvidia GPUs. That type of paradigm might make some people switch platforms (Windows). Having said that I know Steve will probably be happy with an iMac Pro but not everyone will be. I think it is worth mentioing considering Shane is not the only one on this thread who built a hackintosh.


Return to posts index

Rich Rubasch
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 7:23:31 pm

I am wondering if the new iMac Pros would even ship in December....looked at a current fully loaded iMac that they sell today and curious if the GPU is that underpowered that it would not compare. I can full load up two current 27" iMacs for about $5000 each.

Biggest thing the new iMac Pro offers us is 10gig e networking. if the trash cans had implemented 10gig e years ago I would have four of them....currently we run souped up 2010-2012 towers.

With 10gig e networking and a switch along with local thunderboldt RAID storage we'd be ready for sharing, editing and collaborating.

Do I really need the iMac Pro, or could a fully maxed out iMac tide us over for 1-2 years?

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 7:32:26 pm

[Rich Rubasch] "Do I really need the iMac Pro, or could a fully maxed out iMac tide us over for 1-2 years?"

It would depend on what you are trying to do. For me my Mac Mini using FCPX works OK. Having said that I am only going to edit a few 1920 X 1080 YouTube video using AVCHD video files. Obviously the Mac Mini would not be a good option if I wanted to edit the native Red One R3D video files.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 26, 2017 at 8:53:19 pm

[andy patterson] "Why can't Apple just offer better products?"

I think you are making a value judgement based on your needs and wants that most others here may not agree with. I have a hot-rodded Mac Pro tower, but I shifted to using my 2015 MBP full-time at home, because it's a better machine. The place I mainly freelance at has a mixture of old Mac Pros, a 2013 Mac Pro and several loaded iMacs. The Mac Pro towers are dogs by today's standards and the only think the iMacs suffer on is rendering AE projects with heavy plug-ins, like particles. I don't think anyone there misses cards in slots and having to deal with keeping all of that stuff current.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 1:32:29 am

[Oliver Peters] "I think you are making a value judgement based on your needs and wants that most others here may not agree with."

I am going by what I see around me. People have built hackintosh systems and bought after makrtet Nvidia GPUs. I am not saying all Apple users are thinking of switching to Windows 10 systems but some have.


[Oliver Peters] "I have a hot-rodded Mac Pro tower, but I shifted to using my 2015 MBP full-time at home, because it's a better machine."

Better than what? An old 2012 Mac Pro? Does it offer a better bang for the buck than a $1,600.00 dollar gaming PC? If Apple offered a generic ATX system with a six core i7 8700K and a GTX 1080 Ti for $1,600.00 would you have opted for the Trash Can? That is the question that needs to be asked. I cannot wait to see what Volta will have to offer over Pascal. Will Apple even offer Volta as an option?


[Oliver Peters] "The place I mainly freelance at has a mixture of old Mac Pros, a 2013 Mac Pro and several loaded iMacs."

They can only buy what Apple offers. Keep in mind Shane uses a Hackintosh and is considering a Windows PC. That was kind of my point. Apple users should not have to build hackintosh systems or buy an external Nvidia GPU. Apple should have more options. I now Apple won't do it.


[Oliver Peters] "The Mac Pro towers are dogs"

I agree.

[Oliver Peters] " I don't think anyone there misses cards in slots and having to deal with keeping all of that stuff current."

They may not but some people do. Also it is hard to say because Apple's options are limited. There are hackitosh system on YouTube and others have opted to switch to Windows PC. It may or may not be a lot but if Apple did offer a generic ATX system with a Coffee Lake i7 8700K and GTX 1080 Ti for $1,600.00 do you think it would out sell the Trash Can systems? I don't think Anyone wants HP or Dell to stop making their towers and opt for the Trash Can. Do you kind of see my point? I am not saying the Apple products don't work. I am saying if other options were offered some Apple user would prefer the alternative options.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 2:27:00 am

[andy patterson] "Better than what? An old 2012 Mac Pro?"

No, better than my 2009 Mac Pro tower, even though theoretically the tower has better specs. It's a 2015 MBP.

[andy patterson] "Does it offer a better bang for the buck than a $1,600.00 dollar gaming PC?"

For my needs, yes. Especially considering that I already owned it. ☺

[andy patterson] "If Apple offered a generic ATX system with a six core i7 8700K and a GTX 1080 Ti for $1,600.00 would you have opted for the Trash Can?"

I haven't personally bought a trash can, although my son has. I work for companies that have. It's a silly hypothetical you are presenting, as Apple would never offer that kind of machine, while still maintaining a high price on the trash can Macs. But, if dollars were in a similar ballpark, then yes, I might still opt for a trash can.

[andy patterson] "They can only buy what Apple offers."

You have no idea what you're talking about. I was part of those purchasing decisions and first of all, it's an evolutionary decision. If I have 7 or 8 workstations on shared storage of various vintages, I'm not going to replace all 7 or 8 at once with PCs. I have to be able to move files and projects around amongst all of them, which means one platform or you're in a world of hurt. So, staying with Apple is the better business decision.

[andy patterson] " I don't think Anyone wants HP or Dell to stop making their towers and opt for the Trash Can"

Except they do sell all-in-ones (like the iMac), so they definitely have a market for that.

[andy patterson] "I am not saying the Apple products don't work. I am saying if other options were offered some Apple user would prefer the alternative options."

Sure. But there are also plenty of PC users opting for Macs. Ironically, IBM offers their staffers Macs as a work machine option. That's because the company analysis has shown better cost/benefit ratio with the Apple platform versus PCs. Mainly because IBM has fewer tech support (software and hardware) issues with their deployed Macs. The discussion cuts both ways.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 3:51:54 am

[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Better than what? An old 2012 Mac Pro?"

No, better than my 2009 Mac Pro tower, even though theoretically the tower has better specs. It's a 2015 MBP."


You are comparing Apple to Apple. I would hope a new Apple computer would be better than an older Apple computer but Bob hinted towards the competition. I tend to agree with his comment.



[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Does it offer a better bang for the buck than a $1,600.00 dollar gaming PC?"

For my needs, yes. Especially considering that I already owned it. ☺"


You already owned it? Did you pay more than $1,600.00 for it and can it edit video better than a $1,600.00 PC?



[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "They can only buy what Apple offers."

You have no idea what you're talking about. I was part of those purchasing decisions and first of all, it's an evolutionary decision."


You are talking only about you Oliver. My comments are not for Olivier Peters directly but Apple users in general. Many Apple users have built hackintosh systems and bought Nvidia GPUs? Are you saying if Apple offered the GTX 1080 Ti for the Trash Can no one would opt for it? There are YouTube video that state otherwise.



[Oliver Peters] "It's a silly hypothetical you are presenting,"

There are videos of Apple users buying Nvidia GPU and PCIE external enclosures. Also several people who have built Hackintosh systems. What does that tell you?



[Oliver Peters] "But, if dollars were in a similar ballpark, then yes, I might still opt for a trash can."

The generic ATX system can be built for much less money and offer more upgrade ability. Let me ask you this. Would you prefer HP to stop selling towers and only offer a Trash Can style option?



[Oliver Peters] "If I have 7 or 8 workstations on shared storage of various vintages, I'm not going to replace all 7 or 8 at once with PCs."

Who ever said you would? My comments are not directly for you Oliver.

[Oliver Peters] "I have to be able to move files and projects around amongst all of them, which means one platform or you're in a world of hurt. So, staying with Apple is the better business decision."

You introducing a strawman argument.



[Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] " I don't think Anyone wants HP or Dell to stop making their towers and opt for the Trash Can"

Except they do sell all-in-ones (like the iMac), so they definitely have a market for that."


You a proving my point. HP has more options than Apple.



[Oliver Peters] "Sure. But there are also plenty of PC users opting for Macs."

I opted for a Mac Mini so I could get on the Apple platform. You know what? I wish I could have purchased a generic ATX style Apple for $500.00. I had to opt for the Mac Mini becuase it was the least expensive way to get on board the Apple platform. I think more PC user would be willing to buy a Mac if Apple had an inexpensive ATX system like Dell and HP offer but the premium you pay for the Apple logo keeps some people away.



[Oliver Peters] "IBM offers their staffers Macs as a work machine option. That's because the company analysis has shown better cost/benefit ratio with the Apple platform versus PCs."

Once again you are using strawman. I am not saying the Apple product don't work. I am saying Apple users are building hackintosh systems and buying after market Nvidia graphics cards because Apples options are limited. That is all have ever stated. I am not saying the Mac Pro does not work for you and may other people. That has never been my stance.


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 10:46:26 am

Sigh. Someone asks a question about iMac Pro and somehow the topic is brought on to building your own PC. Anyone who is considering buying an iMac Pro is not in the slightest bit interested in building something themselves.

Also, Oliver's point about cost/benefit ratio is not a straw man if you are pushing the agenda of cheaper is better. It is totally relevant.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 1:22:19 pm

[Tom Sefton] "Anyone who is considering buying an iMac Pro is not in the slightest bit interested in building something themselves. "

When everyone talks about building their own PC, they conveniently skip the cost of their own labor. Let's say it takes you only 2 days (conservative) to build the unit and make sure all the drivers are right, make a few calls to various support numbers, etc. If you freelance and get a fairly standard rate for your time (not counting gear), you've just added $1K to the cost. Maybe more. Then when the next update of something comes along and you spend another day dealing with that. On and on and on...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 5:15:42 pm

Plus you need to have some pretty specific knowledge before you start. It’s like comparing the purchase of a new convertible against a kit car.

Not for everyone - rewarding if you can do it, but takes time and effort that you could otherwise spend making money/enjoying the experience, and nobody to help if the clutch fails.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 6:44:36 pm

[Oliver Peters] "When everyone talks about building their own PC, they conveniently skip the cost of their own labor. "

Well, looking at the cost of my Hackintosh, with all the parts it added up to under $1600. And this machine equals the current iMac in terms of processing power, but with 32GB RAM and a superior GPU. Plus additional internal storage. If I spec'd out an iMac, that would be in the $3600 range.

This unit took me about 16 hours to assemble, all told. At $65/hour that's another $1040. And the four hours a friend helped me is another $260...still less than a new iMac.

[Tom Sefton] "Plus you need to have some pretty specific knowledge before you start."

Knowledge on assembling a computer...or just following a guide. Not TOO hard. But then again, I've torn apart Avid's during my Post Coordinator days and assistant editor days, talking the ABVB ones with 6 internal cards...so I'm used to it. But yes, not for everyone, that's for sure. That's why my friend also offers a service where he assembles Hacks for his friends...they supply the parts, he assembles.

[Tom Sefton] "and nobody to help if the clutch fails."

Well, I'm there when the clutch fails...

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:09:00 pm

But my point is that you are in a minority of editors and creatives that have the knowledge and expertise to build a machine that is reliable enough to earn a living from.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:32:06 pm

[Tom Sefton] "But my point is that you are in a minority of editors and creatives that have the knowledge and expertise to build a machine that is reliable enough to earn a living from."

point taken...

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:46:05 pm

[Tom Sefton] "But my point is that you are in a minority of editors and creatives that have the knowledge and expertise to build a machine that is reliable enough to earn a living from."

Or the desire to build one!

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:05:48 pm
Last Edited By Dominic Deacon on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:07:49 pm

On the Mac side maybe. There seems to be a belief that this is a difficult thing to do. Honestly it's less than an hours work. You're just plugging stuff in much as you do at the back of your computer when you''re plugging your peripherals in. Maybe you do have to do a little research. The first time I did it I spent way to much time researching, maybe half a dozen hours, but the knowledge gained will last me a life time, save me at least a grand every time I buy a machine and means every computer I use is specifically tailored to the task it needs to perform rather than the solid all rounder that Apple provides.

That last part is more than invaluable. I'm actually about to build a PC for 3ds. It will be a completely different machine to the one I'm writing on right now which was built for photoshop because the requirements of those programs don't overlap much. Apple might try but there's no way to build a machine for every one that's going to be efficient at every task. With an expensive Mac you're always going to be either paying for stuff for stuff you don't need or missing out on stuff that you do.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:08:18 pm

Seems there are more PC users than Mac users here on this Mac based Software forum

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:27:48 pm

[Steve Connor] "Seems there are more PC users than Mac users here on this Mac based Software forum"

Or... are there more people who run both? Should those of us who only run Windows get lost? ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:44:31 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Or... are there more people who run both? Should those of us who only run Windows get lost? ☺
"


Yes, leave and never return :)

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 9:05:15 pm

[Steve Connor] "[Shawn Miller] "Or... are there more people who run both? Should those of us who only run Windows get lost? ☺
"

Yes, leave and never return :)"


LOL - okay, but I'm taking Tim with me! ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 10:38:57 pm

My mac is on the long slow fade out so I'll eventually be PC only. I thought I would use both but I now do 99% of my work on PC.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:34:15 pm

[Tom Sefton] "But my point is that you are in a minority of editors and creatives that have the knowledge and expertise to build a machine that is reliable enough to earn a living from."

Which basically brings us back to the conundrum that started the thread; should one buy an expensive, brand new Mac model with no track record now or wait 12-18 months and maybe buy a different, expensive brand new Mac model with no track record then? And since Apple hasn't regularly updated its high end desktops since 2009/2010 the 'Maybe I'll wait until Rev 2 next year to see how it shakes out' is no longer available.

Speaking of update cycles, will the iMac Pro get a more regular update cycle like the iMacs do, or a once every few years update like the Mac Pros do? When updates were on a regular, annual cycle it was much easier to gauge ROI and manage risk but now, IMO, you feel more pressure to jump on a new machine as soon as it's released. I think the continued (and more frequent) talk of Hackintoshes, going to Windows and/or updating cMPs is illustrative of the frustration part of the user base is feeling. 10 years ago widespread conversations like this didn't exist.

I've been looking to retire my 2009 cMP since about 2012/2013, but I just keep upgrading it because nothing from Apple has been appealing enough to buy. I've thought about the Hack route (switching to Windows just isn't viable in my work demo in LA), but to be honest I'm probably going to just be lazy and buy from Apple even though they don't offer a product I want at a price that I think is reasonable.

Depending on how much longer I can afford to hold out I'll either end up with a iMac Pro or a yet-to-be-revealed Mac Pro.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 6:12:08 pm

[Oliver Peters] "If you freelance and get a fairly standard rate for your time (not counting gear), you've just added $1K to the cost. Maybe more. Then when the next update of something comes along and you spend another day dealing with that. On and on and on..."

If we are going to micromanage billable hours then you have to consider the amount of time it takes to install software, plugins, transfer/remake user settings, etc., which can easily take the better part of a day so add that additional cost to the iMac too. Not to mention the cost of down time if the iMac has to go into the shop for a repair that takes a week, but the DIY person can get replacement parts and do the fix themselves in just a day or two. 😉

The sweat equity of building & maintaining a Hackintosh certainly should be factored in, but I also think trying to estimate the cost of an off-the-shelf unit vs a custom build down to the billable hour can become superfluous.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 6:36:21 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "but I also think trying to estimate the cost of an off-the-shelf unit vs a custom build down to the billable hour can become superfluous.
"


It is very easy to switch to a less powerful or other Mac if the main machine goes down.

So, you'd have to factor in a switch to another Hackintosh, and keep the drivers and such maintained on that machine too.

Hackintoshes never made good business sense to me, but I don't have an inkling to build my own computer.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:02:40 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It is very easy to switch to a less powerful or other Mac if the main machine goes down.

So, you'd have to factor in a switch to another Hackintosh, and keep the drivers and such maintained on that machine too."


Why would you have to switch to another Hackintosh? It's just MacOS running on non-Apple branded hardware so bouncing between it and, say, a MBP shouldn't be any different than bouncing between an iMac and a MBP.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 9:09:04 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Why would you have to switch to another Hackintosh? "

For the same reason that you are using a PC w/macOS in the first place.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 9:34:50 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "For the same reason that you are using a PC w/macOS in the first place."

I don't follow. If I own a Hack and another Mac (iMac, cMP, MBP, etc.,) and the Hack needs a repair I can continue working with one of the other Macs w/o missing a beat. FCP X, PPro, Avid, etc., running on a Hack are exactly the same as FCP X, PPro, Avid, etc., running on a Mac. Their's no change to any of the software other than a minor tweak to MacOS to allow it to run on a variety of Intel hardware as opposed to just Apple approved Intel hardware.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 12:03:37 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Nov 28, 2017 at 12:06:26 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I don't follow. If I own a Hack and another Mac"

How will your peripherals work on an old Mac? Your new Hackintosh will supposedly have everything inside of it.

You can tell me that internal peripherals are better, and I will tell you not necessarily.

If we used Hacks we’d need extra Hacks to be standing by in case of failure. Right now with our Macs I can swap the machine, and setup to all the same peripherals (including fiber storage) no matter if it’s a cylinder, laptop, iMac, the only thing that changes is performance.

Hackintoshes don’t make sense in a multiuser, multiseat environment.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 6:15:11 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "How will your peripherals work on an old Mac? Your new Hackintosh will supposedly have everything inside of it.

You can tell me that internal peripherals are better, and I will tell you not necessarily. "


Thanks for the more detailed explanation, though I don't think anyone was saying that internal peripherals are better in 100% of the situations (at least I certainly wasn't).

With regards to how my peripherals would work, same way they do now, with adaptors. For example, I/O on my 2009 cMP tops out with USB 3.0, but my 2011 MBP doesn't have USB 3.0. It does have ThB1 though so I use a USB to ThB adapter when I need to connect my RAID to my 2011 MBP. If I end up with a new Mac (or a new RAID) that only has ThB3 ports then I'll have to invest in more adaptors.

The appeal of a Hack to me is customization, upgradeability, and price. The only reason my 2009 cMP is still viable today is because of its upgradability, and being able to upgrade the internal drive and RAM on my 2011 MBP certainly extended its useable lifespan as well (though it sees less uses these days since I have a 2015 MBP).

[Jeremy Garchow] " Right now with our Macs I can swap the machine, and setup to all the same peripherals (including fiber storage) no matter if it’s a cylinder, laptop, iMac, the only thing that changes is performance."

You can do that with a Hack too since Hacks can have all the same ports that Macs can.

I agree though that for large scale, multi-user environments Hacks will, generally speaking, have more IT overhead than going with off-the-shelf PCs or Macs.



[Michael Hadley] "I'll be interested to see what the specs are with the next version of FCPX does once they come out with the new iMac Pro, which will support eGPU on the AMD Vega cards (once High Sierra is updated) and if it makes sense at that point to get an eGPU with the new AMD Vega card and try to prolong the lifespan of my 2013 Mac Pro."

2013 MP only has ThB 2 so an eGPU is going to be constrained compared to ThB 3 or installing it internally.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:31:46 pm

[Oliver Peters] "When everyone talks about building their own PC, they conveniently skip the cost of their own labor. Let's say it takes you only 2 days (conservative) to build the unit and make sure all the drivers are right, make a few calls to various support numbers, etc. If you freelance and get a fairly standard rate for your time (not counting gear), you've just added $1K to the cost."

Uggh I've been working on this feature and spent a few days just moving data around.
They used an HP on set and physically removed RAID sets back and forth for data management.
All due to the fact that they had one single Thunderbolt port on that thing.
Now, of course, I have to document every move I made with the hardware on top of the actual work of transcoding the files for assembly :P
Why can't Windows just mount a damn RAID set without having to go through flaming hoops :P
I have never had this issue on any Mac.
So even a well put together PC didn't do it for me.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 11:27:43 pm

[Eric Santiago] "So even a well put together PC didn't do it for me."

This raises the whole point about choosing to build your own PC. It is about getting performance versus convenience of buying off the shelf. Computers are always getting relatively cheaper so it's a no brainer that anything off the shelf that meets or exceeds performance requirements is not worth building. The fact that so many are choosing to build must tell you that the off the shelf option is not meeting requirements of performance or another issue like form factor or ability to be upgraded. It isn't cost if you make your living with the gear because having better performance pays for itself in most cases, particularly for freelancers who quote for a job, not hourly employees.

I build because I don't need the Apple OS anymore and I can get such better performance and upgrade options that way. Yes it is cheaper, even factoring in my time to research and build. If I did need to run Apple OS I would be buying the best off the shelf grunt I could. I'm just glad I don't need to but in the past I always went for the performance. Apart from the raw economics, I value my time and hate waiting for machines. It's so important that it is fun and the flow is not disrupted.

To Eric's point, it's also more than the spec of a machine. Anything that creates workflow bottle necks is a poor machine regardless of being custom built, off the shelf or the OS chosen. I would expect a custom machine to be better at avoiding such bottle necks but if they don't then they are also a more expensive choice as our time is our greatest currency.


Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:56:07 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Let's say it takes you only 2 days (conservative) to build the unit and make sure all the drivers are right, make a few calls to various support numbers, etc"

2 days? I've only done it a couple times but I'd say half hour to forty five minutes. Tom talks about needing "pretty specific knowledge". Not really. I mean you have to know your CPU will plug into your motherboard and that the PSU is powerful enough (just ask the guy at the shop) but after that I can't think of any specific knowledge... The pieces just plug into each and generally it's not possible to plug anything into the wrong slot. Just look for what fits where, plug it in. Done. Not sure how it can take more than an hour.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:03:46 pm

[Dominic Deacon] "2 days? I've only done it a couple times but I'd say half hour to forty five minutes."

Is this in Dog minutes? It will take you half an hour just to install Windows!!

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 5:55:56 am

Windows takes about 10 to 15 minutes in my experience. If you don't believe me jump on youtube. There's videos taking you through the process of building a pc in real time. These videos don't run for two hours.


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 12:18:55 pm

I think a dog would have a better chance of building a PC that works than I would.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 28, 2017 at 3:51:31 pm

[Tom Sefton] "I think a dog would have a better chance of building a PC that works than I would."

You might be surprised, Tom. Building a PC can be easier than assembling a desk from Ikea. ☺

Shawn



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:51:41 am

[Oliver Peters] "Sure. But there are also plenty of PC users opting for Macs. Ironically, IBM offers their staffers Macs as a work machine option. That's because the company analysis has shown better cost/benefit ratio with the Apple platform versus PCs. Mainly because IBM has fewer tech support (software and hardware) issues with their deployed Macs. The discussion cuts both ways."

That's true, I do a lot of work with IBM and I see large amounts of MacBook Pros at the various offices I visit!

I didn't think that a post about Macs on an FCPX forum would generate so much discussion about PC's

"Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 4:23:17 pm

[Steve Connor] "That's true, I do a lot of work with IBM and I see large amounts of MacBook Pros at the various offices I visit!"

https://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/apple-mac/ibm-says-macs-are-e...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
on Nov 27, 2017 at 7:48:15 pm

[Oliver Peters] "https://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/apple-mac/ibm-says-macs-are-e..."

There's no force I've yet encountered on earth, in heaven, or in hell that could make me buy anything Apple again, but there are some pretty eyebrow-raising data points in this article:

  • 90,000 employees are now using Macs, up from 30,000 in 2015.

  • 100,000 of IBM’s global workforce will be using Macs by the end of the year

  • There are lots of reasons for this, not least that better OS software means Apple needs to update its systems far less often than Microsoft updates Windows. "We have to go out and manage the Mac environment 104 fewer times a year than PC,” Previn said.

  • just 25 staff supported 30,000 Macs


  • Those are the numbers, but this struck me as a number behind the number: people want to use Macs there. This says more to me about the people that IBM is hiring than Macs per se, but here it is:
  • 73 percent of employees will choose a Mac when they get the chance to choose for themself


  • That's simply not true of the world at large, or something much closer to 73% of computers sold at retail would be Macs -- raising the question of what is it about this cohort that makes them swing so disproportionately Mac-ward, since swing Mac-ward they clearly do.


    Return to posts index

    Shawn Miller
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:23:48 pm
    Last Edited By Shawn Miller on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:28:52 pm

    [Tim Wilson] "That's simply not true of the world at large, or something much closer to 73% of computers sold at retail would be Macs -- raising the question of what is it about this cohort that makes them swing so disproportionately Mac-ward, since swing Mac-ward they clearly do."

    Well... Microsoft is a direct competitor in the enterprise - if they could, I would be willing to bet that IBM would excise all things Microsoft from their environment... but AFAIK, they can't. I think it might also be worth noting that IT maintenance costs have been declining across the board for a decade, much of it due to AI, IT as a service and automation. There isn't a large enterprise in my area that I know of which doesn't support Macs in their environment (including Microsoft)... but most people still tend to choose Windows machines for their day to day work. The notable exceptions always seem to be creatives, marketing and some sales people.

    Shawn



    Return to posts index

    greg janza
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 5:38:55 am

    [Tim Wilson] "what is it about this cohort that makes them swing so disproportionately Mac-ward, since swing Mac-ward they clearly do.
    "


    I think you've touched on the story behind the numbers Tim. This upward tick of Mac's being used speaks more to the demographic of employees. The younger the employee the better the chance that they are a Mac centric individual. 20 years of Apple becoming a cultural force and a status symbol product has led us to the IBM statistic.

    I've witnessed this shift towards mac products even among my friends who are employed in all types of businesses and who aren't in a young demographic. All of these folks used to have PC laptops and now at the tail end of 2017 all of these friends except for one (a lawyer) are the proud users of MBP's. It's the cultural shift of a generation that has caused the companies to evolve and change as well.

    But life is also filled with ebb and flow so perhaps this too is just a phase. I'm one of those folks who after many years had my fill of the Apple nonsense and abandoned ship. And I think the abandonment of Apple is also a real trend that is just beginning within the creative world.

    I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
    - Orson Welles


    Return to posts index

    Michael Gissing
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 10:12:45 pm
    Last Edited By Michael Gissing on Nov 27, 2017 at 11:28:43 pm

    [Steve Connor] "I didn't think that a post about Macs on an FCPX forum would generate so much discussion about PC's"

    Well it's just not a debate without the negative argument.


    Return to posts index

    Steve Connor
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 12:02:17 pm

    [Oliver Peters] "[andy patterson] "Does it offer a better bang for the buck than a $1,600.00 dollar gaming PC?""

    Not with FCPX (this is an FCPX Forum) because it can't run it. Also if you want to run PPro and AFX on this "gaming" PC it's also going to cost you an extra $300 in the first year and then another $1200 in the next two years for a CC subscription.

    Plus the fact that any Mac still has a reasonable resale value after 3 years, the gaming PC will be worth squat.

    I do understand the point Andy is making but there's more to it than just cost. I built my own PC's for years when I used to edit on Premiere, and to be honest I probably would again if I just used Premiere Pro, Resolve and AFX, but I don't, I prefer using FCPX primarily which is why I asked the question in the first place. :)

    "Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


    Return to posts index

    Oliver Peters
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 1:29:24 pm

    [Steve Connor] "I prefer using FCPX primarily which is why I asked the question in the first place. :)"

    FWIW - B&H has a Cyber Monday deal on the quad-core 2013 Mac Pro. $1K off. Not the fastest machine, since it's entry-level, but a decent upgrade for many here. Certainly more than enough for HD and offline editing. However, I'm not sure how that works with B&H for those outside of the US, if at all.

    - Oliver

    Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


    Return to posts index

    greg janza
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 5:21:07 am

    [Oliver Peters] "Very few professionals are going to go away from a mainstream PC if they go Windows, which generally means Dell or HP."

    I sure you're right about that Oliver but I'd like to advocate to anyone looking to upgrade their system that a custom built PC is definitely a viable option. Naturally there's a number of variables that can potentially come into play but if one does their homework on compatible components and proper set up ( The Creative Cow and Adobe Hardware Forum being two of the best resources) it shouldn't scare anyone away to build their system from scratch.

    I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
    - Orson Welles


    Return to posts index

    Bob Zelin
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 8:44:16 pm

    It seems obvious to me that the ONLY thing that is more important than "cheap" is "easy to use". And if a Mac (in every application) is easier to use with minimal aggravation, people will pay for that.

    As for PC's - I too come from a background where you just wind up saying "just buy the HP Z840, shut up, and be done with it". But with that said, the "how much does it cost" comes into play. The generic solution has been a HP Z840 (or Z820), or a Dell Precision workstation (or off the shelf boxes from BOXX, or Puget Systems).
    But never underestimate the Chinese companies marching in. Blackmagic Design specifies the ASUS X99 Deluxe motherboard in their hardware specifications as alternates to the HP Z840 computer. And everyone at QNAP seems to love ASUS computers. SO - with that said - look at this "cheapie" with a "free" NVidia GVX-1080ti -

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354215-REG/asus_gd30ci_db71_gtx1080...
    $2000, and no one is "custom building" a computer from scratch (with all the aggravation).

    Bob Zelin

    Bob Zelin
    Rescue 1, Inc.
    bobzelin@icloud.com


    Return to posts index

    andy patterson
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 11:57:02 pm

    [Bob Zelin] "
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1354215-REG/asus_gd30ci_db71_gtx1080.....
    $2000, and no one is "custom building" a computer from scratch (with all the aggravation)."


    The reason this thread was all about building customs PCs is because the Apple users wanted to talk about custom PC. When all is said and done the $1,600.00 gaming PCs will offer a better bang for the buck than what Apple has to offer for video editing and 3D animation. No one has ever said that Apple computers don't work but Apple does not offer the same options to the user as a the Windows system can. Should be a non issues but not in the Cow. Keep in mind prices are a tad bit high because the Coffee Lake CPUs are in short supply. The prices should drop slightly in a couple of months.

    https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227783&cm_re=i7_8...

    https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883230270&cm_re=i7_8...

    If you don't like the cases or the specs simply shop around : )


    Return to posts index

    Tony West
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 9:06:17 pm

    That iMac Pro looks pretty amazing but I plan on waiting for the new Mac Pro.

    I have always liked keeping the computer and the monitor separate. I already have a perfectly good monitor with my old Mp.

    For me, my top priority has always been longevity and dependability. I will spend the money for a product that will last me years with no problems. That could be a car, TV, camera or whatever.

    Another computer may be slightly faster or cheaper but not a big deal to me. Just want it to work well for years to come.


    Return to posts index

    Oliver Peters
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 9:39:48 pm

    [Tony West] "That iMac Pro looks pretty amazing but I plan on waiting for the new Mac Pro."

    Can you wait a year or two?

    - Oliver

    Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


    Return to posts index

    Tony West
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 27, 2017 at 10:27:55 pm

    [Oliver Peters] "Can you wait a year or two?"

    Yeah, ironically because my current Mp is so well made it will likely keep going.


    Return to posts index

    Michael Hadley
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 5:14:48 pm

    FWIW, Apple said they would announce the new Mac Pro in 2018. My guess is that they will do so very late in the year and not actually deliver boxes until 2019--just like with the 2013 Mac Pro.

    I'll be interested to see what the specs are with the next version of FCPX does once they come out with the new iMac Pro, which will support eGPU on the AMD Vega cards (once High Sierra is updated) and if it makes sense at that point to get an eGPU with the new AMD Vega card and try to prolong the lifespan of my 2013 Mac Pro.


    Return to posts index

    andy patterson
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 6:37:01 pm

    [Michael Hadley] "
    I'll be interested to see what the specs are with the next version of FCPX does once they come out with the new iMac Pro, which will support eGPU on the AMD Vega cards (once High Sierra is updated) and if it makes sense at that point to get an eGPU with the new AMD Vega card and try to prolong the lifespan of my 2013 Mac Pro."


    The Vega cards have not proven to be that great but they don't suck either. Having said that Nvidia is supposed to release Volta in 2018 (rumors). Volta is supposed to kick some ass but who know for sure? AMD is supposed to have a new CPU in 2018 to replace the current Ryzen and Threadripper CPUs. 2017 was interesting but 2018 might be even better. I have a feeling in 2018 I am going to see Apple users getting external Volta GPUs if Apple does not offer them in their systems.


    Return to posts index

    Noah Kadner
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 8:07:09 pm

    Unfortunately with the 50% slower Thunderbolt 2 ports on the 2013 MacPro vs the Thunderbolt 3 ports on new iMacs and MacBook Pros, you won't get much net gain over the onboard GPUs with an eGPU.

    Noah

    FCPWORKS - FCPX Workflow
    FCP Exchange - FCPX Workshops
    XinTwo - FCPX Training


    Return to posts index

    andy patterson
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 9:53:32 pm

    [Noah Kadner] "Unfortunately with the 50% slower Thunderbolt 2 ports on the 2013 MacPro vs the Thunderbolt 3 ports on new iMacs and MacBook Pros, you won't get much net gain over the onboard GPUs with an eGPU."

    I think the GTX 1080 Ti hits a bottleneck with Thunderbolt 3. External GPUs are not the best option but for some that is the only option they have. There is rumor that Canon Lake or Ice Lake will support PCIE 4.0.


    Return to posts index

    Ricardo Marty
    Mac on ryzen
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 11:43:12 pm

    This video claims that for less than 1k you get the same performance as 5k mac pro. This with only ryzen 1600, cant imagine a 32 core threadripper.







    Ricardo Marty


    Return to posts index

    Ricardo Marty
    Re: Mac on ryzen in a G5 case
    on Nov 28, 2017 at 11:51:42 pm







    Ricardo Marty


    Return to posts index

    andy patterson
    Re: Mac on ryzen in a G5 case
    on Nov 29, 2017 at 12:37:50 am

    Ryzen and Threadripper are not that great and are out performed by the Intel CPUs. They do offer a decent bang for the buck but I would prefer an I7 8700K over Ryzen. Keep in mind Ice Lake and Cannon Lake will hit the market in 2018. 2018 will be probably better than 2017.


    Return to posts index

    Michael Hadley
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Nov 29, 2017 at 9:22:21 pm

    Diminished gains to be sure. My interest is in seeing what the gains/benefit are of the eGPU/AMD/$1000 kludge vs. $5-$10K iMac Pro.

    We'll need the new FCPX with official eGPU support on the next High Sierra version to really see if there's any value there or not.


    Return to posts index

    Bernard Newnham
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 2, 2017 at 8:49:32 pm

    This is the first time I've been back to this forum for a year or more. I'm rather surprised to find that after all this time people are still waiting on "the next MacPro, iMac, whatever" to come out, but less surprised that there's a whole load more people that have moved to Hackintoshes and indeed PCs.

    I made my own move a few years ago, when FCP7 went away. The Hackintosh that had replaced the G4 was easily re-purposed into a W7 PC, and first Edius then Premiere replaced FCP7. Some people seem a bit obsessed by operating systems, but as someone else points out - you're in the application most of the time, so who cares? I've been through a lot of of operating systems down the years, and like different cars they're all different and all the same.

    Being able to update at any point for much less money than buying a Mac would seem to be a no brainer, but I'm just a now retired BBCtv producer/editor/cameraman etc. These days I teach uni students, but need to keep up so as to not lose cred factor. There's a lots of delivery format discussion here, but in the UK this has been standardised for delivery to the big broadcasters as AS11. See - https://www.digitalproductionpartnership.co.uk/publications/theme/as-11/

    Bernie


    Return to posts index

    greg janza
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 2, 2017 at 10:36:49 pm

    [Bernard Newnham] "Being able to update at any point for much less money than buying a Mac would seem to be a no brainer"

    I agree. However, as with so many other things in life, emotion often plays a larger role in decision making rather than objective analytical thought.

    I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
    - Orson Welles


    Return to posts index

    Michael Gissing
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 2, 2017 at 10:42:55 pm

    [Greg Janza] "I agree. However, as with so many other things in life, emotion often plays a larger role in decision making rather than objective analytical thought."

    To be fair if you want to run FCPX and you don't want to be dealing with potential driver issues etc with a Hack then it does make sense and these forum musings are objective reasoning given the constraints.


    Return to posts index

    Steve Connor
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 1:45:50 pm

    [greg janza] "I agree. However, as with so many other things in life, emotion often plays a larger role in decision making rather than objective analytical thought."

    Hugely patronising comment there Greg, for me staying with Mac was an objective decision NOT an emotional one

    "Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


    Return to posts index

    greg janza
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 4:30:49 pm

    Steve, the comment was not meant to be patronizing at all. I’m simply arguing that the emotional connection to Apple sometimes clouds thinking. I was a mac loyalist for more than 20 years and so I’m using my own experience as a reference point. And once I divorced myself from my own emotional attachment to the Apple brand I was able to objectively assess all of the options that were out there for an edit system.

    It’s one thing if you’re a dedicated FCPX user but the loyalty to the Apple brand goes far beyond the simple logic of using Apple software.

    I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
    - Orson Welles


    Return to posts index

    Oliver Peters
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 5:42:54 pm

    [greg janza] "I’m simply arguing that the emotional connection to Apple sometimes clouds thinking"

    I don't think it's just that. Apple has been very good about creating an ecosystem. Many of us, me included, have availed themselves of that. So, if you have a ton of documents in Pages/Numbers/Keynote, or have invested in a lot of platform-specific plug-ins, or have your music organized in iTunes, or pictures organized in Aperture or Photos, then it's a more difficult shift. You aren't simply moving an NLE to another platform, but nearly everything else you do.

    Even if the PC is a cheaper alternative, you have a lot of other costs involved in time and money to migrate the rest of your personal ecosystem to another platform. The deeper you are in, the easier the decision to stay within the Apple fold. And the more the cost differential becomes a wash.

    - Oliver

    Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


    Return to posts index

    greg janza
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 8:49:38 pm

    Oliver, yes that makes sense as well.

    My transition to PC from Mac was made easier due to the fact that even though I was a long time mac user I never committed to the mac ecosystem. Instead, I adopted the google ecosystem basically from day 1 and therefore my migration to PC has been without the added workload that others might face.

    I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
    - Orson Welles


    Return to posts index

    Steve Connor
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 1:43:10 pm

    [Bernard Newnham] "Being able to update at any point for much less money than buying a Mac would seem to be a no brainer, "

    Firstly welcome back Bernard it's nice to hear from you, secondly the issue for many of us is not cost particularly but it's more about reliability and utility. I don't know a single person that uses FCPX as their primary NLE on a Hackintosh and I'd be interested to see if anyone here has one they use as their main Edit system?

    "Traditional NLEs have timelines. FCPX has storylines" W.Soyka


    Return to posts index

    Eric Santiago
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 3:51:45 pm

    The last few weeks had me in an HP Z840 for a feature cut on Avid.

    Spare you guys the details but I am so glad I use a platform (Mac) that doesn't require me to keep digging into the OS just to mount or use a new app.

    Sure the HP Z840 destroys the nMP D700 in transcoding speeds but I don't mind waiting and enjoying life while it works for me ☺

    I for one can't wait for the new Mac Pro or to see how the iMac Pro fares.

    I say that emotionally ;)


    Return to posts index

    Shane Ross
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 7:54:21 pm

    [Steve Connor] "I don't know a single person that uses FCPX as their primary NLE on a Hackintosh and I'd be interested to see if anyone here has one they use as their main Edit system?
    "


    I use it as my main edit system. I built it to run Resolve primarily, but I do also use Avid and Adobe on it....all of them professionally. I have run FCX on it, mainly to grab missing elements from the offline that I need in online...as a vast majority of the onlines I have done came from FCX. But yes, I use a Hackintosh as my main editing computer. The only issues I've had with it apparently plague the nMacPro (tubes) too...rendering in Resolve (in the MacOS) overheats the computer and causes it to restart. My solution to that is to render at a lower speed.

    Shane
    Little Frog Post
    Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


    Return to posts index

    Oliver Peters
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 8:43:56 pm

    [Shane Ross] "as a vast majority of the onlines I have done came from FCX"

    It's a bit off-topic (what isn't on the COW), but since there's so much speculation of how much "pro" use there is of X, it would be nice to have some more details here.

    [Shane Ross] "The only issues I've had with it apparently plague the nMacPro (tubes) too...rendering in Resolve (in the MacOS) overheats the computer and causes it to restart"

    Huh? I run a nMP and have never had that type of issue. The only issues I encounter are random render glitches with Adobe apps (only), because they overheat the GPU.

    AFAIK, the core issue is that only Apple's software evenly distributes GPU load to both GPUs in the nMP simultaneously. All other software hits the first one hard and then overflows to the second. That's probably why the "Deadpool" crew burned through several machines. I don't get that same problem when I use "software rendering" in the Adobe apps on the nMP, nor when I render on an older tower or an iMac.

    It's in recognition of the fact that Apple's design was out of step with the rest of the engineering in the industry, that Apple decided to drop this dual-GPU configuration in its new designs.

    - Oliver

    Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


    Return to posts index

    Bernard Newnham
    Re: iMac Pro or next year's Mac Pro?
    on Dec 3, 2017 at 8:45:51 pm
    Last Edited By Bernard Newnham on Dec 3, 2017 at 10:02:18 pm

    [Steve Connor] "Firstly welcome back Bernard it's nice to hear from you"

    Thank you - very kind. I must admit that I was expecting to ghost through and depart, but reading this thread is quite nostalgic, though as I said the balance does seem to have changed.

    Several years ago I responded to a challenge by Jeremy Garchow to cost similarly specced Macs and PCs. The PC won hands down, and it could be updated at any time - I imagine the same could be said now. Lots of people seem to have now worked that out, though a man a few posts up says " that doesn't require me to keep digging into the OS just to mount or use a new app.". Don't know what he's been trying. Windows NT?

    Bernie


    Return to posts index

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