40 replies to this topic

[jonny shaw]

I'm running PP and FCP 3 on a 27" iMac 2.8 i7 (I think) 12 gb ram and they both run sweet as. You shouldn't be getting all those issues.

What is that guy on saying that your machine isn't powerful enough..... numpty!

[uwxplorer]

I'm running PP and FCP 3 on a 27" iMac 2.8 i7 (I think) 12 gb ram and they both run sweet as. You shouldn't be getting all those issues.

What is that guy on saying that your machine isn't powerful enough..... numpty!

We need to talk! I am getting nowhere. What disk configuration are you using? Are we talking about editing AVCHD footage? That's what I am interested in and that appears to be challenging for any machine.
Right now, I have resorted to transcoding my footage to DNxHD (Avid) which of course defeats the whole purpose of using a "native editing" NLE and multiply the file size by a factor 10 (not mentioning that it takes a long time). But since I have invested in the damn' hardware and software, I can't just give up.

The guy is one of the non-Adobe gurus who prides himself of having the most powerful PC for PP editing (PPBM5.com). Which I am sure he is and has, but is not at all useful in my case.

[Drew]

I think it'd be more helpful if you tell us your settings and system. There are a few settings which can help.

[uwxplorer]

I think it'd be more helpful if you tell us your settings and system. There are a few settings which can help.

iMac 21.5" Intel i7 2.8 GHz, 12 GB RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6770M 512 MB, 1 TB internal 7200 rpm, 1TB external 7200 rpm (FW800).
I have tried different configurations within PP5.5 but haven't found one that would result 1) in smooth playback, 2) avoid PP from just becoming unresponsive after a few editing steps. Right now, Preferences>>Media has all the caches on the root drive (where the OS and programs are based) and Project Settings>>Scratch Disks has everything else on my external drive.

[Drew]

FW800 is not fast enough due to system bottlenecks with the 1394 bus. How much RAM did you allocate to the program? Are you optimizing the settings for "Performance" or Memory?

[uwxplorer]

FW800 is not fast enough due to system bottlenecks with the 1394 bus. How much RAM did you allocate to the program? Are you optimizing the settings for "Performance" or Memory?

FW800: I don't have any other options so far (not many Thunderbolt drives out there and so far only pricey RAID enclosures). My LaCie drive also has an eSATA port and I think TB to eSATA adapters will eventually show up (http://eshop.macsale...ey/iMac_2010_27) but not as of today...
RAM: 9 GB for CS5.5 (I usually only run PP, but I am planning to use AE).
Optimization: Performance.

I managed to have it work fine with the DNxHD transcoded footage (at least playback is smooth with moderate editing such as color correction, speed modification and title layer) so I will try continuing this way at this time. But overall I am mighty disappointed. I don't think FCP X would have done any better though...

Edited by uwxplorer, 14 September 2011 - 06:40 AM.

[Drew]

Switch to Memory. Make sure you set resolution of playback to 1/4.

[uwxplorer]

Switch to Memory. Make sure you set resolution of playback to 1/4.

I am pretty sure I have tried that with no noticeable difference.

What I am particularly disgruntled about is the lack of warning (or benchmark) for Adobe's products on Apple hardware. It is not like there is an infinite variety of products like in the PC world. But in retrospect, I should only blame myself for having fallen for the Adobe TV ads. Kevin Monahan's comment that "Premiere Pro CS5 and CS5.5 do run just fine on Macs. Unfortunately, the iMac is not the best choice for editing AVCHD footage. It's some of the toughest footage to edit with. I would recommend a MacPro with a qualified NVIDIA card. Even more RAM would be ideal. Premiere Pro is a 64 bit application, so you really do need a beefier system to run it, be it Mac or PC" is a bit disingenuous to use an understatement.
It is in any case not very helpful to target the right hardware (the link he provides after his remark is entirely dedicated to PCs and again, since there is no benchmark for Apple hardware, you are basically on your own to figure what to buy).

[jonny shaw]

Aaahh big diffence is that I'm not working with AVCHD, sorry.
Have you tried transcoding to cineform or prores?

[uwxplorer]

Aaahh big diffence is that I'm not working with AVCHD, sorry.
Have you tried transcoding to cineform or prores?

That makes sense. I don't have ProRes codecs as it does not come with FCE (which I was using prior to the switch to PP) but as I said, I downloaded the Avid codecs which apparently are as good if not better than ProRes ones and this works. I also downloaded the cineform codecs, but for whatever reason, neither Adobe Media Encoder not MPEG Streamclip have managed to do anything with them (some error occurs and the transcoding fails).

[Steve Douglas]

UW Explorer, Why don't you download MPEG Streamclip, which is free and bugless, and just transcode your AVCHD footage to a codec that works in FCE? FCE really did not come with too many codec choices but M.S. should do the job quite well for you.
Steve

[uwxplorer]

UW Explorer, Why don't you download MPEG Streamclip, which is free and bugless, and just transcode your AVCHD footage to a codec that works in FCE? FCE really did not come with too many codec choices but M.S. should do the job quite well for you.
Steve

Steve, as stated in my previous post, I have MPEG StreamClip and I have migrated AWAY from FCE (which I used with AVCHD footage, which forced me to render EVERY single clip/effect I added). The irony is that I thought that I could avoid rendering (and still use native AVCHD clips) by migrating to Premiere...

[uwxplorer]

All right. After a few weeks of using CS 5.5 Production Premium as a complete amateur, I have come up with some conclusions:

1) First, do not buy into Adobe claims that Premiere edits AVCHD (or H.264) footage natively. It does may, but ONLY if you meet some very specific hardware specifications, and then some. I already pointed to a "discussion" started with Kevin Monahan on Adobe's TV site. This thread on Adobe's forum will show that I am not the delusional guy on the block... I must add that I strongly suspect that this is also the case for FCPX, although at least FCPX does not hide that you always have the option to render your timeline if playback becomes frustratingly slow. In a nutshell, even with the most powerful Mac Pro, you might will encounter problems.

2) This being said, once this fact has settled down in you, what is true is that you can edit OK, if not always perfectly smoothly, provided you transcode your footage (there is no background rendering in PP, so transcoding is actually a better idea, even though it results in large files). I am talking about my limited experience of editing CX550V (AVCHD 24 Mbps) and HX5V (AVCHD 17 Mbps) footage on a 21.5" iMac i7. I am not sure my external FW800 7200 rpm hardrive helps with that, but I certainly would recommend to follow the advice of others to have as many fast internal hard drives in your machine and go for as many cores as possible (I chose i7 because it has 4 cores +4 virtual cores and they often are used at 100% capacity during playback OF MY edited TRANSCODED FOOTAGE).

3) One thing you can do is to perform your edits on the transcoded footage (including dynamically linked compositions in After Effet - which I used for stabilization only so far) and before you render everything, replace this footage with your originals. Just don't try to play your timeline. It won't work. However rendering works like a charm, without quality loss due to the transcoding (if you are suspecting any).

4) Another option is to totally give up Macs and go for a Windows beast. But who would call that a "migration"?

Disclaimer: I may have a few things wrong or upside down, but I hope this may help. Comments welcome.

Edited by uwxplorer, 20 September 2011 - 07:38 PM.

[TheRealDrew]

Not sure if you saw the update for Final Cut X, the most important being that there is a free download/trial of the software.

When I first tried it, ran into some issues, partly being unfamiliar with it. And there are still some features I would like to see and cannot move away from 7 for some things. That being said, it was quick to edit a multicam shoot (3 cameras) though Plural Eyes to synch things, had two stationary cams and a hand held cam (actually my 5D Mark II) so I knew what I was to going to get generally, plus the playback and the quick ability to show/hide things made it painless. (I have worked on projects where people edit 5 or 6 cameras this way as compared to multi cam viewer.)

I am going to give it a whirl on a couple of other projects coming up.

Not saying it does not have warts or some things I would like to see (would like to be able to pick black and white points when color balancing), but I can see it being real good for things that are in its realm right now. And I am still on the lower end of the learning curve with this since I am dipping my toes into it when I have a chance. I have a couple of projects coming up where I think it will be easier to get final results when compared to FCP 7 (after doing one project in FCP 7 and seeing how some people looked at things while editing and what they needed as output.)

[uwxplorer]

Not sure if you saw the update for Final Cut X, the most important being that there is a free download/trial of the software.

I have been too busy struggling with CS5.5 to bother trying FCPX. But I have a $100 Apple voucher, so... The only things that may tempt me would be native editing of mts clips (in the case of PP, as I explained, I am not trying anymore, but even when I did, I still needed to rewrap the files with ClipWrap and then rename them as mpg files for some weird reason, to be able to play them smoothly within Bridge and PP) on MY machine. I strongly doubt FCPX is miraculously more efficient than PP to perform than on the same hardware.

Note: there is an update to PP (5.5.1) that apparently fixes some AVCHD playback issues on Macs. so I may come back with good new (or not).

[TheRealDrew]

I have been too busy struggling with CS5.5 to bother trying FCPX. But I have a $100 Apple voucher, so... The only things that may tempt me would be native editing of mts clips (in the case of PP, as I explained, I am not trying anymore, but even when I did, I still needed to rewrap the files with ClipWrap and then rename them as mpg files for some weird reason, to be able to play them smoothly within Bridge and PP) on MY machine. I strongly doubt FCPX is miraculously more efficient than PP to perform than on the same hardware.

Note: there is an update to PP (5.5.1) that apparently fixes some AVCHD playback issues on Macs. so I may come back with good new (or not).

Not sure which camera you are shooting on, and it may not work with the AVCHD you are shooting, but the one thing I have found is that it has been pretty good in handling my 5D footage in terms of playback and just being able to edit. There are options to import/convert on the fly and rendering is going on (if you want it to) but alot less obtrusive then dealing with FCP 7 and going through the steps to bring the footage in via ProRes. They also updated the Codecs the other day. Again, not sure if will do what you need, but give it a shot. I have even been playing on my MacBook Pro with it.

Here is Supported Camera List

[wagsy]

I'm still laughing here :-)
Native AVCHD, HDV mts and Canon MOV's files all in the same timeline real time on a 2008 PC is no problems here lol
But you guys enjoy those Apples cause they look just great.

[TheRealDrew]

I'm still laughing here :-)
Native AVCHD, HDV mts and Canon MOV's files all in the same timeline real time on a 2008 PC is no problems here lol
But you guys enjoy those Apples cause they look just great.

Hey Wags, working fine on my old laptop also. Oh, it is a Mac. You shooting the good 5D Mark II footage or the lower end 7D? Just asking

[wagsy]

Bootcamp?
I don't use the 7D much, I use the 60D as it's prefect for video with its flip out screen.

[TheRealDrew]

Bootcamp?
I don't use the 7D much, I use the 60D as it's prefect for video with its flip out screen.

Nah Bootcamp is too tough for me, all the running and pushups and stuff

How do you like the 60D? Played with it and it seemed real nice.