Author Topic: I tried a Mac for video editing...  (Read 118760 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dimlow

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 301
  • Country: gb
  • Likes to be thought of as
    • Dimlow Ponders
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #50 on: April 08, 2013, 11:33:12 pm »
I dont have vegas but i do have handbrake, i just dropped it in and clicked start, it took 1:18 on my old Q6600 overclocked to 3.8 Ghz. Will try to find vegas and give it a go
 

Offline dimlow

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 301
  • Country: gb
  • Likes to be thought of as
    • Dimlow Ponders
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #51 on: April 08, 2013, 11:37:05 pm »
Just noted you used an QF of 22, so i set it to that and it rendered in 1:16 seconds
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 27440
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #52 on: April 08, 2013, 11:44:24 pm »
Are you using one of the premade profiles of handbrake for internet video or you cooked a custom special profile?

Yes, I have a custom script I wrote.

Quote
HandBrakeCLI" -i "%%G" -t 1 -c 1 -o "F:\Video\EEVblog\1440x1080\%%~nH-1440x1080.mp4" -f mp4 --strict-anamorphic  -e x264 -q 22 -r 25 --cfr  -a 1 -E faac -B 192 -6 stereo -R 48 -D 0 --gain=0 --audio-copy-mask none --audio-fallback ffac3 -x ref=2:bframes=2:subq=6:mixed-refs=0:weightb=0:8x8dct=0:trellis=0 --verbose=1
 

Offline ivan747

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2010
  • Country: do
I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #53 on: April 08, 2013, 11:52:05 pm »
Dave, Handbrake is also available for Mac (and it works quite well). It can convert .mts files for FInal Cut import. Other than Sony Vegas, everything else needs conversion before importing.

Converting files before import is not an option. That's just an extra step that takes time.

Well, you can only use Sony Vegas then. Or get a new camera and get rid of stupid proprietary formats when you have standards like MPEG's.
Nothing like the smell of rosin core solder in the morning.
"Could you not use some of that crowdfunded $1.5 million to hire a graphic designer who understands perspective?" -Delta
"A soldering station I bought once had a sticker on it that said, I shit you not, 'QENUINE'." -c4757p
 

Offline dimlow

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 301
  • Country: gb
  • Likes to be thought of as
    • Dimlow Ponders
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #54 on: April 09, 2013, 12:05:41 am »
I ran you script after modding it for my local paths and got 1:40
 

Offline peter.mitchell

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1568
  • Country: au
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #55 on: April 09, 2013, 12:11:39 am »
ummm... AVCHD is a standard format, heaps of software suites support it, what the heck are you on about?

1:40 is only a little bit faster than realtime, which i think is what dave already gets.
 

Offline firewalker

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2309
  • Country: gr
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #56 on: April 09, 2013, 12:13:06 am »
My GNU/Linux, i3 4Gbyte RAM laptop, converted it (with the handbrake script) in  4m28.665s (125,7 Mb). OpenShot loads that MTS file with no problem.  ;D ;D ;D
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 12:27:18 am by firewalker »
Become a realist, stay a dreamer.

 

Online mikeselectricstuff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11686
  • Country: gb
    • Mike's Electric Stuff
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #57 on: April 09, 2013, 12:24:19 am »
Maybe an answer is to get an internet connection with faster upload speed (or is it throttled at Youtube's end?)
If only Vegas could encode and stream to Youtube at the same time it would save a lot of time - ISTR it will do, but only at low res.

 
Youtube channel:Taking wierd stuff apart. Very apart.
Mike's Electric Stuff: High voltage, vintage electronics etc.
Day Job: Mostly LEDs
 

Offline dimlow

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 301
  • Country: gb
  • Likes to be thought of as
    • Dimlow Ponders
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #58 on: April 09, 2013, 12:26:23 am »
1:40 is only a little bit faster than realtime, which i think is what dave already gets.

Yea, but my ststem is not an i7 its a q6600 4 core cpu 7 years old, not fast by todays standards ,daves render is 2:01 im sure with a modern desktop with a good CPU he could half his handbrake rendering times.

I notice dave script generates a file of 125 MB, were as Handbrakes UI generates a file of 111Mb. dave was quoting files sizes of 111MB and a time of 2:01 my guess is Dave encoded with Handbrakes UI for his timings. so to compare, my timing for the UI are 1:16 thats closer to 2x. thats is much.much  better than his laptop.
Ditch the laptop get a GOOD desktop machine. See the link to the video i posted.

My GNU/Linux, i3 4Gbyte RAM laptop, converted it (with the handbrake script) in  4m28.665s. OpenShot loads that MTS file with no problem.  ;D ;D ;D
Laptop speed here, Pretty darn slow.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 12:30:10 am by dimlow »
 

Offline moemoe

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 105
  • Country: de
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #59 on: April 09, 2013, 12:40:39 am »
There's a real huge difference with different CPUs (and perhaps a little OS influence, but didn't boot up Linux on the faster machine), I tested it with:

i7 L640  @2.13GHz, Debian 64bit, SSD: 9m00s
i5 2500K @3.3GHz, Win7 64bit, rotating rust: 1m48s

If you take a look at http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7+L+640+%40+2.13GHz&id=848 and http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-2500K+%40+3.30GHz&id=804, that roughly represents the same result: 2200 and 6400 points. And this goes up to Intel Core i7-3770K @3.50GHz with 9,637 points.

So you should probably buy a decent encoding machine with some good cpu, 500 bucks and the encoding will be about 1.5xRealtime.

And this clearly shows that clock and i3/i5/i7 as model is not enough information, you need to specify the excat model.
https://github.com/maugsburger/
Breadboard Adapters featured in EEVBlog #573 on Tindie
 

Offline ecat

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #60 on: April 09, 2013, 12:46:49 am »
1:40 is only a little bit faster than realtime, which i think is what dave already gets.

Yea, but my ststem is not an i7 its a q6600 4 core cpu 7 years old, not fast by todays standards ,daves render is 2:01 im sure with a modern desktop with a good CPU he could half his handbrake rendering times.

I'll give it a go on my i5 once the download is finished... 32MB downloaded so far, 1 hour  20 minutes remaining - bloody hell, what do you Antipodeans use for servers, recycled Fosters cans and dingo brains ? ;)
 
 

Offline dimlow

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 301
  • Country: gb
  • Likes to be thought of as
    • Dimlow Ponders
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #61 on: April 09, 2013, 12:53:08 am »
The i5 is too slow, Dave want at least a 3930K overclocked to get some good performance.
 

Offline bxs

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 89
  • Country: 00
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #62 on: April 09, 2013, 01:08:24 am »
I don't see the lack of MTS files as a big fail, MTS is just a contender, in this case a transport stream, you can simple remux it to something like a mp4, it will be as fast as your hard drive.

Something like this will do the job:
Code: [Select]
ffmpeg -i EEVblogTestRender2Min22.MTS -acodec copy -vcodec copy EEVblogTestRender2Min22.mp4In this case: EEVblogTestRender2Min22.MTS(214MB) -> EEVblogTestRender2Min22.mp4(203MB)

You don't even need to copy the MTS files to disk, simple read them from SD and write the MP4 to HDD, a simple script will do that with no trouble.

But, yes, is another steep...

About handbreak, I ran:
Code: [Select]
HandBrakeCLI -i EEVblogTestRender2min22-SonyAVC-1440x1080.mp4 -t 1 -c 1 -o EEVblogTestRender2min22-SonyAVC-1440x1080_a.mp4 -f mp4 --strict-anamorphic  -e x264 -q 22 -r 25 --cfr  -a 1 -E faac -B 192 -6 stereo -R 48 -D 0 --gain=0 --audio-copy-mask none --audio-fallback ffac3 -x ref=2:bframes=2:subq=6:mixed-refs=0:weightb=0:8x8dct=0:trellis=0 --verbose=1and got: EEVblogTestRender2min22-SonyAVC-1440x1080.mp4(109MB) -> EEVblogTestRender2Min22_a.mp4(94MB)

This in a very old AMD dual core PC, I have it for 7 years, and even them it was a weak PC, so weak that I only  bought it because cause the shop was so desperate to sell it that almost gave me the the PC  :-DD and took 6min, so your modern system is only 3X faster???  :-//

You probably are not using a proper system for the job...

Just another note, I read that Intel released or will release a QSV SDk and remember reading that handbreak will make use of it  :-+
 

Offline ddavidebor

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1012
  • Country: it
    • Fermium LABS website
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #63 on: April 09, 2013, 01:20:31 am »
handbrake on i7 late 2009 mac with normal hd (and overwriting existing files) take less than 1 min with an average frame rate of 65.
Davide Bortolami,
Fermium LABS srl
 

Offline Rufus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2094
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #64 on: April 09, 2013, 01:47:00 am »
Quote
HandBrakeCLI" -i "%%G" -t 1 -c 1 -o "F:\Video\EEVblog\1440x1080\%%~nH-1440x1080.mp4" -f mp4 --strict-anamorphic  -e x264 -q 22 -r 25 --cfr  -a 1 -E faac -B 192 -6 stereo -R 48 -D 0 --gain=0 --audio-copy-mask none --audio-fallback ffac3 -x ref=2:bframes=2:subq=6:mixed-refs=0:weightb=0:8x8dct=0:trellis=0 --verbose=1

Handbrake x64, SSD, notebook with i7 2670QM @ 2.2G. The script ran in 1:54.0

Handbrake x64, SSD, i7 920 overclocked @ 4.2G. The script ran in 1:17.3

 

Offline kripton2035

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1633
  • Country: fr
    • kripton2035 schematics repository
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #65 on: April 09, 2013, 02:04:33 am »
handbrake on i7 late 2009 mac with normal hd (and overwriting existing files) take less than 1 min with an average frame rate of 65.
and a high end late 2009 i7 imac @2.8GHz is almost same speed as today base mac pro (and 1/3 of today high end mac pro)
see Dave, why I told you not to go in an apple store ? ;)

Offline ecat

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #66 on: April 09, 2013, 03:05:03 am »
Numbers!
For what they are worth...

i5 2500k @ 4.2GHz (for those interested, CPU Mark = 7405 ish as I had some light stuff running in background) , ATi 6950.

In Movie Studio, Sony AVC/MVC as per (my understanding of) Dave's settings in reply #48

CPU only: 2:10 200.5MB file
GPU if available 1:58 212MB file

In Movie Studio, MainConcept AVC/AAC. No option here for 12Mbps so I tried 10Mbps and 14Mbps

CPU only 4:33 212MB file (10Mpbs I think)
OpenCL 1:27 176MB file (10Mbps)
OpenCL 1:30 246MB file (14Mbps)

Conclusion:
I'm hungry. I'll try thinking and eating at the same time and see what the delusionary stew turns up.
For sure the ability of Sony AVC/MVC and MainConcept AVC/AAC to utilise the GPU differs with the former is best suited for CPU and the latter showing a considerable GPU gain.


Reason for edit:
Changed incorrect (12Mbps) to (14Mbps)
« Last Edit: April 10, 2013, 01:38:09 am by ecat »
 

Offline Wuerstchenhund

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 2766
  • Country: gb
  • Occasionally active on the forum, available via PM
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #67 on: April 09, 2013, 03:49:19 am »
And yes I believe the Premium price for Apple is justified. Been using Macs and "normal" PC's. Apple build quality is exceptional good,

Only if you compare to cheap consumer PCs. And even then it's up for discussion if the higher price is justified.

Aside from Macs (Mac user since 1993) I am mostly using PC workstations (I'm typing this on a soon-to-be-replaced HP z800), and not only is the quality at a similar or even better level (especially when it comes to components) than with Apple, the hardware capabilities are also far superior than anything Apple offers in the high end range. That was already the case when they were selling Powermac G5s, and hasn't changed since.

And then there are the occasional design flaws Apple tends to build into their products. Which wouldn't be that bad if they at least would fix them without hassle, but unfortunately that's not how Apple works.

Quote
I find the OS a lot easier to work with than Windows (or Linux).

I think its around on par with Windows but I can't really say I find OS X easier than Windows 7 or Windows 8. In addition, for high performance tasks it's generally Windows or Linux as both are more capable than OS X.

Quote
And they keep there value more than a "normal" PC.

That is true, but then I'm not buying a computer as investment portfolio but as a tool, and at the end of the day a more capable and faster system saves me time and thus more money than what I could get more over a comparable PC after 4- years.

I have a few friends who work internationally in professional video/film production, and they often told me that the majority of machines you find there are not Macs but mostly HP and (to a smaller extend) Dell workstations. Apparently there are some die-hards who still hold onto Macs (especially in audio production) but apparently the majority happens on HP gear running Windows or Linux.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 03:52:47 am by Wuerstchenhund »
Brexit n - The undefined being negotiated by the unprepared in order to get the unspecified for the uninformed.
 

Offline marmad

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2979
  • Country: aq
    • DaysAlive
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #68 on: April 09, 2013, 04:51:01 am »
Win7 x64 - i7 950 @ 3.06GHz - No overclocking
Source: SSD
Destination: HD RAID Stripe
Handbrake Encode Time: 1:07

You'd likely get slightly better times using an SSD RAID Stripe as the Destination.

I agree with Wuerstchenhund on all his points surrounding Apple/Windows/Linux - and would only add that most people find the OS that they started with the easiest to work with. I've heard just as many complaints from Windows people trying to get around in OS X. If you use both OSes regularly (which you will inevitably do if you use Windows at home and teach), you'll find both of them have nice features - and other features that you absolutely hate. And in terms of learning them: both have features which make it easy and hard for new users.
 

Offline free_electron

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6988
  • Country: us
    • SiliconValleyGarage
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #69 on: April 09, 2013, 04:57:17 am »
Dave : Why 1440X1080 ? that may be one of the problems.... sony software may upscale to downscale again... should be 1920x1080. filming in 4:3 ?
Professional Electron Wrangler.
Any comments, or points of view expressed, are my own and not endorsed , induced or compensated by my employer(s).
 

Offline bxs

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 89
  • Country: 00
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #70 on: April 09, 2013, 05:13:05 am »
Dave : Why 1440X1080 ? that may be one of the problems.... sony software may upscale to downscale again... should be 1920x1080. filming in 4:3 ?

I also dislike filming in 4:3 a 16:9 video, I see it as cheating  :o

them in youtube it will reencode it from 1440x1080 to 1920x1080, kind of a mess.

look the example of video 451: hxxp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TSr9nFN1GU
Code: [Select]
Available formats:
37      :       mp4     [1080x1920]
46      :       webm    [1080x1920]
22      :       mp4     [720x1280]
45      :       webm    [720x1280]
35      :       flv     [480x854]
44      :       webm    [480x854]
34      :       flv     [360x640]
18      :       mp4     [360x640]
43      :       webm    [360x640]
5       :       flv     [240x400]
17      :       mp4     [144x176]

I have a slow connection, so it will not affect me, some times I can't even see the 480p from youtube...
 

Offline marmad

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2979
  • Country: aq
    • DaysAlive
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #71 on: April 09, 2013, 05:20:45 am »
The i5 is too slow, Dave want at least a 3930K overclocked to get some good performance.
I don't think so - I agree with Eliminateur, who suggested that Dave would be better off building a system around the AMD FX-8350, thereby getting ~83% of the 3930K encoding speed at ~35% of the price.
 

Offline moemoe

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 105
  • Country: de
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #72 on: April 09, 2013, 05:33:31 am »
You'd likely get slightly better times using an SSD RAID Stripe as the Destination.

Don't think so, a video of this size can be written in 1-2s by a modern HDD. So give it some additional seconds for seeks, and you're still on the safe side.
https://github.com/maugsburger/
Breadboard Adapters featured in EEVBlog #573 on Tindie
 

Offline hans

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1012
  • Country: nl
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #73 on: April 09, 2013, 05:57:05 am »
Intel i5 3570k @ 3.6GHz (stock):1:33
Intel i5 3570K @ 4GHz: 1:18.  4GHz is pretty easy overclock these days.

Asus P8Z77-V PRO, 2x8GB 1600MHz RAM, AMD HD7850 GPU.  I used a 2GB RAM disk (6GB/s+ Read speeds, woohoo!) because for temporary files, it's actually useful.
If I'm actually using my hard drives, I usually use 2 physically seperate drives to source and write to. I don't run raid nor have very fast bulk drives, so that works best for me.

Also used Handbrake 0.9.8. Does it use QuickSync from Intel? It should be quicker than AMD or Nvidia GPU acceleration. I think I did read that Intel would work together with Handbrake to incorporate this, but I dunno whether it's released yet.

A Intel i7 3770K has 8 threads (instead of 4) but is  ~50% more expensive. For me, spending 50% extra for more threads sounds useless, because I rarely encode lots of video.
AMD make better bang per buck chips, but I am uncertain about their raw performance, especially for video encoding.
Moreover.. notice how Marmad's system (i7 950) that's a couple of years old still beats this system. Though, not sure if I can use Quicksync, maybe that's a lot faster.

I personally don't see any benefit of a Mac. I believe in the past a Mac Pro workstation would cost a fortune and was a power house. Nowadays I think it's only the 'user experience' that would set things apart, and that's user preference. I personally find Mac on a technical environment 'limiting', think about toolchains for ARM, your favorite design CAD tool, etc. Installign Dual-boot or VM with Windows? Then it defeats the purpose of having a Mac.. also, every program you can get for Mac is available for Windows. In more or less frustration free packaging.

Moreover, the Mac hardware these days is the same Intel platform.  "But they are optimized for Mac OSX". That's suggesting Intel deliberately write slower drivers (like chipset, MEI, etc.) for Windows than for Mac. I call it BS.
Even better, my motherboard (Asus P8Z77-V PRO with UEFI) comes with a shiny "Performance" button which overclocks the CPU to 4.4GHz. Not with the best settings (70C temp full load with case fans off) but ~800MHz boost which is 20% theoretical performance for free (given you run a good CPU cooler, which I would anyway for silent computing).
If Mac would have any advantage, I am pretty sure this takes it back with a bit of margin.

Also, upgrades for a desktop machine are so much cheaper.. For e.g.: 250GB Samsung 840 SSD: ~140 euro's (200$). A 512GB SSD in a Mac Pro costs 750$.
Or.. 16GB RAM upgrade would cost me about 80 euro's. For a Mac, chances are they don't upgrade it after your purchased. Or they charge you 600$ for hardware that costs 100 dollar .

Absolutely insane pricing scheme.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 06:17:45 am by hans »
 

Offline marmad

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2979
  • Country: aq
    • DaysAlive
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #74 on: April 09, 2013, 05:59:58 am »
Don't think so, a video of this size can be written in 1-2s by a modern HDD. So give it some additional seconds for seeks, and you're still on the safe side.

This is just a test video - I assume the videos Dave would actually be encoding would be much much larger - which is what I was referring to.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 06:03:03 am by marmad »
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf