Author Topic: I tried a Mac for video editing...  (Read 171318 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests 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 #225 on: April 14, 2013, 09:50:34 am »
now if you looked at a chart with a linear scale it would tell the truth

Time to get more sleep
« Last Edit: April 14, 2013, 10:49:08 am by dimlow »
 

Online hans

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1626
  • Country: nl
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #226 on: April 14, 2013, 09:54:13 am »
Obivously not. The 3970X is a 940 euro CPU. I think your original i7 system with motherboard, RAM, PSU, HDD, case comes in at 940 euro.
Socket 2011 motherboards are more expensive.
Socket 2011 runs best with quad channel RAM (better to say; it can make use of quad channel as opposed to dual channel RAM).
Socket 2011 CPU's don't come with a boxed cooler. They figured you're such an enthusiastic user, you're going to fit a good one yourself anyway. Or , they had to admit their boxed coolers suck :-//
 

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 #227 on: April 14, 2013, 09:59:06 am »
Sorry guys i meant a 3930k, dont know why i wrote 3970k, the 3970k IS NOT worth the extra
« Last Edit: April 14, 2013, 10:03:22 am by dimlow »
 

Online hans

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1626
  • Country: nl
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #228 on: April 14, 2013, 10:09:54 am »
Then still though, a typical socket 2011 motherboard is about 180 euro.
The CPU itself is about 180 euro's more expensive.
You need a dedicated cooler..
And a dedicated Graphics Card

And in the end you win about 15 seconds in handbrake. 10%.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #229 on: April 14, 2013, 10:11:48 am »
now if you looked at a chart with a linear scale it would tell the truth

The 3930K is 1:50
The 3770K is 2:05
12% speed improvement. Not much.
 

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 #230 on: April 14, 2013, 10:13:44 am »
Yes but look at this. Toms hardware does not show the big jump in speed from 3770k to 3930k. their charts are misleading.

Load of dogs.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2013, 10:50:02 am by dimlow »
 

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 #231 on: April 14, 2013, 10:18:32 am »
how did you calculate 12% seems more like 26% to me

I really should check charts better next time
« Last Edit: April 14, 2013, 10:51:06 am by dimlow »
 

alm

  • Guest
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #232 on: April 14, 2013, 10:23:07 am »
There are 60 seconds in a minute, not 100.
 

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 #233 on: April 14, 2013, 10:25:07 am »
lol :D

« Last Edit: April 14, 2013, 10:29:30 am by dimlow »
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #234 on: April 14, 2013, 10:28:00 am »
how did you calculate 12% seems more like 26% to me

The graph I posted shows:
3930K is 1:50 = 110 seconds
3770K is 2:05 = 125 seconds
Do the math  ;D
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #235 on: April 14, 2013, 10:29:35 am »
Yes but look at this. Toms hardware does not show the big jump in speed from 3770k to 3930k. their charts are misleading.

Their chart is not misleading, it clearly shows exact times in second for both processors, for H.264 rendering in Handbrake (exactly the task I want)
What is the graph you posted referring too?, that's misleading without any context!
 

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 #236 on: April 14, 2013, 10:35:41 am »
In my defence I'm a Dimlow.
 

Offline SteigsdB

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 31
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #237 on: April 14, 2013, 02:42:24 pm »
Well, is problably possible to encode the files when you are writing it (aka shooting the video)

Yes, but there is no point doing that, it saves you nothing.
You still have to use a video editor to cut the dead space at the start and end of each clip.
Then you still have to transcode using Handbrake to get your correct size/quality ratio.
The exact same workflow that takes 99% of my time.
As I said, all that saves if the few minutes to copy the files.

If you were to record the file in its final format (H.264) and then edit that file for upload would it not save you from skipping the transcode step?

You could use something like this:
http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/h264prorecorder/
 

Offline mariush

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4983
  • Country: ro
  • .
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #238 on: April 14, 2013, 02:54:22 pm »
The camera records already in h264 but it's a relatively constant and high bitrate format, something like 16-24 mbps. 

Dave's problem is slow upload speed, he has to optimize his videos to retain as much quality in a reasonable amount of disk space. The camera format (and camera videos in general) are not optimized for that, no matter the scene complexity the camera will use the same disk space, they have a hardware encoder inside that balance battery consumption with encoding complexity and encoding time.

Dave imports these video into the editor, makes some cuts and stuff on the videos, saves into h264 with some big file - high quality setting (hence no actual real processing work, no big cpu usage by the editor), and then the video goes to handbrake which encodes with specific settings that shrink the video file size while retaining as much quality  (constant quality factor, each frame has same quality, size varying depending on complexity)


Anyway... I was the one pushing for AMD as a good solution for the money, but I'm perfectly fine with Dave's choise for the 3770k.

Hardware wise, the only thing I don't like about that configuration is the power supply.. i personally don't trust Thermaltake like I said, and I'd recommend paying a bit more for a psu with Japanese capacitors and more modern OEM design/architecture.  I would go for a psu that has a Delta or Seasonic OEM design inside, but you'd have to search for reviews for each psu and determine that, which takes time.
But in the end, that Litepower will be OK, the system won't even use half of the maximum power it's rated for, it will be OK.
 

Offline SteigsdB

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 31
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #239 on: April 14, 2013, 02:59:42 pm »
Dave imports these video into the editor, makes some cuts and stuff on the videos, saves into h264 with some big file - high quality setting (hence no actual real processing work, no big cpu usage by the editor), and then the video goes to handbrake which encodes with specific settings that shrink the video file size while retaining as much quality  (constant quality factor, each frame has same quality, size varying depending on complexity)

What I'm suggesting is finding a way to ingest the video directly using post-handbrake settings, thereby eliminating that step.

I haven't played with Media Express so I'm not familiar with it's particular compression options, but surely there has to be some way to do it.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #240 on: April 14, 2013, 11:47:13 pm »
If you were to record the file in its final format (H.264) and then edit that file for upload would it not save you from skipping the transcode step?

No, that's not how it works.
You still need a video editor which does not magically output the samecombined H.264 file.
So you still have the exact same video editor render and final H264 transcode to do.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #241 on: April 15, 2013, 03:28:47 am »
VideoReDo TVSuite H.264. can edit without rendering again. It only renders the frames before and after the cut so it is really fast. See my previous post.

Then it's not possible to do anything else. Like overlays, captions, fades, crop, zoom, dual camera etc.
I do need at least a modicum of editing features.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #242 on: April 15, 2013, 03:34:37 am »
What I'm suggesting is finding a way to ingest the video directly using post-handbrake settings, thereby eliminating that step.

You can't. "and stuff" mariush referred to is the key. You cannot get around needing a proper video editor for this kind of stuff.
Then once you established you need that, you have limited choices. I have tried them all, and I found Sony MS is the best for my purpose.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #243 on: April 15, 2013, 03:43:06 am »
The deed is done.
I've ordered an i7 system from JW with Silencio 550 case, Corsair H55 water cooler, 16GB Corsair DDR3, Corsair VS650 PSU (yeah, yeah, blah, blah, best value option they had, I'll take my chances :-P) and ASUS P8Z77-V-LX MB.
I would have only saved just over $100 by going AMD, so sorry you AMD fanboys.
They wanted $99 assembly/test/burnin, so I'll do that myself.
Worth doing a boring build video? (Altzone or EEVblog?)
 

Offline ecat

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 296
  • Country: gb
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #244 on: April 15, 2013, 03:58:55 am »
See, that was easy and didn't take long only took 17 pages  :-DD

Video of the build? I bloody well hope so ;) More to the point some rendering and transcoding numbers, then we can look forward to another 17 pages of 'told you so'. lol.

Glad you have things sorted.


 

Offline mariush

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4983
  • Country: ro
  • .
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #245 on: April 15, 2013, 04:10:28 am »
Make it a live show, like you did with the 3d printer.
 

Offline NiHaoMike

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8973
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #246 on: April 15, 2013, 04:14:02 am »
650W would be massive overkill since you aren't using a high end GPU. (Though you'll be all set for a future CUDA upgrade or a RAID array...) Water cooling would be massive overkill unless you're planning to overclock a lot. A $30 Cooler Master heatsink will handle even a 6 core i7 just fine.

Also beware that the motherboard you selected doesn't have IEEE1394, in case you still have an IEEE1394 camera you want to use. In that case, a cheap IEEE1394 card would solve your problem.
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #247 on: April 15, 2013, 04:17:04 am »
Make it a live show, like you did with the 3d printer.

Live shows turn into shitty final videos though. Fine for the keen 100 or so who turn up, but boring for the 20,000 who watch later.
 

Online EEVblogTopic starter

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #248 on: April 15, 2013, 04:20:11 am »
650W would be massive overkill since you aren't using a high end GPU. (Though you'll be all set for a future CUDA upgrade or a RAID array...) Water cooling would be massive overkill unless you're planning to overclock a lot. A $30 Cooler Master heatsink will handle even a 6 core i7 just fine.

Well, I'd probably be silly not to try and overclock it at least a little with the K CPU, chipset support, and water cooler (which hardly cost much extra).
Overkill is what I want. That hopefully means lower temps, and hence lower fan noise all round.
 

Offline jmole

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 211
  • Country: us
    • My Portfolio
Re: I tried a Mac for video editing...
« Reply #249 on: April 15, 2013, 07:08:47 am »
Overkill is what I want. That hopefully means lower temps, and hence lower fan noise all round.

If you want overkill, you can pick up a quad CPU server chassis, and load it up with 10 core Xeons. Of course, that be just about as useful as that 13GHz scope for day to day use. Not to mention the $20k price tag.

My research lab put together a system like this for a virtualized web server. Sure was a hell of a build.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf