My partner and I are just starting out, and we're wondering what software and computers you reccommend. Mac or PC? A computer dedicated solely to editing? And what programs? We'd be very appreciative if you guys could help us out with this. Thanks.
editing Best Editing Software and Equipment for Digital Editing
- Thread starter AgresticProductions
- Start date
That said...what the mac doesn't get you is the DIY computer thing...which some people prefer, and that's a valid reason to build your own PC.
Windows/Mac is a preference...but cost isn't an arguement that holds water anymore...it absolutely used to in the PPC/SCSI days, but those days of not even trying to compete have come to an end. Apple has lowered their prices to compete and uses higher quality parts while doing so. By getting volume discounts on their parts and selling a turnkey system, they are able to keep their costs down while getting better parts than we could get for the same price. Apple made their hardware a viable contender against the Dells, Gateways (are they still around?) and HP's of the PC world on the hardware front.
The intel mac also runs Windows and Linux, so you're set there as well if you don't prefer the Mac OS.
Windows/Mac is a preference...but cost isn't an arguement that holds water anymore...it absolutely used to in the PPC/SCSI days, but those days of not even trying to compete have come to an end. Apple has lowered their prices to compete and uses higher quality parts while doing so. By getting volume discounts on their parts and selling a turnkey system, they are able to keep their costs down while getting better parts than we could get for the same price. Apple made their hardware a viable contender against the Dells, Gateways (are they still around?) and HP's of the PC world on the hardware front.
The intel mac also runs Windows and Linux, so you're set there as well if you don't prefer the Mac OS.
Well, there are a couple of glaring disparities for someone claiming to be an expert. For one, it's not "PCI-X". This is a bus technology typically found in server environments. It's actually "PCI Express" (a.k.a. PCI-E or PCIe). PCI-X is still a parallel link technology where PCI-E, like SATA, USB, and HyperTransport, is scaleable serial link.
All modern ATI and NVIDIA graphics cards are "compatible" with DX10, even those that only have hardware acceleration for DX9. And DX10 only operates under Vista (unless you hack your games), so this is a don't care bullet if you're using Windows XP. There isn't a non-linear editor out there that "requires" DX10 anyway. This is primarily for games. The additions over DX9 in DX10 won't speed up your rendering or preview times in video overlay. And unless you're running a 30" Cinema Display or equivelent, you can get by with 128MB local framebuffer. EDIT: Now there are some cool technologies in the latest DX10 graphics cards from ATI that have dedicated cores for accelerating MPEG2, H.264 and VC1 (High-definition codecs found in HD-DVD and Blu-Ray), so if you plan to author in HD and use these codecs and you are using a compatible player (like the latest Cyberlink PowerDVD) these graphics cards can help offload the CPU for other tasks.
I bought a 500GB 7200 RPM External USB 2.0 hard drive for $85 not too long ago. Purchased many 350-450GB internal SATA drives for under $100, all 7200RPM. 10K RPM drives are the expensive drives, but not really necessary for 90% of editing tasks. I run RAID 0 in one of my systems.
Some motherboards have built-in IEEE 1394, high-definition audio, graphics comparable to the Radeon HD2400 (e.g. the AMD RS780). You don't necessarily need an Intel CPU for non-linear editing. You can easily get by with a dual or quad core Athlon/Phenom. These motherboards run anywhere from $99 to just over $200, and they will save you the cost of adding audio, graphics, NIC, and IEEE 1394.
I got a free tower case ($50 with a $50 mail-in rebate) in a Fry's sale.
I picked up 2GB good quality PC6400 DDR2 memory for $70 on the same sale (after mail-in rebate).
You don't need XP Pro. You can get by with XP Home unless you are on a corporate network using Domains. Here's a legit full copy for $90.00 (you can get the upgrade for the same price if you already have an older version of Windows). Granted, this is supposed to be for system builders, but it will still install fine and activate:
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Win..._1_2?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1204444882&sr=1-2
Believe me, you can build PCs pretty cheap these days. What you can't get cheap "legally" is all of the software you need to run it, so on that much we can agree. Although AVG Free is an excellent AntiVirus software. And note that it's "free".
I have 20 years of professional experience in the computer industry, so we can certainly pick some nits together.
I am currently a Field Applications Engineer for AMD and previously performed similar functions at ATI Technologies, Compaq, 3dfx Interactive, Dell, and STB Systems (graphics and multimedia hardware).
Let's get technical.
Disclaimer: I build my own PCs because I can get stuff at a discount since I work in the industry, and I have the expertise to keep them running stable and debug them when they're not. If you are just getting started in computers and digital non-linear editing, buy a Mac or a brand name Commercial desktop (preferably using AMD
) because it will save you a ton of headache. Building your own PC is fun if you want the knowledge and experience and have patience to work through the compatibility issues with the mish-mash of retail components that probably never got tested together. Yes, there are plugfests and standards designed to make everyone play well harmoniously, but there will always be the oddball out there. Hard drives can land on the shelves with outdated and/or buggy firmware, but so can motherboards. Most Commercial computer systems (from Dell and HP, for instance) and Apple Computers go through rigorous compatibility and stability tests in order to deliver a solid solution to customers. Finding that in a "DIY" computer is rare unless you really know what to avoid.
Now that said, [shameless plug] I am happy to say that Mac isn't always the answer to every solution in film. Lucasfilm and ILM use AMD processors to deliver their stunning CGI and digital effects like those seen in the movie Transformers
[/shameless plug]
All modern ATI and NVIDIA graphics cards are "compatible" with DX10, even those that only have hardware acceleration for DX9. And DX10 only operates under Vista (unless you hack your games), so this is a don't care bullet if you're using Windows XP. There isn't a non-linear editor out there that "requires" DX10 anyway. This is primarily for games. The additions over DX9 in DX10 won't speed up your rendering or preview times in video overlay. And unless you're running a 30" Cinema Display or equivelent, you can get by with 128MB local framebuffer. EDIT: Now there are some cool technologies in the latest DX10 graphics cards from ATI that have dedicated cores for accelerating MPEG2, H.264 and VC1 (High-definition codecs found in HD-DVD and Blu-Ray), so if you plan to author in HD and use these codecs and you are using a compatible player (like the latest Cyberlink PowerDVD) these graphics cards can help offload the CPU for other tasks.
I bought a 500GB 7200 RPM External USB 2.0 hard drive for $85 not too long ago. Purchased many 350-450GB internal SATA drives for under $100, all 7200RPM. 10K RPM drives are the expensive drives, but not really necessary for 90% of editing tasks. I run RAID 0 in one of my systems.
Some motherboards have built-in IEEE 1394, high-definition audio, graphics comparable to the Radeon HD2400 (e.g. the AMD RS780). You don't necessarily need an Intel CPU for non-linear editing. You can easily get by with a dual or quad core Athlon/Phenom. These motherboards run anywhere from $99 to just over $200, and they will save you the cost of adding audio, graphics, NIC, and IEEE 1394.
I got a free tower case ($50 with a $50 mail-in rebate) in a Fry's sale.
I picked up 2GB good quality PC6400 DDR2 memory for $70 on the same sale (after mail-in rebate).
You don't need XP Pro. You can get by with XP Home unless you are on a corporate network using Domains. Here's a legit full copy for $90.00 (you can get the upgrade for the same price if you already have an older version of Windows). Granted, this is supposed to be for system builders, but it will still install fine and activate:
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Win..._1_2?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1204444882&sr=1-2
Believe me, you can build PCs pretty cheap these days. What you can't get cheap "legally" is all of the software you need to run it, so on that much we can agree. Although AVG Free is an excellent AntiVirus software. And note that it's "free".
I have 20 years of professional experience in the computer industry, so we can certainly pick some nits together.
I am currently a Field Applications Engineer for AMD and previously performed similar functions at ATI Technologies, Compaq, 3dfx Interactive, Dell, and STB Systems (graphics and multimedia hardware).Let's get technical.
Disclaimer: I build my own PCs because I can get stuff at a discount since I work in the industry, and I have the expertise to keep them running stable and debug them when they're not. If you are just getting started in computers and digital non-linear editing, buy a Mac or a brand name Commercial desktop (preferably using AMD
) because it will save you a ton of headache. Building your own PC is fun if you want the knowledge and experience and have patience to work through the compatibility issues with the mish-mash of retail components that probably never got tested together. Yes, there are plugfests and standards designed to make everyone play well harmoniously, but there will always be the oddball out there. Hard drives can land on the shelves with outdated and/or buggy firmware, but so can motherboards. Most Commercial computer systems (from Dell and HP, for instance) and Apple Computers go through rigorous compatibility and stability tests in order to deliver a solid solution to customers. Finding that in a "DIY" computer is rare unless you really know what to avoid.Now that said, [shameless plug] I am happy to say that Mac isn't always the answer to every solution in film. Lucasfilm and ILM use AMD processors to deliver their stunning CGI and digital effects like those seen in the movie Transformers
[/shameless plug]
Last edited:
Thank you for picking nits...I'm forwarding your info there to my friend, he likes data. Everytime I hear this argument though, I am reminded of my friend who bought a machine built at a local PC vendor who is more reputable than most in town.
They built from cheap parts and he ended up bringing the computer back a dozen times before they figured out that his modem dropping his online connection was caused by the graphics card. 2 years of computer replacement and windows reinstalls seemed unreal...although I'm sure this is a worst case incident, it wouldn't have happened with a brandname Box, so I'm loathe to recommend building your own to folks who aren't dyed in the wool geeks (I would build my own).
I'll restate my position on the Mac/Windows/Linux thing...it's only personal preference...there are no other delimiting factors that makes one better than the other. Except that as a Mac use, I'm right and everyone else is wrong
They built from cheap parts and he ended up bringing the computer back a dozen times before they figured out that his modem dropping his online connection was caused by the graphics card. 2 years of computer replacement and windows reinstalls seemed unreal...although I'm sure this is a worst case incident, it wouldn't have happened with a brandname Box, so I'm loathe to recommend building your own to folks who aren't dyed in the wool geeks (I would build my own).
I'll restate my position on the Mac/Windows/Linux thing...it's only personal preference...there are no other delimiting factors that makes one better than the other. Except that as a Mac use, I'm right and everyone else is wrong
I logged down time on my workstations for 1 year. At that time, I had a Windows editing system with Adobe Premiere. The machine had nothing else on it, and it was firewalled off from the internet completely. When I computed the cost of down time, and time spent rebooting, etc., the PPC Mac was still less expensive. After that year, Windows was banished from my office. I have a Windows XP machine here that belongs to a client, solely for testing the software I developed for them, and I have Windows XP installed under Parallels on my laptop for Windows development (it is also not allowed to touch the internet). Otherwise, I have Linux servers and Mac workstations. You can go on and on about preferences, but for me, it was a hard, cold business decision, based totally on the actual numbers. It was not based on perception, preference, or simply the initial purchase price, which does not tell the whole story. Granted, the numbers would vary based on how the computers are used. My computers get pounded. Since I also support networks and systems for my clients, I can say, without hesitation, that the systems that are the most difficult and expensive to support, repair, backup, etc. are all Microsoft operating systems.
Finally, I do a lot of audio editing in my office, and I can hear the PC server that is 10 feet away over the G5 that is warming my feet. The iMac is totally silent. That is another consideration that would not matter as much to someone with a different job, but we are talking about an editing machine here.
It's not a big deal, but I also appreciate the engineering that goes into the Macs which makes them easy to clean and upgrade, free of tangled cables, cool running, etc.
I could see, someday, switching to all open source software, which would leave me more open in hardware selection, and I may very well build my own workstation, but for now, the Apple software I use is by far the most expedient for what I do, and time is money. Really, in the end, the platform that runs your software of choice is where you're going to work. The hardware is pretty genereric, after all.
Regarding 128MB video memory being all that is required. If you plan on doing a lot of CGI in Maya or Lightwave, or 3D Studio Max, I highly recommend 256MB. Otherwise, 128 is probably sufficient ... for now.
Sidenote: Apple's Motion is very GPU intensive, but I haven't made any speed comparisons between video cards, so I'd just say get a decent video card for editing, or you may regret it. The trend is towards GPU processing for realtime previews.
Hopefully, I stuck to the facts. I'm really not interested in a heated debate about which GUI is "the best".
Doug
Finally, I do a lot of audio editing in my office, and I can hear the PC server that is 10 feet away over the G5 that is warming my feet. The iMac is totally silent. That is another consideration that would not matter as much to someone with a different job, but we are talking about an editing machine here.
It's not a big deal, but I also appreciate the engineering that goes into the Macs which makes them easy to clean and upgrade, free of tangled cables, cool running, etc.
I could see, someday, switching to all open source software, which would leave me more open in hardware selection, and I may very well build my own workstation, but for now, the Apple software I use is by far the most expedient for what I do, and time is money. Really, in the end, the platform that runs your software of choice is where you're going to work. The hardware is pretty genereric, after all.
Regarding 128MB video memory being all that is required. If you plan on doing a lot of CGI in Maya or Lightwave, or 3D Studio Max, I highly recommend 256MB. Otherwise, 128 is probably sufficient ... for now.
Sidenote: Apple's Motion is very GPU intensive, but I haven't made any speed comparisons between video cards, so I'd just say get a decent video card for editing, or you may regret it. The trend is towards GPU processing for realtime previews.
Hopefully, I stuck to the facts. I'm really not interested in a heated debate about which GUI is "the best".
Doug
p.s. I am also a big fan of AMD. All of my Linux servers are powered by AMD processors, I do think they offer great performance for the price; even when you don't get an industry discount!
Please note that I said "commercial". Most consumer boxes, even from brand names, don't go through the same level of testing thanks to TTM (Time to Market) as the commercial desktops and workstations. Even with a brand name, your mileage will vary. Apple is no different. My I-Pod locks every now and then, and ironically it was handed to me on stage by the at the time VP of worldwide marketing for Apple. Go figure. 
Simple fact is you can't predict with 100% accuracy the behavior of an electron and the bits they wiggle. The key is designing enough margin and fault tolerance, but to do this you need known variables. With consumer boxes, "Mom & Pop" computers, and DIY systems, they are not a closed design so margin is either low or you have other variables not tested. Apple controls this very well by carefully testing and certifying most everything that goes in the box. And heat is the enemy. If you don't design sufficient chassis and component cooling, the timing will shift, and without that margin it could fall out of the stable window and lockup, corrupt your data, and make your life miserable. This is why most retail motherboards have the ability to adjust clocks and timing. You can fine tune everything to make it more stable (or you can overclock the various buses to make it more powerful).
My workhorse is an HP Dc7700. Never had a problem with it (except a software incompatibility between Premiere and Creative Labs), and it's relatively silent even with a 1GB FireGL V7750 until I crank up the 3D applications, and then the graphics cooling fan is noticeable. I use a selective startup for my editing suite. Now my gaming system with its 1KW power supply (yes, that's 1000 Watts) RAID 0 array and its dual graphics cards is a different story. I've watched real-time 3D rendering evolve over the years. Playing Crysis in all its DX10 glory is just breathtaking compared to GL Quake, where the hardware accelerated 3D revolution really began thanks to 3dfx and Voodoo1.
Computers are like cars. Your mileage will vary and so will your stability and reliability. That's why warranties exist and people like me make good money designing and maintaining them.
And if you're using Maya or Lightwave or doing 3D rendering of any kind, even 256MB is marginal. 512MB-1GB (what I use) is preferred and so are the ISV certifications (why these cards are very expensive). I said 128MB for non-linear editing. 3D rendering is a whole different story. Just for gaming, you can now have up to four graphics processors running in parallel (CrossfireX or Quad SLI). NVIDIA has adopted SLI (was scan-line interleave developed by 3dfx, but is now a different technology) for the workstation market. For professional real-time simulation, you can have hundreds of graphics processors rendering in parallel. Your graphics framebuffer is just to hold textures and geometry when doing real-time preview. In the Windows world, technologies like HyperMemory (ATI) and TurboCache (NVIDIA) extend the local graphics framebuffer to the host memory so you can still get by with 128MB albeit at a performance hit. And now even UMA (Unified Memory Architecture) graphics are getting to where you can do basic 3D rendering and editing with no local framebuffer at all. UMA sets aside dedicated space in the host memory (same memory used by the CPU, hence "unified") . Try a search on the AMD RS780. For a couple hundred dollars, you'll have a motherboard with HD2400 class graphics, Gigabit LAN (sometimes 2 ports), WiFi, 7.1 HD audio, IEEE 1394, 6+ SATA ports for RAID and/or eSATA. For a couple hundred more, you can add decent CPU and memory. $120 or less for a system case with power supply. ~$150 for a 19" wide-screen LCD (if you need color accurate 10-bit, plan to spend a heck of a lot more). ~$40 for a KB and mouse. ~$100 or less for a 400GB 7200 RPM hard drive (watch the Fry's ads or check New Egg). That's ~$810 for a complete system (sans operating system, and you can get Linux for free). And wait a year. That same amount of money could assemble a system twice as powerful.
Bottom line, anyone can build a box. And the technologies in that box aren't any different from one vendor to the next. What makes a computer stable and reliable is the amount of time planning, testing, tweaking, debugging, and certifying what goes in it. If you take the DIY route, much of that system integration testing and debugging falls in your lap, so be prepared.
EDIT: Side note, Gateway is still around and actually merged with eMachines awhile ago. Mergers are very common. I've been through four in the last 10 years, most recently the ATI and AMD merger (how I ended up at AMD).
EDIT2: Another example as to why computer systems and individual components are not as reliable is the trend of moving away from the more expensive ceramic or tantalum capacitors and switching to aluminum electrolytic capacitors. The electrolytes can dry up over time and the system reliability along with it. Granted, this could take years, but it's something to think about when choosing inexpensive consumer grade electronics of any kind (including cameras). As costs come down thanks to manufacturing enhancements, this trend will reverse (and may have already). This is one of the major differences between that $200 receiver and another one with the same features costing over $2000, and that's the MTBF (mean-time between failure) of the components. It is this quality differential that seperates professional from consumer. I haven't cracked the case of a Mac in many years, but I suspect they are still using higher quality components with tighter tolerances. Same holds true for commercial desktops, professional workstations and servers.
Simple fact is you can't predict with 100% accuracy the behavior of an electron and the bits they wiggle. The key is designing enough margin and fault tolerance, but to do this you need known variables. With consumer boxes, "Mom & Pop" computers, and DIY systems, they are not a closed design so margin is either low or you have other variables not tested. Apple controls this very well by carefully testing and certifying most everything that goes in the box. And heat is the enemy. If you don't design sufficient chassis and component cooling, the timing will shift, and without that margin it could fall out of the stable window and lockup, corrupt your data, and make your life miserable. This is why most retail motherboards have the ability to adjust clocks and timing. You can fine tune everything to make it more stable (or you can overclock the various buses to make it more powerful).My workhorse is an HP Dc7700. Never had a problem with it (except a software incompatibility between Premiere and Creative Labs), and it's relatively silent even with a 1GB FireGL V7750 until I crank up the 3D applications, and then the graphics cooling fan is noticeable. I use a selective startup for my editing suite. Now my gaming system with its 1KW power supply (yes, that's 1000 Watts) RAID 0 array and its dual graphics cards is a different story. I've watched real-time 3D rendering evolve over the years. Playing Crysis in all its DX10 glory is just breathtaking compared to GL Quake, where the hardware accelerated 3D revolution really began thanks to 3dfx and Voodoo1.
Computers are like cars. Your mileage will vary and so will your stability and reliability. That's why warranties exist and people like me make good money designing and maintaining them.
And if you're using Maya or Lightwave or doing 3D rendering of any kind, even 256MB is marginal. 512MB-1GB (what I use) is preferred and so are the ISV certifications (why these cards are very expensive). I said 128MB for non-linear editing. 3D rendering is a whole different story. Just for gaming, you can now have up to four graphics processors running in parallel (CrossfireX or Quad SLI). NVIDIA has adopted SLI (was scan-line interleave developed by 3dfx, but is now a different technology) for the workstation market. For professional real-time simulation, you can have hundreds of graphics processors rendering in parallel. Your graphics framebuffer is just to hold textures and geometry when doing real-time preview. In the Windows world, technologies like HyperMemory (ATI) and TurboCache (NVIDIA) extend the local graphics framebuffer to the host memory so you can still get by with 128MB albeit at a performance hit. And now even UMA (Unified Memory Architecture) graphics are getting to where you can do basic 3D rendering and editing with no local framebuffer at all. UMA sets aside dedicated space in the host memory (same memory used by the CPU, hence "unified") . Try a search on the AMD RS780. For a couple hundred dollars, you'll have a motherboard with HD2400 class graphics, Gigabit LAN (sometimes 2 ports), WiFi, 7.1 HD audio, IEEE 1394, 6+ SATA ports for RAID and/or eSATA. For a couple hundred more, you can add decent CPU and memory. $120 or less for a system case with power supply. ~$150 for a 19" wide-screen LCD (if you need color accurate 10-bit, plan to spend a heck of a lot more). ~$40 for a KB and mouse. ~$100 or less for a 400GB 7200 RPM hard drive (watch the Fry's ads or check New Egg). That's ~$810 for a complete system (sans operating system, and you can get Linux for free). And wait a year. That same amount of money could assemble a system twice as powerful.
Bottom line, anyone can build a box. And the technologies in that box aren't any different from one vendor to the next. What makes a computer stable and reliable is the amount of time planning, testing, tweaking, debugging, and certifying what goes in it. If you take the DIY route, much of that system integration testing and debugging falls in your lap, so be prepared.
EDIT: Side note, Gateway is still around and actually merged with eMachines awhile ago. Mergers are very common. I've been through four in the last 10 years, most recently the ATI and AMD merger (how I ended up at AMD).
EDIT2: Another example as to why computer systems and individual components are not as reliable is the trend of moving away from the more expensive ceramic or tantalum capacitors and switching to aluminum electrolytic capacitors. The electrolytes can dry up over time and the system reliability along with it. Granted, this could take years, but it's something to think about when choosing inexpensive consumer grade electronics of any kind (including cameras). As costs come down thanks to manufacturing enhancements, this trend will reverse (and may have already). This is one of the major differences between that $200 receiver and another one with the same features costing over $2000, and that's the MTBF (mean-time between failure) of the components. It is this quality differential that seperates professional from consumer. I haven't cracked the case of a Mac in many years, but I suspect they are still using higher quality components with tighter tolerances. Same holds true for commercial desktops, professional workstations and servers.
Last edited:
Me, too.
Intel is still a good company, though, but AMD is not anywhere near down and out as some predicted with Core2 Duo/Quad. There are still advantages over Intel in the AMD architecture, especially in the server space. Intel needs to ditch that Front Side Bus at some point. HyperTransport is the way to go.
And where would the prices of Intel CPUs be if not for competition from AMD? Where would graphics prices from NVIDIA be without competition from ATI? Where would Microsoft be without Apple? Where would Ford be without GM? I can't imagine a world without competition. The consumer would suffer.
Since I do mostly commercial work, I guess I may be unique among video editors, but I consider Lightwave 3D just part of my work bench. I do many 3D effects like enhancing a sky with some CG helicopters, animating a logo, modeling part of a scene for particle effects, etc. It's all part of post production in my business, so I consider it a requirement in my edit suite.
Wow, that's a lot of info to digest. I guess what it all boils down to for me is this. I know Windows, I know how it works, how to use it and such, but I HATE it. I use the OS, but that's it. Media Players, everything else, I get from other sources. So would it be worth my while to learn Mac? I've been told that Mac's are really easy to learn to use. If this is true, then i think that may be what I should go with. Then I can get all the Windows junk, and I emphasize "junk", out of my house. Especially since XP will no longer be available after April. I have a friend who just bought his first computer (never used one, knows nothing about them, etc.) and he called me from the store to ask me which to get. His choices were Dell and Gateway. Now, without thinking, I asked him the specs, compared the numbers he gave me, and told him the Dell would be his best bet, better processor than the Gateway, a little less RAM, but $200 less in price, and price was a deciding factor for him. So anyway, he never asks "XP or vista" and I never thought about it. So he calls me up a few hours later, wants me to come over and help him set it up. Like any good friend (who's offered beer and pizza in return) I zip over there thinking, this'll only take a bit. Nope, he got Vista. After I messed with the thing for an hour and a half, I tell him to take it back. The moral of this story is, after my experience with Vista, I think my Windows days are about over.
Hehe... just don't use a MacBook Air- a couple of college kids were able to hack it in 2 minutes. Look it up.
Actually, for the same price as a mac book pro, (if not lower) you can get an alienware Area-51 notebook designed specifically for video editing.
I'm writing this on my Alienware Area-51 Desktop right now. It's a beast.
2 gigs ram
4 3.2ghz processors
256mb video (ya, almost needs an update)
500 gb harddrive
dual dvd+-r readers/burners w/ lightscribe
liquid cooling for all my games
Vegas Pro 8 w/ DVDA
Lots of other neat stuff, but yeah. Price (2 yrs ago) = $1800
Actually, for the same price as a mac book pro, (if not lower) you can get an alienware Area-51 notebook designed specifically for video editing.
I'm writing this on my Alienware Area-51 Desktop right now. It's a beast.
2 gigs ram
4 3.2ghz processors
256mb video (ya, almost needs an update)
500 gb harddrive
dual dvd+-r readers/burners w/ lightscribe
liquid cooling for all my games
Vegas Pro 8 w/ DVDA
Lots of other neat stuff, but yeah. Price (2 yrs ago) = $1800
I think what is most evident is "What is the best editing platform/software?" will always be a subjective, individual choice.
Here's the dead honest truth - one is not "better" than another in any kind of general sense. At this point, Mac/PC, or Final Cut/Adobe Premiere/Avid/Vegas - they all do basically the exact same thing. Imovie and Windows Moviemaker do 95% of what more editors do (IE straight cuts, dissolves, titles, and multitrack audio), so the rest of the bells and whistles are specific to what you do or don't need.
It's the artist not the brush that counts. I can't imagine DaVinci and Picasso debating "My brush is better than your brush!"
I am a professional editor and I've worked with Avid, Final Cut Pro, and Adobe Premiere Pro all in commercial and film paid settings. I can say that in my opinion one is not "better" than the other one.
All anyone can tell you is their own personal preference. Nothing more, nothing less.
What it comes down to is trying them all out and seeing with one is "best" for you. No one can answer that for you.
Here's the dead honest truth - one is not "better" than another in any kind of general sense. At this point, Mac/PC, or Final Cut/Adobe Premiere/Avid/Vegas - they all do basically the exact same thing. Imovie and Windows Moviemaker do 95% of what more editors do (IE straight cuts, dissolves, titles, and multitrack audio), so the rest of the bells and whistles are specific to what you do or don't need.
It's the artist not the brush that counts. I can't imagine DaVinci and Picasso debating "My brush is better than your brush!"
I am a professional editor and I've worked with Avid, Final Cut Pro, and Adobe Premiere Pro all in commercial and film paid settings. I can say that in my opinion one is not "better" than the other one.
All anyone can tell you is their own personal preference. Nothing more, nothing less.
What it comes down to is trying them all out and seeing with one is "best" for you. No one can answer that for you.
I agree with a lot of what has been said here. Specifically what Sonnyboo has just said about what's best being subjective. What works best for me won't necessarily work best for someone else, etc. So as several people have said the operating system and hardware is irrelevant.
You are going to want to get best hardware you can for your buck. In my opinion that is still on the PC side, but only because I've been building systems for years and I research every part and buy the best I can afford for each component. Either way, whichever direction you go four things you'll not want to skimp on are Main Processor, RAM, Hard Drives, and Video.
Main Processor, 2GHz or faster, preferably dual core.. Faster is better, and more is better. So, you could theoretically do 4 dual core chips, or 4 quad core chips if you had the salad to spend on it (the server I work with at my day job runs 4 quad cores, that sucker is FAST)
RAM, you want to get low latency and fastest bus speed you can (this will also be dependent on what your main board can support).. and I wouldn't recommend doing any significant video editing with less than 2 gig. Sure you can, but do you want to? There will come a time -- depending on the amount of footage you're using -- that the whole system will bog down if you're not using enough ram. I personally loathe Windows Vista, but with XP you can only access about 3gig of ram, unless you're running the 64bit version -- I believe vista alleviated that issue.
Hard Drives, these days I wouldn't personally build or buy a new system that was using anything other than a SATA interface for the hard drives. You'll want one for your system files, operating system, editing software, etc.. and another for storing and working with your footage. There are of course several options there, you could go with internal or external, you could also do a RAID array.
Video, oddly enough, even though we're doing video editing many people don't consider how the video card can help or hinder the process. There are of course MANY options for video, and I don't presume to know all of them and won't tell you what the best choice is, but you really can't go wrong with a high-end video card aimed at gamers. These cards have a powerful graphic processor on it, and the nice thing about that is it takes a lot of load off the main processor in the system so things run a bit zippier. Also, Adobe Premiere will make use of your graphic processor to help speed compile times. I can edit HDV in real time, and renders I believe are either real time or just under real time (haven't tried yet so I can't say for certain) but standard def renders are faster than real time by 2 or 3 times, and if I apply magic bullet coloring effects I can preview in realtime without prerendering. Without my graphic card that wouldn't be possible -- and my card is several years old at this point.
Another important thing to consider is audio, but since this thread is talking primarily about video editing I didn't include it in the 4 main things not to skimp on discussion because I personally believe that the audio work should be done separately as an NLE technically speaking isn't the best tool for the job -- and this is an area most of us need to focus on more, audio accounts for upwards of 70% of the viewers experience.
If you're not comfortable or capable of building your own system I would look at PCs aimed at gamers (Dell has some decent packages at decent price points) or look into an intel mac with good specs that has room to grow with memory and hard drives.. You can also upgrade the video card in a mac, and the new ones might even allow for cpu upgrades but I'm not a mac guy so I don't know.
Personally, if I bought a mac I would take knightly's advice and use bootcamp on it to get Windows to boot. I would likely spend most or all of my time in that environment simply because I just don't like the way macs work. Of course I've been using PC's since the pre Windows 1.0 days, so it's second nature to me and macs are foreign (and too 'cutesy')
You are going to want to get best hardware you can for your buck. In my opinion that is still on the PC side, but only because I've been building systems for years and I research every part and buy the best I can afford for each component. Either way, whichever direction you go four things you'll not want to skimp on are Main Processor, RAM, Hard Drives, and Video.
Main Processor, 2GHz or faster, preferably dual core.. Faster is better, and more is better. So, you could theoretically do 4 dual core chips, or 4 quad core chips if you had the salad to spend on it (the server I work with at my day job runs 4 quad cores, that sucker is FAST)
RAM, you want to get low latency and fastest bus speed you can (this will also be dependent on what your main board can support).. and I wouldn't recommend doing any significant video editing with less than 2 gig. Sure you can, but do you want to? There will come a time -- depending on the amount of footage you're using -- that the whole system will bog down if you're not using enough ram. I personally loathe Windows Vista, but with XP you can only access about 3gig of ram, unless you're running the 64bit version -- I believe vista alleviated that issue.
Hard Drives, these days I wouldn't personally build or buy a new system that was using anything other than a SATA interface for the hard drives. You'll want one for your system files, operating system, editing software, etc.. and another for storing and working with your footage. There are of course several options there, you could go with internal or external, you could also do a RAID array.
Video, oddly enough, even though we're doing video editing many people don't consider how the video card can help or hinder the process. There are of course MANY options for video, and I don't presume to know all of them and won't tell you what the best choice is, but you really can't go wrong with a high-end video card aimed at gamers. These cards have a powerful graphic processor on it, and the nice thing about that is it takes a lot of load off the main processor in the system so things run a bit zippier. Also, Adobe Premiere will make use of your graphic processor to help speed compile times. I can edit HDV in real time, and renders I believe are either real time or just under real time (haven't tried yet so I can't say for certain) but standard def renders are faster than real time by 2 or 3 times, and if I apply magic bullet coloring effects I can preview in realtime without prerendering. Without my graphic card that wouldn't be possible -- and my card is several years old at this point.
Another important thing to consider is audio, but since this thread is talking primarily about video editing I didn't include it in the 4 main things not to skimp on discussion because I personally believe that the audio work should be done separately as an NLE technically speaking isn't the best tool for the job -- and this is an area most of us need to focus on more, audio accounts for upwards of 70% of the viewers experience.
If you're not comfortable or capable of building your own system I would look at PCs aimed at gamers (Dell has some decent packages at decent price points) or look into an intel mac with good specs that has room to grow with memory and hard drives.. You can also upgrade the video card in a mac, and the new ones might even allow for cpu upgrades but I'm not a mac guy so I don't know.
Personally, if I bought a mac I would take knightly's advice and use bootcamp on it to get Windows to boot. I would likely spend most or all of my time in that environment simply because I just don't like the way macs work. Of course I've been using PC's since the pre Windows 1.0 days, so it's second nature to me and macs are foreign (and too 'cutesy')
Last edited: