What is better video editing?

[MangoIce]

Context: My school has set up a "film crew" for making promotional material about the school by students, (we are also gonna make student films aswell), and I need to know whats better for video editing?

 

First: is it better to get a Mac Pro or a souped up PC monster. (Here price and OS is not an issue so if your here to hate on apple, just go away )

Second: If we are going with PC which is the better CPU: i7 5960x or some Xeon (I dont know how Xeons work which is why I'm asking)

 

We are gonna be using 4K footage from a GH4 camera and maybe some GoPro stuff. Software wise well probs be using a mixture of Premiere Pro, After Effects, Sony Vegas and some other stuff. Maybe 3DS Max or something for CGI if we ever bother.

 

Proposed PC build: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/jDFXXL

 

do mention any issues for PC regarding upgraded power or cheapness

[ALwin]

Well if you plan to use 3Ds Max, it doesn't run on OSX so that already determines what machine you need.  But if you don't need 3Ds Max, which I don't think you do because After Effects comes with a free version of Cinema 4D or you can use Black Magic Fusion (free) which runs on either OSX or Windows.

 

I don't think you really need dual Titan X GPU.  But you might want to consider a 10-bit capable workstation GPU (e.g. Quadro) if you plan to record in Log gamma on the GH4 and do a lot of color correcting and grading... of course this also means you need a monitor capable of 10-bit color.  The Dell UP3216Q comes to mind.

 

You can pair a Titan X and a Quadro, the Quadro will be the display GPU and the Titan X will be the workhorse for rendering support.

 

The dual Firepro GPU's on the Mac Pro are already workstation GPUs.  But because the maximum internal storage is 1TB, you will have to use a large capacity external storage or several for archiving and saving files.

 

Mac Pro cons:

• Price
• limited expansion capability, so you will be running a lot of cables to external accessories

Mac Pro pros:

• A more stable OS
• Already comes with workstation GPUs

[wkelly]

Well definitely go with the PC. You will be able to produce a much more powerful rig and for less money. The build looks great but you have to buy a CPU cooler. 

[BrinkGG]

5 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

Context: My school has set up a "film crew" for making promotional material about the school by students, (we are also gonna make student films aswell), and I need to know whats better for video editing?

 

First: is it better to get a Mac Pro or a souped up PC monster. (Here price and OS is not an issue so if your here to hate on apple, just go away )

Second: If we are going with PC which is the better CPU: i7 5960x or some Xeon (I dont know how Xeons work which is why I'm asking)

 

We are gonna be using 4K footage from a GH4 camera and maybe some GoPro stuff. Software wise well probs be using a mixture of Premiere Pro, After Effects, Sony Vegas and some other stuff. Maybe 3DS Max or something for CGI if we ever bother.

 

Proposed PC build: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/jDFXXL

 

do mention any issues for PC regarding upgraded power or cheapness

First: Mac pro vs. PC... It really depends on what software you prefer. And if you buy the right pc hardware, you could probably dual boot as a hackintosh anyway. 

Look at TonyMac X86 as a starting point, but just remember that it might not be up to date after a new hardware release. 

[Howlingwolf101]

The difference between xeons and i7, is that the i7's main purpose is for video, music and photo editing, where as the xeon is targeted for workstation, server systems. So you should be all set with that i7. I'm not a video editor but do you really think you need two titans for a bit of video editing? If anything go for one now and update in the future if needed. Also the 1200watt PSU is overkill I think. I would reccomend a 1000 or even a 750 watt PSU 

[CtrlAltELITE]

Have you considered a hackintosh? Running a self build componant PC with Mac OS installed on to it. My cousin produces music and runs this setup as he found it he could get a LOT more bang for the buck, but also he was still able to use his Apple based programs.

 

Although have you considered running 980Tis instead of the dual titans? You get a lot more card for your money that way.

[Sentryy]

14 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

Context: My school has set up a "film crew" for making promotional material about the school by students, (we are also gonna make student films aswell), and I need to know whats better for video editing?

 

First: is it better to get a Mac Pro or a souped up PC monster. (Here price and OS is not an issue so if your here to hate on apple, just go away )

Second: If we are going with PC which is the better CPU: i7 5960x or some Xeon (I dont know how Xeons work which is why I'm asking)

 

We are gonna be using 4K footage from a GH4 camera and maybe some GoPro stuff. Software wise well probs be using a mixture of Premiere Pro, After Effects, Sony Vegas and some other stuff. Maybe 3DS Max or something for CGI if we ever bother.

 

Proposed PC build: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/jDFXXL

 

do mention any issues for PC regarding upgraded power or cheapness

How about a  single titan x and a quadro k4000 and a xeon 2690 v3 if you can squeeze it in? also go for a workstation board. The mac pro has super fast storage, but you could get =~ with a 750 series 400 or 800gb and then have a couple hard drives or a few High capacity SSD if the budget allows (Maybe a couple of the 4TB mushkin ones that are coming out for 500$?)

[Orangeator]

1 minute ago, Howlingwolf101 said:

The difference between xeons and i7, is that the i7's main purpose is for video, music and photo editing, where as the xeon is targeted for workstation, server systems. So you should be all set with that i7. I'm not a video editor but do you really think you need two titans for a bit of video editing? If anything go for one now and update in the future if needed. Also the 1200watt PSU is overkill I think. I would reccomend a 1000 or even a 750 watt PSU 

I am pretty sure programs such as premier can use unlimited amount of threads/cores, so a Xeon build might be a better option and cost effective. I know that two 2670's out perform an i7-5960X in multi-threaded work loads, and two of them cost $140. So don't rule out Xeon's just yet. 

[Howlingwolf101]

1 minute ago, Orangeator said:

I am pretty sure programs such as premier can use unlimited amount of threads/cores, so a Xeon build might be a better option and cost effective. I know that two 2670's out perform an i7-5960X in multi-threaded work loads, and two of them cost $140. So don't rule out Xeon's just yet. 

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the heads up

[ALwin]

Another point to consider is (I am going to say THIS IS JUST A HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE)

 

Instead of spending $10,000 on a maxed out Mac Pro, you can consider buying 3-4 decently configured 27" 5K iMacs.

 

If you have only one editing machine, no matter how powerful it is, that single machine will be a bottleneck.  Having multiple "workstations" so that you can have different people/teams working on different projects or parts of the same project at the same time can be a time saver.

 

With a single machine, you'll be working on one project at a time and there can be a long queue.

 

Why do I recommend having multiple workstations: Because as a general guideline, 1 minute of recorded footage may use up between 30-60 minutes of editing time.  So if you have videos piling up that need to be edited....

[MangoIce]

13 minutes ago, Brink2Three said:

First: Mac pro vs. PC... It really depends on what software you prefer. And if you buy the right pc hardware, you could probably dual boot as a hackintosh anyway. 

Look at TonyMac X86 as a starting point, but just remember that it might not be up to date after a new hardware release. 

 

10 minutes ago, CtrlAltELITE said:

Have you considered a hackintosh? Running a self build componant PC with Mac OS installed on to it. My cousin produces music and runs this setup as he found it he could get a LOT more bang for the buck, but also he was still able to use his Apple based programs.

 

Regarding the Hackintosh: bluntly put I can't be f***ing bothered. Politely put: I tried with my own machine and failed, and even if I managed to get it working on the computer I wont be able to do the "customer support" cause i wont be able to fix it.

 

 

14 minutes ago, Howlingwolf101 said:

The difference between xeons and i7, is that the i7's main purpose is for video, music and photo editing, where as the xeon is targeted for workstation, server systems. So you should be all set with that i7. I'm not a video editor but do you really think you need two titans for a bit of video editing? If anything go for one now and update in the future if needed. Also the 1200watt PSU is overkill I think. I would reccomend a 1000 or even a 750 watt PSU 

 

14 minutes ago, CtrlAltELITE said:

Although have you considered running 980Tis instead of the dual titans? You get a lot more card for your money that way.

 

9 minutes ago, Sentryy said:

How about a  single titan x and a quadro k4000 and a xeon 2690 v3 if you can squeeze it in? also go for a workstation board. The mac pro has super fast storage, but you could get =~ with a 750 series 400 or 800gb and then have a couple hard drives or a few High capacity SSD if the budget allows (Maybe a couple of the 4TB mushkin ones that are coming out for 500$?)

 

18 minutes ago, wkelly said:

Well definitely go with the PC. You will be able to produce a much more powerful rig and for less money. The build looks great but you have to buy a CPU cooler. 

I was probably going to use 980Tis anyway cuase I know dual titan Xs are overkill and frankly the PCPP build i just scrapped together in 5 mins without the proper research which is why stuff is overkill.

 

For the quadro and Titan X, I need more research because I dfont know how to run 2 different cards at the same timne, in one PC works

19 minutes ago, ALwin said:

I don't think you really need dual Titan X GPU.  But you might want to consider a 10-bit capable workstation GPU (e.g. Quadro) if you plan to record in Log gamma on the GH4 and do a lot of color correcting and grading... of course this also means you need a monitor capable of 10-bit color.  The Dell UP3216Q comes to mind.

 

You can pair a Titan X and a Quadro, the Quadro will be the display GPU and the Titan X will be the workhorse for rendering support.

[MangoIce]

3 minutes ago, ALwin said:

Another point to consider is (I am going to say THIS IS JUST A HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE)

 

Instead of spending $10,000 on a maxed out Mac Pro, you can consider buying 3-4 decently configured 27" 5K iMacs.

 

If you have only one editing machine, no matter how powerful it is, that single machine will be a bottleneck.  So having multiple "workstations" so that you can have different people/teams working on different projects or parts of the same project at the same time can be a time saver.

 

With a single machine, you'll be working on one project at a time and there can be a long queue.

 

speaking of which I was thinking of getting one rendering monster and then a couple of fairly good for computer for people to do the work seperately allowing for more people to work at a time.

[ALwin]

2 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

I was probably going to use 980Tis anyway cuase I know dual titan Xs are overkill

You really might want to re-consider this statement.  Only for the sake of argument here.  While games might not need more than 6GB of VRAM, with video editing, having more VRAM can be very useful.  Especially if you work with very high bit rate 4K masters or even cinema RAW.

[MangoIce]

Just now, ALwin said:

You really might want to re-consider this statement.  Only for the sake of argument here.  While games might not need more than 6GB of VRAM, with video editing, having more VRAM can be very useful.  Especially if you work with very high bit rate 4K masters or even cinema RAW.

titan x it is then

[ALwin]

2 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

 

speaking of which I was thinking of getting one rendering monster and then a couple of fairly good for computer for people to do the work seperately allowing for more people to work at a time.

I wouldn't do this.  It will be less efficient than having 3-4 decently powerful workstations.

 

For this to work, you'd need a very very powerful central rendering rig.  I wouldn't consider a $10,000 maxed out Mac Pro or any Windows equivalent to be sufficient to act as a central rendering rig.

[MangoIce]

1 minute ago, ALwin said:

I wouldn't do this.  It will be less efficient than having 3-4 decently powerful workstations.

 

For this to work, you'd need a very very powerful central rendering rig.  I wouldn't consider a $10,000 maxed out Mac Pro or any Windows equivalent to be sufficient to act as a central rendering rig.

s***

[ALwin]

5 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

For the quadro and Titan X, I need more research because I dfont know how to run 2 different cards at the same timne, in one PC works

My home workstation currently runs a Titan X and soon I am planning to add a Quadro. I am using Adobe CC and can configure the settings in there.  But as I have yet to actually do this setup, the better person to ask will be @Dredgy who has done this kind of different GPU setup and he can help you.

 

Just one thing, don't mix AMD and nVidia cards for this sort of setup.

[MangoIce]

1 minute ago, ALwin said:

Just one thing, don't mix AMD and nVidia cards for this sort of setup.

 

I wont even touch AMD unless I have to

[ALwin]

10 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

 

I wont even touch AMD unless I have to

FYI:

1. My video camera: Sony PXW-FS7
2. The video files I record: XAVC-I 4K footage @ 600Mbps (the GH4 records 4K at 100Mbps max)
3. My mobile workstation: maxed out 15" Retina MacBook Pro from 2015
4. Location of project files: 2TB WD USB 3.0 portable external drive, a 2.5" HDD drive.

I can easily work with the high bit rate 4K video from my camera using that MacBook Pro and external drive, takes me on average 30 minutes to render out a 15 minute video, and I color correct, grade, add transitions, text and captions, etc.  I render the same videos on my home workstation (i7 -4790K, 32GB, dual Samsung 850 SSDs in RAID 0, 2x Titan X in SLI), it only shaves off a few minutes off the render time.

 

What I am trying to say:

Don't be too eager to build an ultra powerful rig, you might not really need it or it might not really give you the performance you'd expect.

[MangoIce]

3 minutes ago, ALwin said:

FYI:

1. My video camera: Sony PXW-FS7
2. The video files I record: XAVC-I 4K footage @ 600Mbps (the GH4 records 4K at 100Mbps max)
3. My mobile workstation: maxed out 15" Retina MacBook Pro from 2015
4. Location of project files: 2TB WD USB 3.0 portable external drive, a 2.5" HDD drive.

I can easily work with the high bit rate 4K video from my camera using that MacBook Pro and external drive, takes me on average 30 minutes to render out a 15 minute video, and I color correct, grade, add transitions, text and captions, etc.  I render the same videos on my home workstation (i7 -4790K, 32GB, dual Samsung 850 SSDs in RAID 0, 2x Titan X in SLI), it only shaves off a few minutes off the render time.

 

What I am trying to say:

Don't be too eager to build an ultra powerful rig, you might not really need it or it might not really give you the performance you'd expect.

thx ill need to think throught it again ill probably tell them to get 2 not overkill but decent PCs and then maybe a macbook if we need some OS X encoding or translation of some kind

[ALwin]

14 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

thx ill need to think throught it again ill probably tell them to get 2 not overkill but decent PCs and then maybe a macbook if we need some OS X encoding or translation of some kind

That's a good idea.

 

For the moment, just put a single Titan X or 980ti in each workstation, make sure it uses SSD drives (in fact, I would recommend something like a 256GB SSD for OS and installation of some software and another SSD drive, 512GB or more, for saving the video files of active projects).  I don't recommend using the same SSD for OS/Applications and video files you want to edit.  For the CPU, even an i7 5820K might be enough for each machine. 16-32GB memory minimum.

 

Buy some external storage for archiving video files and project files, also to serve as backup.

 

For software, you don't necessarily need to invest in Adobe CC. DaVinci Resolve 12 and Fusion 8 have free versions and are very nice video editors and motion graphics software.

 

I don't know how frequent or how quickly your school expects to produce/distribute/broadcast videos. 

 

If your school expects to do a lot of live real time broadcasting or very fast delivery of content (e.g. record now and one hour later it has to be ready for publishing) you may need a fairly powerful rig.  Not only that but the in-camera settings, the workflows, everything has to be set up in a way that enables such speedy delivery.

 

But if your school doesn't expect to do live broadcasts or very fast deliveries, then you have time to spare and won't necessarily need a powerful rig.  A decent workstation with an efficient workflow is enough.

[MangoIce]

Speaking of external footage I was thinking of getting something like a synology NAS, just a small 4-5 bay one for just the film team, or something else which couled use thunderbolt 3

[ALwin]

4 minutes ago, MangoIce said:

Speaking of external footage I was thinking of getting something like a synology NAS, just a small 4-5 bay one for just the film team, or something else which couled use thunderbolt 3

If you plan to connect an external storage to multiple workstations I wouldn't recommend a Thunderbolt drive.  Better a NAS with RAID 5/6 support.

 

And unless you have 10-gigabit network speeds, don't plan to edit the video files off the NAS.

 

A Synology NAS is pretty good, I have one myself, the DS2415+ 12-bay NAS.

 

My recommendation:

• Record the video using the cameras
• Take the memory cards and copy the original video files to:
  • local storage on the computer
  • a duplicate copy to the external storage (whether it's a USB/Thunderbolt connected drive or a NAS drive) for having a backup
  • don't start working on editing the video files until you've made sure that a copy of the original exists on another location, safe and sound.  (Yes I know NLEs like Premiere Pro are non-destructive editors, but it pays to be paranoid about your files. I've been burned a couple of times before, luckily all happened with non-essential video files.)
• Do not format the memory cards until you are 100% certain the footage has at least one backup
• Work on the project using the copy on the local drive
• When the project is finished, move all the project files onto the external storage devices and just delete the files from local storage

[MangoIce]

3 minutes ago, ALwin said:

If you plan to connect an external storage to multiple workstations I wouldn't recommend a Thunderbolt drive.  Better a NAS with RAID 5/6 support.

 

And unless you have 10-gigabit network speeds, don't plan to edit the video files off the NAS.

 

A Synology NAS is pretty good, I have one myself, the DS2415+ 12-bay NAS.

 

My recommendation:

• Record the video using the cameras
• Take the memory cards and copy the original video files to:
  • local storage on the computer
  • a duplicate copy to the external storage (whether it's a USB/Thunderbolt connected drive or a NAS drive) for having a backup
  • don't start working on editing the video files until you've made sure that a copy of the original exists on another location, safe and sound.  (Yes I know NLEs like Premiere Pro are non-destructive editors, but it pays to be paranoid about your files. I've been burned a couple of times before, luckily all happened with non-essential video files.)
• Do not format the memory cards until you are 100% certain the footage has at least one backup
• Work on the project using the copy on the local drive
• When the project is finished, move all the project files onto the external storage devices and just delete the files from local storage

sounds good man

[Dredgy]

1. Quadro (high end at least) for video editing is not worth it. Especially for the footage that comes off of the GH, which is pretty easy to work with. A GTX 780Ti was comparable in render performance to a Quadro M5000. Quadro improvements were only notable in live color grading of uncompressed, 4K RAW files.

2. Mixing quadros and geforce cards is as simple as putting both in and installing the drivers. Apparently driver conflicts can occur and doing this is discouraged by nVidia, but I didn't have any issues at all.