VEGAS POST

If you are focused on Media Composer, Premiere Pro, or Final Cut Pro X, then it’s easy to forget that there are a number of other capable NLEs in the wild – especially for the Windows/PC platform. One of those is VEGAS Pro, which was originally developed by Sonic Foundry and came to market in 1999. At first VEGAS was a DAW, but video was quickly added, thus turning it into a competitive NLE. Over the years, the software development team moved to Sony (Sony Creative Software) and then to its new home, VEGAS Creative Software, owned by Magix, a German software company. Along with the VEGAS product line, Magix also handles the other creative apps from the Sonic Foundry/Sony family, including Acid and Sound Forge.

The VEGAS edit applications may be purchased in a number of versions and bundles, depending on your need and budget. Magix sent me VEGAS POST for this review, which bundles the latest VEGAS Pro 17 editing application with VEGAS Effects and VEGAS Image. The latter two apps were developed in conjunction with FX Home. VEGAS Effects shares technology with HitFilm Pro, while VEGAS Image shares a foundation with Imerge Pro. As a bundle, it’s similar to Adobe Premiere Pro grouped with After Effects and Photoshop.

VEGAS POST is available as a perpetual license or through subscription. Magix also offers other apps and add-ons, which are included with some of the other bundles or can be separately purchased. These include VEGAS DVD Architect, as well as plug-ins from Boris FX, and New Blue. Since I mainly work on Macs, Puget Systems loaned me one of their custom PCs for this review. More about Puget at the end.

First impressions

Technically this isn’t a first impression, because I’ve reviewed VEGAS a number of times in the past and my son had used VEGAS extensively for music recording and mixing years ago. But this is my first chance to look over the updated VEGAS Pro 17. To start with, this is an easy-to-use editing application that’s optimized for a Windows 10 workstation. It’s a 64-bit application that thoroughly takes advantage of the Windows media framework. If you are using NVIDIA or AMD graphics cards, then you also get the benefit of GPU acceleration for effects and some codecs, as well as for speeding up rendering.

If you’ve never worked with VEGAS and are used to NLEs like Avid Media Composer or Adobe Premiere Pro, then it will take a while to get comfortable with the user interface and workflow of VEGAS. In a very broad sense, the general editing concepts are much like Apple’s approach to iMovie and Final Cut Pro X, although VEGAS was there long before Apple developed their own take on things. VEGAS Pro 17 sports a modernized UI with a darker appearance and tabbed panels. The interface can be customized by undocking the tabs and moving panels. In addition to a fresher look, there are plenty of contextual “hamburger” menus throughout parts of the interface. I wish they had gone farther with this new interface design, but then I know how hard it is to change interfaces when you have a loyal fan base.

VEGAS claims to be faster than any other NLE. I would take that claim with a grain of salt, although it is fast and the interface is very responsive. It handles media well and thanks to the tight Windows integration, nearly any media file can be previewed from any location on your system and edited directly to the timeline. That’s without first importing these files into your project. Clips are treated as combined audio/video clips until you trim or ungroup them. VEGAS uses a very fluid form of hover scrubbing to skim through clips.

The editing workflow is more like working with an audio application than most video editing tools. So it’s oriented around a click-and-drag approach with direct timeline interaction. For example, you can trim clips while maintaining playback. If you drag a clip past the edge of another on the timeline, it will automatically create an audio and video crossfade in the overlap region between those two clips. This can be controlled by a preference setting. All timeline clips include audio and video fade handles. If you double-click a source clip in your project panel, it will automatically edit to the place in the timeline where your cursor is parked. Once you get used to the VEGAS way of editing, you can work quite quickly.

What’s new in VEGAS Pro 17

Thanks to Magix’s renewed support of the VEGAS Creative Software team, VEGAS Pro 17 sports over 30 new features. The biggest of these is nested timelines. VEGAS has always approached its project structure as being based on a single timeline. Working with multiple timelines required a workaround that involved opening multiple instances of the application. While nested or compound clips are pretty common in most other NLEs, this new feature in VEGAS takes a different approach.

To work with nested timelines, start by editing some clips together on the timeline, select them, and create and save a new nested timeline consisting of those selected clips. This nest is actually saved as a separate VEGAS project file. Multiple editors can work separately on each nest as its own VEGAS project. Changes made are then reflected back in the parent timeline. For instance, you might be editing a show and create three separate nested timelines for the show open, the body of the show, and the finale. Each segment could be edited as a self-contained project by a different editor. The three are then automatically combined and updated within the parent timeline. New tools on the bottom toolbar make it easy to navigate between the nested and parent timelines.

The next big feature is a unified color grading workspace. This combines all of the common grading tools like color wheels and curves into a single panel. Although VEGAS does not honor embedded camera LUTs, such as from an ARRI Amira, you can import and apply technical and creative LUTs from this grading workspace. VEGAS now also supports HLG HDR and the ACES 1.1 color standard. The tools worked well, but the controls have a rather coarse range when using a mouse. Holding down the CTL (control) key will give you a finer adjustment range.

Other features include planar tracking, optical flow slow motion, a warp flow (morph) transition, support for 8K files, integrated screen capture, a mesh warp effect, clip stabilization, and more. An offshoot of the warp transition is a new Smart Split edit function, which would commonly be used to shorten interview soundbites without a jump cut. Mark the in and out points within a lengthy timeline clip and perform the Smart Split command. In a single step, that section is trimmed out, the ends joined together, and a short warp flow transition is applied. You can see the effect in real time; however, the morph is between two still frames, rather than with continuous motion through the duration of the transition. Avid uses a similar effect in Media Composer.

Putting VEGAS Pro 17 through the paces

I used a mixture of media formats and projects to compare VEGAS Pro’s performance against Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve installed on the same PC. Most media was fine, although there’s no support for Blackmagic BRAW or Apple ProRes RAW. Standard ProRes media playback was good, except that VEGAS had issues with some 4K ProRes 4444 files from an ARRI Alexa LF camera. The other files that exhibited stuttering playback were the heavier 320Mb/s H.264 files from a Panasonic EVA1. The ProRes 4444 files played smoothly in Premiere Pro and Resolve, but only Resolve was fluid with the EVA1 files.

I also tested some older 4K REDCODE (.R3D) raw files. These open and play well in VEGAS, but the application does immediately start to generate some form of peak or proxy files upon import. However, you can cancel out of this file generation process and it doesn’t appear to affect the application or prevent you from playing the R3D. These were older RED One camera files, but judging by various forums comments that I’ve seen, newer RED camera files are not yet supported.

VEGAS supports several project exchange formats, including AAF and FCPXML. The latter is a specific interchange format exported by Final Cut Pro X. My AAF import from Premiere translated well, but the FCPXML import wasn’t successful. This doesn’t surprise me, because only Resolve – among the other editing apps – correctly supports FCPXML.

To claim to be fast, you also need speedy timeline exports. I was surprised to find that ProRes and DNxHD/HR formats were not available, even though other NLEs do offer these format options on Windows. It also wasn’t clear what the exact H.264 MP4 settings were. For consistency across the competing applications, I exported the same :90 test timeline from each using the Sony XDCAM HD422 50Mb/s MXF format. Export times were 1:20 for VEGAS Pro and 1:08 for Premiere Pro. But Resolve smoked them both with a zippy 28 seconds.

This PC was configured with an AMD rather than Intel CPU. It’s quite possible that VEGAS Pro or Premiere Pro may have faired better if I had been running the same test using an Intel Xeon or Core i9 processor. Nevertheless, media performance with VEGAS Pro is good, assuming you are working with formats for which VEGAS Pro is optimized.

I didn’t do much testing with either VEGAS Effects or VEGAS Image, but the combination does offer similarities to Adobe’s integration. You can send a clip on the timeline to VEGAS Effects for compositing, further image editing, or adding one of the many plug-in effects. When you save that change in VEGAS Effects, the clip is replaced in the VEGAS Pro timeline by a nest, which is a self-contained VEGAS project file. This method effectively gives you the same sort of dynamic link between the applications as you have between Premiere Pro and After Effects.

Conclusion

VEGAS Pro 17 continues to be a solid editor for the user who prefers Windows. It’s got a lot going for it, but it’s different than most other NLEs. The typical user is going to be the independent video professional who doesn’t regularly need to exchange project files or work with a mix of other freelance editors. That’s very similar to the situation with Final Cut Pro X among Apple users. Nevertheless, variety is good and that’s what VEGAS fans like about the application. So it’s a good thing that Magix sees value in supporting ongoing development.

A word about the Puget Systems PC

This review was made possible thanks in part to the help of Puget Systems. While Puget has benchmarked plenty of creative applications and has a good handle on how to optimize a PC configuration specific to your needs, they hadn’t ever tested the VEGAS products. In my consultation with them it was decided to configure a custom PC workstation optimized for Adobe applications. At retail, this would be a $5,000 system.

The workstation is a very quiet and cool tower built into a Fractal Design case. It was configured with an AMD Ryzen 9 16-core CPU, 64GB RAM, and an RTX 2080 Ti XC (11GB) GPU. Hard drives are the key to good media performance. We configured this with two Samsung 1TB M.2 SSDs – one of which was my main media drive for these tests. The SSD drives clocked in at about 2600 MB/s (write)/2900-3100 MB/s (read). Of course, the case and power supply support plenty of internal hardware and media expansion, along with numerous USB ports. While not cheap, this workstation is certainly more bang-for-the-buck than an equivalent HP or Apple workstation.

Part of the pleasure of dealing with the company is the personalized touch that Puget Systems’ customers enjoy when buying a new system. There’s a consultation call up front to nail down the specs and configuration that’s best for each customer. They are now extending that with Puget Systems Lab Services. This is an independent hardware consultation service, intended for people who need hardware advice, regardless of whether or not they are purchasing one of the custom Puget Systems PCs.

Originally written for Pro Video Coalition.

©2020 Oliver Peters

The Missing Mac

High-end Mac users waited six years for Apple to release its successor to the cylindrical 2013 Mac Pro. That’s a unit that was derided by some and was ideal for others. Its unique shape earned the nickname of the “trash can.” Love it or hate it that Mac Pro lacked the ability to expand and grow with the times. Nevertheless, many are still in daily service and being used to crank out great wok.

The 2019 Mac Pro revitalized Apple’s tower configuration – dubbed the “cheese grater” design. If you want expandability, this one has it in spades. But at a premium price that puts it way above the cost of a decked out 2013 Mac Pro. Unfortunately for many users, this leaves a gap in the product line – both in features and in price range.

If you want a powerful Mac in the $3,000 – $5,000 range without a built-in display, then there is none. I really like the top-spec versions of the iMac and iMac Pro, but if I already own a display, would like to only use an Apple XDR, or want an LG, Dell, Asus, etc, then I’m stuck. Naturally one approach would be to buy a 16″ MacBook Pro and dock it to an external display, using the MacBook Pro as a second display or in the clamshell configuration. I’ve discussed that in various posts and it’s one way nimble editing shops like Trim in London tend to work.

Another option would be the Mac Mini, which is closest to the unit that best fits this void. It recently got a slight bump up in specs, but it’s missing 8-core CPU options and an advanced graphics card. The best 6-core configuration might actually be a serviceable computer, but I would imagine effects requiring GPU acceleration will be hampered by the Intel UHD 630 built-in graphics. The Mini does tick a lot of the boxes, including wi-fi, Bluetooth, four Thunderbolt 3/USB-C ports, HDMI 2.0, two USB 3.0 ports, plus Ethernet and headphone jacks.

I’ve tested both the previous Mac Mini iteration (with and w/o eGPU) and the latest 16″ MacBook Pro. Both were capable Macs, but the 16″ truly shines. I find it hard to believe that Apple couldn’t have created a Mac Mini with the same electronics as the loaded 16″ MacBook Pro. After all, once you remove the better speaker system, keyboard, and battery from the lower case of the laptop, you have about the same amount of “guts” as that of the Mac Mini. I think you could make the same calculation with the iMac electronics. Even if the Mini case needed to be a bit taller, I don’t see why this wouldn’t be technically possible.

Here’s a hypothetical Mac Mini spec (similar to the MacBook Pro) that could be a true sweet spot:

  • 2.4GHz 8-core, 9th-generation Intel Core i9 processor (or faster)
  • 64GB 2666MHz DD4 memory
  • AMD Radeon Pro 5600M GPU with 8GB HBM2 memory
  • 1TB SSD storage (or higher – up to 8TB)
  • 10 Gigabit Ethernet

Such a configuration would likely be in the range of $3,000 – $5,000 based on the BTO options of the current Mini, iMac, and MacBook Pro. Of course, if you bump the internal SSD from 1TB to the higher capacities, the total price will go up. In my opinion, it should be easy for Apple to supply such a version without significant re-engineering. I recognize that if you went with a Xeon-based configuration, like the iMac Pros, then the task would be a bit more challenging, in part due to power demands and airflow. Naturally, an even higher-spec’ed Mac like this in the $5,000 – $10,000 range would also be appealing, but that would likely be a bridge too far for Apple.

What I ultimately want is a reasonably powerful Mac without being forced to also purchase an Apple display as this isn’t always the best option. But I want that without spending as much as on a car to get there. I understand that such a unit wouldn’t have the ability to add more cards, but then neither do the iMacs and MacBook Pros. So I really don’t see this as a huge issue. I feel that this configuration would be an instant success with many editors. Plug in the display and storage of your choice and Bob’s your uncle.

I’m not optimistic. Maybe Apple has run the calculation that such a version would rob sales from the 2019 Mac Pro or iMac Pros. Or maybe they simply view the Mini as fitting into a narrow range of server and home computing use cases. Whatever the reason, it seems clear to me that there is a huge gap in the product line that could be served by a Mac Mini with specs such as these.

On the other hand, Apple’s virtual WWDC is just around the corner, so we can always hope!

©2020 Oliver Peters

The Banker

Apple has launched its new TV+ service and this provides another opportunity for filmmakers to bring untold stories to the world. That’s the case for The Banker, an independent film picked up by Apple. It tells the story of two African American entrepreneurs attempting to earn their piece of the American dream during the repressive 1960s through real estate and banking. It stars Samuel L. Jackson, Anthony Mackie, Nia Long, and Nicholas Hoult.

The film was directed by George Nolfi (The Adjustment Bureau) and produced by Joel Viertel, who also signed on to edit the film. Viertel’s background hasn’t followed the usual path for a feature film editor. Interested in editing while still in high school, the move to LA after college landed him a job at Paramount where he eventually became a creative executive. During that time he kept up his editing chops and eventually left Paramount to pursue independent filmmaking as a writer, producer, and editor. His editing experience included Apple Final Cut Pro 1.0 through 7.0 and Avid Media Composer, but cutting The Banker was his first time using Apple’s Final Cut Pro X.

I recently chatted with Joel Viertel about the experience of making this film and working with Apple’s innovative editing application.

____________________________________________

[OP] How did you get involved with co-producing and cutting The Banker?

[JV] This film originally started while I was at Paramount. Through a connection from a friend, I met with David Smith and he pitched me the film. I fell in love with it right away, but as is the case with these films, it took a long while to put all the pieces together. While I was doing The Adjustment Bureau with George Nolfi and Anthony Mackie, I pitched it to them, and they agreed it would be a great project for us all to collaborate on. From there it took a few years to get to a script we were all happy with, cast the roles, get the movie financed, and off the ground.

[OP] I imagine that it’s exciting to be one of the first films picked up by Apple for their TV+ service. Was that deal arranged before you started filming or after everything was in the can, so to speak?

[JV] Apple partnered with us after it was finished. It was made and financed completely independently through Romulus Entertainment. While we were in the finishing stages, Endeavor Content repped the film and got us into discussions with Apple. It’s one of their first major theatrical releases and then goes on the platform after that. Apple is a great company and brand, so it’s exciting to get in on the ground floor of what they’re doing.

[OP] When I screened the film, one of the things I enjoyed was the use of montages to quickly cover a series of events. Was that how it was written or were those developed during the edit as a way to cut running time?

[JV] Nope, it was all scripted. Those segments can bedevil a production, because getting all of those little pieces is a lot of effort for very little yield. But it was very important to George and myself and the collaborators on the film to get them. It’s a film about banking and real estate, so you have to figure out how to make that a fun and interesting story. Montages were one way to keep the film propulsive and moving forward – to give it motion and excitement. We just had to get through production finding places to pick off those pieces, because none of those were developed in post.

[OP] What was your overall time frame to shoot and post this film?

[JV] We started in late September 2018 and finished production in early November. It was about 30 days in Atlanta and then a few days of pick-ups in LA. We started post right after Thanksgiving and locked in May, I think. Once Apple got involved, there were a few minor changes. However, Apple’s delivery specs were completely different from our original delivery specs, so we had to circle back on a bunch of our finishing.

[OP] Different in what way?

[JV] We had planned to finish in 2K with a 5.1 mix. Their deliverables are 4K with a Dolby Atmos mix. Because we had shot on 35mm film, we had the capacity, but it meant that we had to rescan and redo the visual effects at 4K. We had to lay the groundwork to do an Atmos mix and DolbyVision finish for theatrical and home video, which required the 35mm film negative to be rescanned and dust-busted.

Our DP, Charlotte Bruus Christensen, has shot mostly on 35mm – films like A Quiet Place and The Girl on a Train and those movies are beautiful. And so we wanted to accommodate that, but it presents challenges if you aren’t shooting in LA. Between Kodak in Atlanta and Technicolor in LA we were able to make it work.

Kodak would process the negative and Technicolor made a one-light transfer for 2K dailies. Those were archived and then I edited with ProResLT copies in HD. Once we were done, Technicolor onlined the movie from their 2K scans. After the change in deliverable specs, Technicolor rescanned the clips used for the online finish at 4K and conformed the cut at 4K.

[OP] I felt that the eclectic score fit this movie well and really places it in time. As an editor, how did you work to build up your temp tracks? Or did you simply leave it up to the composer?

[JV] George and I have worked with our composer, Scott Salinas, for a very long time on a bunch of things. Typically, I give him a script and then he pulls samples that he thinks are in the ballpark. He gave me a grab bag of stuff for The Banker – some of which was score, some of which was jazz. I start laying that against the picture myself as I go and find these little things that feel right and set the tone of the movie. I’m finding my way for the right marriage of music and picture. If it works, it sticks. If it doesn’t, we replace it. Then at the end, he’s got to score over that stuff.

Most of the jazz in The Banker is original, but there are a couple tracks where we just licensed them. There’s a track called “Cash and Carry” that I used over the montage when they get rich. They’ve just bought the Banker’s Building and popped the champagne. This wacky, French 1970s bit of music comes in with a dude scatting over it while they are buying buildings or looking at the map of LA. That was a track Scott gave me before we shot a frame of film, so when we got to that section of the movie, I chose it out of the bin and put that sequence to it and it just stuck.

There are some cases where it’s almost impossible to temp, so I just cut it dry and give it to him. Sometimes he’ll temp it and sometimes he’ll do a scratch score. For example, the very beginning of the movie never had temp in any way. I just cut it dry. I gave it to Scott. He scored it and then we revised his scoring a bunch of times to get to the final version.

[OP] Did you do any official or “friends and family” screenings of The Banker while editing it? If so, did that impact the way the film turned out?

[JV] The post process is largely dictated by how good your first cut is. If the movie works, but needs improvement – that’s one thing. If it fundamentally doesn’t – that’s another. It’s a question of where you landed from the get-go and what needs to be fixed to get to the end of the road.

We’re big fans of doing mini-testing – bringing in people we know and people whose opinions we want to hear. At some point you have to get outside of the process and aggregate what you hear over and over again. You need to address the common things that people pick up on. The only way to keep improving your movie is to get outside feedback so they tell you what to focus on.

Over time that significantly impacted the film. It’s not like any one person said that one thing that caused us to re-edit the film. People see the problem that sticks out to them in the cut and you work on that. The next time there’s something else and then you work on that. You keep trying to make all the improvements you can make. So it’s an iterative process.

[OP] This film marked a shift for you from using earlier versions of Final Cut Pro to now cutting on Final Cut Pro X for the first time. Why did you make that choice and what was the experience like?

[JV] George has a relationship with Apple and they had suggested using Final Cut Pro X on his next project. I had always used Final Cut Pro 7 as my preference. We had used it on an NBC show called Allegiance in 2014 and then on Birth of the Dragon in 2015 and 2016 – long after it had been discontinued. We all could see the writing on the wall – operating systems would quit running it and it’s not harnessing what the computers can do.

I got involved in the conversation and was invited to come to a seminar at the Editors Guild about Final Cut Pro X that was taught by Kevin Bailey, who was the assistant editor for Whiskey Tango Foxtrot. I had looked at Final Cut Pro X when it first came out and then again several years later. I felt like it had been vastly improved and was in a place where I could give it a shot. So I committed at that point to cutting this film on Final Cut Pro X and teaching myself how to use it. I also hired Kevin to help as my assistant for the start of the film. He became unavailable later in the production, so we found Steven Moyer to be my assistant and he was fantastic. I would have never made it through without the both of them.

[OP] How did you feel about Final Cut Pro X once you got your sea legs?

[JV] It’s always hard to learn to walk again. That’s what a lot of editors bump into with Final Cut Pro X, because it is a very different approach than any other NLE. I found that once you get to know it and rewire your brain that you can be very fast on it. A lot of the things that it does are revolutionary and pretty incredible. And there are still other areas that are being worked on. Those guys are constantly trying to make it better. We’ve had multiple conversations with them about the possibilities and they are very open to feedback.

[OP] Every editor has their own way of tackling dailies and wading through an avalanche of footage coming in from production. And of course, Final Cut Pro X features some interesting ways to organize media. What was the process like for The Banker?

[JV] The sound and picture were both running at 24fps. I would upload the sound files from my hotel room in Atlanta to Technicolor in LA, who would sync the sound. They would send back the dailies and sound, which Kevin – who was assisting at that time – would load into Final Cut. He would multi-clip the sound files and the two camera angles. Everything is in a multi-clip, except for purely MOS B-roll shots. Each scene had its own event. Kevin used the same system he had devised with Jan [Kovac, editor on Whiskey Tango Foxtrot and Focus]. He would keyword each dialogue line, so that when you select a keyword collection in the browser, every take for that line comes up. That’s labor-intensive for the assistant, but it makes life that much faster for me once it’s set up.

[OP] I suppose that method also makes it much faster when you are working with the director and need to quickly get to alternate takes.

[JV] It speeds things along for George, but also for me. I don’t have to hunt around to find the lines when I have to edit a very long dialogue scene. You could assemble selects reels first, but I like to look at everything. I fundamentally believe there’s something good in every bad take. It doesn’t take very long to watch every take of a line. Plus I do a fair amount of ‘Franken-biting’ with dialogue where needed.

[OP] Obviously the final mix and color correction were done at specialty facilities. Since The Banker was shot on film, I would imagine that complicated the hand-off slightly. Please walk me through the process you followed.

[JV] Marti Humphrey did the sound at The Dub Stage in Burbank. We have a good relationship with him and can call him very early in the process to work out the timeline of how we are going to do things. He had to soup up his system a bit to handle the Atmos near-field stuff, but it was a good opportunity for him to get into that space. So he was able to do all the various versions of our mix.

Technicolor was the new guy for us. Mike Hatzer did the color grade. It was a fairly complex process for them and they were a good partner. For the conform, we handed them an XML and EDL. They had their Flex files to get back to the film edge code. Steven had to break up the sequence to generate separate tracks for the 35mm original, stock, and VFX shots, because Technicolor needed separate EDLs for those. But it wasn’t like we invented anything that hasn’t been done before.

We did use third-party apps for some of this. The great thing about that is you can just contact the developer directly. There was one EDL issue and Steven could just call up the app developer to explain the issue and they’d fix it in a couple of days.

[OP] What sort of visual effects were required? The film is set more or less 70 years ago, so were the majority of effects just to make the locations look right? Like cars, signs, and so on?

[JV] It was mostly period clean-up. You have to paint out all sorts of boring stuff, like road paint. In the 50s and 60s, those white lines have to come out. Wires, of course. A couple of shots we wanted to ‘LA-ify’ Georgia. We shot some stuff in LA, but when you put Griffith Park right next to a shot of Newnan, Georgia, the way to blend that over is to put palm trees in the Newnan shot.

We also did a pick-up with Anthony while he was on another show the required a beard for that role. So we had to paint out his beard. Good luck figuring out which was the shot where we had to paint out his beard!

[OP] Now that you have a feature film under your belt with Final Cut Pro X, what are your thoughts about it? Anything you feel that it’s missing?

[JV] All the NLEs have their particular strengths. Final Cut has several that are amazing, like background exports and rendering. It has Roles, where you can differentiate dialogue, sound effects, and music sources. You can bus things to different places. This is the first time I’ve ever edited in 5.1, because Final Cut supports that. That was a fun challenge.

We used Final Cut Pro X to edit a movie shot on film, which is kind of a first at this level, but it’s not like we crashed into some huge problem with that. We gamed it out and it all worked like it was supposed to. Obviously it doesn’t do some stuff the same way. Fortunately through our relationship with Apple we can make some suggestions about that. But there really isn’t anything it doesn’t do. If that were the case, we would have just said that we can’t cut with this.

Final Cut Pro X is an evolving NLE – as they all are. What I realized at the seminar is that it changed a lot from when it first appeared. It was a good experience cutting a movie on it. Some editors are hesitant, because that first hour is difficult and I totally get that. But if you push through that and get to know it – there are many things that are very good and addictively good. I would certainly cut another movie on it.

____________________________________________

The Banker started a limited theatrical release on March 6 and will be available on the Apple TV+ streaming service on March 20.

For even more details on the post process for The Baker, check out Pro Video Coalition

Originally written for FCPco.

®2020 Oliver Peters

Apple 2019 16″ MacBook Pro

Creatives in all fields are the target market for Apple’s MacBook Pro product line. Apple introduced the 16″ model to replace its 15″ predecessor in late 2019. This new model is not only a serious tool for location work but is powerful enough to form the hub of your edit suite, whether on-site or at a fixed facility.

Nuts and bolts

The 2019 MacBook Pro comes in 6-core (Intel Core i7) and 8-core (Intel Core i9) configurations. It boasts up to 64GB RAM, an AMD Radeon Pro 5500M series GPU with up to 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM, and can be equipped with up to 8TB of internal SSD storage. Prices start at under $2,800 USD*, but the full monty rings up at about $6,500 USD*. The high-capacity SSD options contribute to the most expensive configurations, but those sizes may be overkill for most users. A more realistic price for a typical editor’s 8-core configuration would be about $3,900 USD*. Just stick to a 1TB internal SSD and back the RAM down to 32GB. Quite frankly the 6-core is likely to be sufficient for many editing and design tasks. (*With AppleCare warranty, but no local VAT or sales taxes added.)

While there are great PC laptop choices, it’s very hard to make direct comparisons to laptops with all of these same components. Few PC laptops offer this much RAM or SSDs that large, for example. When you can make a direct comparison, name brand PC laptops are often more expensive. And remember, great gaming PCs are not necessarily the best editing machines and vice versa.

What’s improved?

Apple loaned me a space gray, 8-core 16″ MacBook Pro configured with 64GB RAM, the AMD GPU with 8GB VRAM, and a 4TB internal hard drive. I own a mid-2014 MacBook Pro as the center of my edit system at home. The two MacBook Pros are physically very similar. They are nearly the identical size, with the 2019 MacBook Pro a bit thinner and lighter. The keyboard footprint is the same as my five-year-old model, though the keys are slightly larger on the new laptop with less space between. Apple tweaked the keyboard mechanism on the 16″ model. Typing feels about the same between these two, though the keys on the new machine are quieter. Plus, it has a much bigger trackpad and the touch bar.

The Retina screen is housed in a lid about the same size as the 15″ model. Its 16″ diagonal spec is achieved by using smaller bezels. Of course, the newer display is also higher density resulting in 3072 x 1920 pixels at 226 ppi. This 500-nit, P3 display offers True Tone, thanks to macOS Catalina. True Tone alters the color temperature based on ambient light. It’s easy on the eyes, because it warms up the image in standard room lighting. However, I would discourage enabling it while working on projects requiring critical color accuracy.

The MacBook Pro features four Thunderbolt 3/USB-C ports, like its 15″ predecessor. These connect peripherals and/or power. I don’t know whether Apple had room to add standard USB-A ports or if there was a trade-off for space needed for cooling or the improved speaker system. Maybe it was just a decision to move forward regardless of some short-term inconvenience. In any case, if you purchase a MacBook Pro, plan on also buying a few adapters and cables, a USB hub, and/or a Thunderbolt 3 dock.

Performance testing

How does the 2019 MacBook Pro stack up against a desktop Mac, like the 10-core 3.0 GHz 2017 iMac Pro used at my daily editing gig? Both have 64GB RAM, but there are 16GB of VRAM in the iMac Pro. I tested with both the internal SSDs and an external USB 3.0 GDRIVE SSD. Both internal drives clocked well over 2500 MB/sec, while the GDRIVE was in the 400-500 range.

My “benchmark” tests included BruceX for Final Cut Pro X, Puget Systems’ After Effects benchmark, and two of Simon Ubsdell’s Motion tutorial projects. For the “real world” tests, I used a travelogue series sizzle edit with 4K (and larger) media, various codecs, scaling, speed changes, and color correction. The timeline was exported to ProRes and H.264 using various NLEs. My final test sequence was a taxing 6K FCPX timeline composed of nine layers of 6K RED raw files.

Until the release of the new Mac Pro tower, the iMac Pro had been Apple’s most powerful desktop computer. Yet, in nearly all of these tests, the 16″ MacBook Pro equaled or slightly bettered the times of the iMac Pro. The laptop had faster export times and a higher Puget score with After Effects. One exception was my nine-layer 6K RED project, where the iMac Pro shined – exporting twice as fast as the MacBook Pro. Both Macs played back and scrubbed through this variety of files with ease, regardless of application or internal versus external drive. Overall, the biggest difference I noticed was that exports on the iMac Pro stayed quiet throughout, while the MacBook Pro frequently had to rev up the fans.

Apple claims up to 11 hours of battery life, but that’s really just during light duty computing: checking e-mails, writing, surfing the web, etc. And if you’ve optimized your energy settings for battery life. The MacBook Pro includes an integrated Intel GPU and employs automatic graphics cards switching. During tasks that don’t generate a heavy GPU load the machine is running on the integrated card. It switches to the AMD for apps like Final Cut or Premiere. I purposefully set up a looping 4K sequence in FCPX and found that the battery drained from 100% down to 10% in about two hours. While this is more stress than normal editing, it’s typical behavior for creative applications. The bottom line is that you shouldn’t expect to be editing for 11 hours straight running only on the internal battery.

Final thoughts

This machine comes with macOS Catalina pre-installed. Don’t plan on downgrading that. Catalina is the first version of macOS that is purely 64-bit and with significant under-the-hood security changes. All 32-bit dependencies have been dropped, which means that some software and hardware products might not be fully compatible. So, check first. I would recommend a clean install of apps and plug-ins rather than migrating from another machine’s drive. I did a clean installation of apps through my Apple and Adobe CC IDs and was ready to go in half a day. Conversely I’ve heard stories from others who pulled their hair out for a week trying to migrate between machines and OS versions. There are ways to do this and most of the time they work, but why not just start out fresh when you get a new machine?

Apple’s ProApps, Adobe Creative Cloud software, and DaVinci Resolve are all ready to go. Media Composer editors have a slight wait. Avid is beta testing a Catalina-compatible version of Media Composer (at the time of this writing). Some functionality won’t be there at the start, but updates will quickly add in many of those missing features.

Mac owners who bought a recent 15″ MacBook Pro will see a definite boost, but probably not enough to refresh their systems yet. But if, like me, you are running a five-year-old model, then this unit becomes very tempting, especially when working with anything more taxing than ProRes 1080p files. For work on-the-go, like on-site editing, DIT tasks, photo processing, or other creative tasks, the 2019 MacBook Pro easily fits the bill. Many editors may also need a machine that can easily shift from the field to the office/home/studio in place of an iMac or iMac Pro. If that’s you, then the MacBook Pro has the horsepower. Plug it up to a Thunderbolt dock, an external display, or other peripherals, and you are ready to go – no desktop computer needed.

Original written for RedShark News.

©2020 Oliver Peters

A First Look at Postlab Cloud

Apple developed Final Cut Pro X around single-editor workflows. As such, professional editing teams who wanted to use this tool for collaborative editing have been challenged to develop their own solutions. One approach was Postlab, which was developed in-house at Dutch broadcaster Evanglische Omroep (EO). In order to expand the product as a commercial application, lead developer Jasper Siegers decided to move it under the Hedge umbrella. This required the app to be rebuilt with new code before it could be offered to the FCPX market. That time has come and Postlab is now available as Postlab Cloud.

As the name implies, Postlab Cloud hosts your FCPX libraries “in the cloud,” i.e. on Postlab’s servers. Some production companies or broadcasters are reticent to have their editing computers connected online, but it’s important to note that only libraries and no media or caches are hosted by Postlab. This keeps the transfer times fast and file sizes light. Cache and media files stay local, whether on your machine or on connected shared storage. Postlab sets up accounts based on site licenses and numbers of users. Each user is assigned a log-in based on an e-mail address and a password. This means that a production hosted by Postlab can be accessed by authorized users anywhere in the world, provided there’s a viable internet connection.

The owner of the account can set up productions and organize them within folders. Each production is a collection or bundle of one or more Final Cut Pro X libraries. If you have ever worked with Final Cut Server in the FCP7 days, then the Postlab workflow is very similar. Once a production has been created, an editor can log in, download the library (a check-out step), edit in it, and then upload the changed version (a check-in step). As part of this upload, the Postlab interface prompts you to add comments describing the work you’ve done. Only one editor at a time can download a library and have write access; however, other users can still download it with read-only access. If you have two editors ping-ponging work on the same library file, then one has to upload it (check in) before the other editor can download it (check out) for their edits.

Getting started

I decided to test Postlab Cloud in two scenarios: a) multiple workstations connected to a shared storage network, and b) two disconnected editors collaborating over long distances. To start, once an account has been established, any editor using Postlab Cloud must install the small Postlab application. Since the app controls some of Final Cut’s functions, you will be prompted to enable GUI Scripting in your privacy preferences. In order for Postlab to work properly, media and cache files need to be outside of the library bundle. When you first download a library, you may be prompted to change your settings. In a networked environment with media on shared storage, the path to the media should be the same on each workstation. This means when Editor A finishes and checks in the production and then Editor B checks it back out, you generally will not need to relink the media files on Editor B’s system. Therefore, this edit collaboration can proceed fluidly.

Once a production has been downloaded, the library file exists as a temporary file on the local machine and not the network. This means that Postlab can still work in tandem with storage solutions that don’t normally perform well with FCPX libraries. In addition to this temporary library file, the Final Cut backup library is also stored in the location you have designated. If you are working in a networked, collaborative environment, then the advantage Postlab offers is version tracking and the ability for multiple users to open a library file (only one with write access).

Long distance

The second scenario is working with other editors outside of your facility. The first step is to get the media to the outside editor. You could certainly send a drive, but that isn’t efficient in time nor cost, especially across continents. If you only need creative editing and not finishing services, then low-res, proxy files are fine. So I converted my 4K UHD ProRes HQ files to 960 x 540 H264 (3Mbps) files and used Frame.io to transfer them over the internet. The key to proper relinking when you are done is to set audio to pass-through when converting this files. This was a double-system sound shoot, so I uploaded both the H264 videos files and the sound recordist’s WAV files to Frame and then downloaded them again at the other end (my home). Now I had media in both locations. The process would be the same even if it were two editors in two different countries.

The first Postlab step is to create and upload this FCPX library. Once that has been established, any authorized user with a Postlab log-in can access the production. I decided to go back and forth on this production between my home and the facility and also using different user log-ins – thus simulating a team of remote editors. Each time I did this, version changes were tracked by Postlab. If I were working with multiple editors, I would have been able to see what tasks each had performed.

It’s important to note that when you collaborate in this way, each editor should be using the same effects, LUTs, and Motion templates, otherwise some things will appear offline. Since the path to the media was different at home versus at the facility, each time I went between the two, checking in and then checking out the production, media files would appear offline. A simple relink fixed this, but it’s something to be aware of. Once totally done, I could relink to the high-res camera files and “finish” the project back at the office.

Wrap-up

When you upload a library back to Postlab, that open FCPX library is closed within Final Cut Pro X on your system, because you have checked it back in. Once you log out of Postlab, the temporary library file is moved to the trash. If you need a local version of the library, then export it from the Postlab app.

Once you get the hang of it, collaboration is simple using Postlab Cloud. Library files stay light without any of the sort of corruption caused by using services like DropBox. My test project included synchronized multi-cam clips and multi-channel audio. Each time during this exchange clips, projects, and edits showed up as expected when going between the various users. Whether or not Apple ever tackles collaboration within Final Cut Pro X is an unknown. But why wait? If you need that today, then Postlab Cloud offers a solid answer.

The relaunched Postlab Cloud includes three plans, which are priced per user/per year: Postlab, Postlab Pro, and Postlab Server. The first tier only allows for library version tracking and sharing. Pro allows for a lot more libraries to be shared and comes with more features. Server is a dedicated Postlab Cloud server for larger teams or those that require IT-specific features like Active Directory. Finally, Hedge/Postlab plans to ship a local version of Postlab – designed for use within local networks – soon after launch.

Postlab has now expanded to include Premiere Pro users.

Check out the Postlab tutorials for more information.

The article was originally written for FCP.co.

©2020 Oliver Peters