NLE as Post Production Hub

df2316_main_sm

As 2009 closed, I wrote a post about Final Cut Studio as the center of a boutique post production workflow. A lot has changed since then, but that approach is still valid and a number of companies can fill those shoes. In each case, rather than be the complete, self-contained tool, the editing application becomes the hub of the operation. Other applications surround it and the workflow tends to go from NLE to support tool and back for delivery. Here are a few solutions.

Adobe Premiere Pro CC

df2316_prproNo current editing package comes as close to the role of the old Final Cut Studio as does Adobe’s Creative Cloud. You get nearly all of the creative tools under a single subscription and facilities with a team account can equip every room with the full complement of applications. When designed correctly, workflows in any room can shift from edit to effects to sound to color correction – according to the load. In a shared storage operation, projects can stay in a single bay for everything or shift from bay to bay based on operator speciality and talent.

While there are many tools in the Creative Cloud kit, the primary editor-specific applications are Premiere Pro CC, After Effects CC and Audition CC. It goes without saying that for most, Photoshop CC and Adobe Media Encoder are also givens. On the other hand, I don’t know too many folks using Prelude CC, so I can’t say what the future for this tool will be. Especially since the next version of Premiere Pro includes built-in proxy transcoding. Also, as more of SpeedGrade CC’s color correction tools make it into Premiere Pro, it’s clear to see that SpeedGrade itself is getting very little love. The low-cost market for outboard color correction software has largely been lost to DaVinci Resolve (free). For now, SpeedGrade is really “dead man walking”. I’d be surprised if it’s still around by mid-2017. That might also be the case for Prelude.

Many editors I know that are heavy into graphics and visual effects do most of that work in After Effects. With CC and Dynamic Link, there’s a natural connection between the Premiere Pro timeline and After Effects. A similar tie can exist between Premiere Pro and Audition. I find the latter to be a superb audio post application and, from my experience, provides the best transfer of a Premiere Pro timeline into any audio application. This connection is being further enhanced by the updates coming from Adobe this year.

Rounding out the package is Photoshop CC, of course. While most editors are not big Photoshop artists, it’s worth noting that this application also enables animated motion graphics. For example, if you want to create an animated lower third banner, it can be done completely inside of Photoshop without ever needing to step into After Effects. Drop the file onto a Premiere Pro timeline and it’s complete with animation and proper transparency values. Update the text in Photoshop and hit “save” – voila the graphic is instantly updated within Premiere Pro.

Given the breadth and quality of tools in the Creative Cloud kit, it’s possible to stay entirely within these options for all of a facility’s post needs. Of course, roundtrips to Resolve, Baselight, ProTools, etc. are still possible, but not required. Nevertheless, in this scenario I typically see everything starting and ending in Premiere Pro (with exports via AME), making the Adobe solution my first vote for the modern hub concept.

Apple Final Cut Pro X

df2316_fcpxApple walked away from the market for an all-inclusive studio package. Instead, it opted to offer more self-contained solutions that don’t have the same interoperability as before, nor that of the comparable Adobe solutions. To build up a similar toolkit, you would need Final Cut Pro X, Motion, Compressor and Logic Pro X. An individual editor/owner would purchase these once and install these on as many machines as he or she owned. A business would have to buy each application for each separate machine. So a boutique facility would need a full set for each room or they would have to build rooms by specialty – edit, audio, graphics, etc.

Even with this combination, there are missing links when going from one application to another. These gaps have to be plugged by the various third-party productivity solutions, such as Clip Exporter, XtoCC, 7toX, Xsend Motion, X2Pro, EDL-X and others. These provide better conduits between Apple applications than Apple itself provides. For example, only through Automatic Duck Xsend Motion can you get an FCPX project (timeline) into Motion. Marquis Broadcast’s X2Pro Audio Convert provides a better path into Logic than the native route.

If you want the sort of color correction power available in Premiere Pro’s Lumetri Color panel, you’ll need more advanced color correction plug-ins, like Hawaiki Color or Color Finale. Since Apple doesn’t produce an equivalent to Photoshop, look to Pixelmator or Affinity Photo for a viable substitute. Although powerful, you still won’t get quite the same level of interoperability as between Photoshop and Premiere Pro.

Naturally, if your desire is to use non-Apple solutions for graphics and color correction, then similar rules apply as with Premiere Pro. For instance, roundtripping to Resolve for color correction is pretty solid using the FCPXML import/export function within Resolve. Prefer to use After Effects for your motion graphics instead of Motion? Then Automatic Duck Ximport AE on the After Effects side has your back.

Most of the tools are there for those users wishing to stay in an Apple-centric world, provided you add a lot of glue to patch over the missing elements. Since many of the plug-ins for FCPX (Motion templates) are superior to a lot of what’s out there, I do think that an FCPX-centric shop will likely choose to start and end in X (possibly with a Compressor export). Even when Resolve is used for color correction, I suspect the final touches will happen inside of Final Cut. It’s more of the Lego approach to the toolkit than the Adobe solution, yet I still see it functioning in much the same way.

Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve

df2316_resolveIt’s hard to say what Blackmagic’s end goal is with Resolve. Clearly the world of color correction is changing. Every NLE developer is integrating quality color correction modules right inside of their editing application. So it seems only natural that Blackmagic is making Resolve into an all-in-one tool for no other reason than self-preservation. And by golly, they are doing a darn good job of it! Each version is better than the last. If you want a highly functional editor with world-class color correction tools for free, look no further than Resolve. Ingest, transcoded and/or native media editing, color correction, mastering and delivery – all there in Resolve.

There are two weak links – graphics and audio. On the latter front, the internal audio tools are good enough for many editors. However, Blackmagic realizes that specialty audio post is still the domain of the sound engineering world, which is made up predominantly of Avid Pro Tools shops. To make this easy, Resolve has built-in audio export functions to send the timeline to Pro Tools via AAF. There’s no roundtrip back, but you’d typically get composite mixed tracks back from the engineer to lay into the timeline.

To build on the momentum it started, Blackmagic Design acquired the assets of EyeOn’s Fusion software, which gives then a node-based compositor, suitable for visual effects and some motion graphics. This requires a different mindset than After Effects with Premiere Pro or Motion with Final Cut Pro X (when using Xsend Motion). You aren’t going to send a full sequence from Resolve to Fusion. Instead, the Connect plug-in links a single shot to Fusion, where it can be effected through series of nodes. The Connect plug-in provides a similar “conduit” function to that of Adobe’s Dynamic Link between Premiere Pro and After Effects, except that the return is a rendered clip instead of a live project file. To take advantage of this interoperability between Resolve and Fusion, you need the paid versions.

Just as in Apple’s case, there really is no Blackmagic-owned substitute for Photoshop or an equivalent application. You’ll just have to buy what matches your need. While it’s quite possible to build a shop around Resolve and Fusion (plus maybe Pro Tools and Photoshop), it’s more likely that Resolve’s integrated approach will appeal mainly to those folks looking for free tools. I don’t see too many advanced pros doing their creative cutting on Resolve (at least not yet). However, that being said, it’s pretty close, so I don’t want to slight the capabilities.

Where I see it shine is as a finishing or “online” NLE. Let’s say you perform the creative or “offline” edit in Premiere Pro, FCPX or Media Composer. This could even be three editors working on separate segments of a larger show – each on a different NLE. Each’s sequence goes to Resolve, where the timelines are imported, combined and relinked to the high-res media. The audio has gone via a parallel path to a Pro Tools mixer and graphics come in as individual clips, shots or files. Then all is combined inside Resolve, color corrected and delivered straight from Resolve. For many shops, that scenario is starting to look like the best of all worlds.

I tend to see Resolve as less of a hub than either Premiere Pro or Final Cut Pro X. Instead, I think it may take several possible positions: a) color correction and transcoding at the front end, b) color correction in the middle – i.e. the standard roundtrip, and/or c) the new “online editor” for final assembly, color correction, mastering and delivery.

Avid Media Composer

df2316_avidmcThis brings me to Avid Media Composer, the least integrated of the bunch. You can certainly build an operation based on Media Composer as the hub – as so many shops have. But there simply isn’t the silky smooth interoperability among tools like there is with Adobe or the dearly departed Final Cut Pro “classic”. However, that doesn’t mean it’s not possible. You can add advanced color correction through the Symphony option, plus Avid Pro Tools in your mixing rooms. In an Avid-centric facility, rooms will definitely be task-oriented, rather than provide the ease of switching functions in the same suite based on load, as you can with Creative Cloud.

The best path right now is Media Composer to Pro Tools. Unfortunately it ends there. Like Blackmagic, Avid only offers two hero applications in the post space – Media Composer/Symphony and Pro Tools. They have graphics products, but those are designed and configured for news on-air operations. This means that effects and graphics are typically handled through After Effects, Boris RED or Fusion.

Boris RED runs as an integrated tool, which augments the Media Composer timeline. However, RED uses its own user interface. That operation is relatively seamless, since any “roundtrip” happens invisibly within Media Composer. Fusion can be integrated using the Connect plug-in, just like between Fusion and Resolve. Automatic Duck’s AAF import functions have been integrated directly into After Effects by Adobe. It’s easy to send a Media Composer timeline into After Effects as a one-way trip. In fact, that’s where this all started in the first place. Finally, there’s also a direct connection with Baselight Editions for Avid, if you add that as a “plug-in” within Media Composer. As with Boris RED, clips open up in the Baselight interface, which has now been enhanced with a smoother shot-to-shot workflow inside of Media Composer.

While a lot of shops still use Media Composer as the hub, this seems like a very old-school approach. Many editors still love this NLE for its creative editing prowess, but in today’s mixed-format, mixed-codec, file-based post world, Avid has struggled to keep Media Composer competitive with the other options. There’s certainly no reason Media Composer can’t be the center – with audio in Pro Tools, color correction in Resolve, and effects in After Effects. However, most newer editors simply don’t view it the same way as they do with Adobe or even Apple. Generally, it seems the best Avid path is to “offline” edit in Media Composer and then move to other tools for everything else.

So that’s post in 2016. Four good options with pros and cons to each. Sorry to slight the Lightworks, Vegas Pro, Smoke/Flame and Edius crowds, but I just don’t encounter them too often in my neck of the woods. In any case, there are plenty of options, even starting at free, which makes the editing world pretty exciting right now.

©2016 Oliver Peters

HP Z1 G2 Workstation

df_hpz1g2_heroHewlett-Packard is known for developing workstations that set a reliability and performance standard, characterized by the Z-series of workstation towers. HP has sought to extend what they call the “Z experience” to other designs, like mobile and all-in-one computers. The latest of these is the HP Z1 G2 Workstation – the second generation model of the Z1 series.

Most readers will associate the all-in-one concept with an Apple iMac. Like the iMac, the Z1 G2 is a self-contained unit housing all electronics and the display in one chassis. Whereas the top-end iMacs are targeted at advanced consumers and pros with less demanding computing needs, the HP Z1 G2 is strictly for the serious user who requires advanced horsepower. The iMac is a sealed unit, which cannot be upgraded by the user (except for RAM), and is largely configured with laptop-grade parts. In contrast, the HP Z1 G2 is a Rolls-Royce. The build is very solid and it exudes a sense of performance. The user has the option to configure their Z1 G2 from a wide range of components. The display lifts like a car hood for easy accept to the “engine”, making user upgrades nearly as easy as on a tower.

Configuration options

df_hpz1g2_hero_touchThe HP Z1 G2 offers processor choices that include Intel Core i3, Core i5 and three Xeon models. There are a variety of storage and graphics card choices and it supports up to 32GB of RAM. You may also choose between a Touch and non-Touch display. The Touch screen adds a glass overlay and offers finger or stylus interaction with the screen. Non-touch screens are a matte finish, while Touch screens are glossy. You have a choice of operating systems, including Windows 7, Windows 8 and Linux distributions.

I was able to specify the built-to-order configuration of the Z1 G2 for my review. This included a Xeon E3 (3.6GHz) quad-core, 16GB of RAM, optical drive and the NVIDIA K4100M graphics card. For storage, I selected one 256GB mSATA boot drive (“flash” storage), plus two 512GB SSDs that were set-up in a RAID-0 configuration. I also ordered the Touch option with 64-bit Windows 8.1 Pro. Z1 G2 models start at $1,999; however, as configured, this system would retail at over $6,100, including a 20% eCoupon promo discount.

An important, new feature is support for Thunderbolt 2 with an optional module. HP is one of the first PC manufacturers to support Thunderbolt. I didn’t order that, but reps from AJA, Avid and Blackmagic Design all confirmed to me that their Thunderbolt units should work fine with this workstation, as long as you install their Windows device drivers. One of these would be required for any external broadcast or grading monitor.

In addition to the custom options, the Z1 G2 includes wireless support, four USB 2.0 ports, two USB 3.0 ports, Gigabit Ethernet, a DisplayPort connector for an secondary computer monitor, S/PDIF, analog audio connectors, a webcam and a media card reader.

Arrival and set-up

df_hpz1g2_openThe HP Z1 G2 ships as a single, 57 pound package, complete with a wireless mouse and keyboard. The display/electronics chassis is attached to an adjustable arm that connects to the base. This allows the system to be tilted at any angle, as well as completely flat for shipping and access to the electronics. It locks into place when it’s flat (as in shipping), so you have to push down lightly on the display in order to unlock the latch button.

The display features a 27” (diagonal) screen, but the chassis is actually 31” corner-to-corner. Because the stand has to support the unit and counter-balance the weight at various angles, it sticks out about 12” behind the back of the chassis. Some connectors (including the power cord) are at the bottom, center of the back of the chassis. Others are along the sides. The adjustable arm allows any angle from vertical to horizontal, so it would be feasible to operate in a standing or high-chair position looking down at the monitor – a bit like a drafting table. I liked the fact that the arm lets you drop the display completely down to the desk surface, which put the bottom of the screen lower than my stationary 20” Apple Cinemas.

First impressions

df_hpz1g2_win81I picked the Touch option in order to test the concept, but quite frankly I decided it wasn’t for me. In order to control items by touch, you have to be a bit closer than the full length of your arm. As a glasses-wearer, this distance is uncomfortable for me, as I prefer to be a little farther away from a screen of this size. Although the touch precision is good, it’s not as precise as you’d get with a mouse or pen and tablet – even if using an iPad stylus. Only menu and navigation operations, but no drawing tools, worked in Photoshop – an application that seems natural for Touch. While I found the Touch option not to be that interesting to me, I did like the screen that comes with it. It’s glossy, which gives you nice density to your images, but not so reflective as to be annoying in a room with ambient lighting.

The second curiosity item for me was Windows 8.1. The Microsoft “metro” look has been maligned and many pros opt for Windows 7 instead. I actually found the operating system to function well and the “flat” design philosophy much like what Apple is doing with Mac OS X and iOS. The tiled Start screen that highlights this release can easily be avoided when you set-up your preferences. If you prefer to pin application shortcuts to the Windows task bar or on the Desktop, that’s easily done. Once you are in an application like Premiere Pro or Media Composer, the OS differences tend to disappear anyway.

df_hpz1g2_bmdtestSince I had configured this unit with an mSATA boot/applications drive and RAID-0 SSDs for media, the launch and operation of any application was very fast. Naturally the difference from a cold start on the Z1 G2, as compared to my 2009 Mac Pro with standard 7200RPM drives, was night and day. With most actual operations, the differences in application responsiveness were less dramatic.

One area that I think needs improvement is screen calibration. The display is not a DreamColor display, but color accuracy seems quite good and it’s very crisp at 2560 x 1440 pixels. Unfortunately, both the HP and NVIDIA calibration applications were weak, using consumer level nomenclature for settings. For instance, I found no way to accurately set a 6500-degree color temperature or a 2.2 gamma level, based on how the sliders were labelled. Some of the NVIDIA software controls didn’t appear to work at all.

Performance stress testing

I loaded up the Z1 G2 with a potpourri of media and applications, including Adobe CC 2014 (Photoshop, Premiere Pro, After Effects, SpeedGrade), Avid Media Composer 8, DaVinci Resolve 11 Lite (beta) and Sony Vegas Pro 13. Media included Sony XAVC 4K, Avid DNxHD175X, Apple ProRes 4444, REDCODE raw from an EPIC Dragon camera and more. This allowed me to make some direct comparisons with the same applications and media available on my 2009 eight-core Mac Pro. Its configuration included dual Xeon quad-core processors (2.26GHz), 28GB RAM, an ATI 5870 GPU card and a RAID-0 stripe of two internal 7200RPM spinning hard drives. No I/O devices were installed on either computer. While these two systems aren’t exactly “apples-to-apples”, it does provide a logical benchmark for the type of machine a new Z1 G2 customer might be upgrading from.

df_hpz1g2_4kIn typical, side-by-side testing with edited, single-layer timelines, most applications on both machines performed in a similar fashion, even with 4K media. It’s when I started layering sequences and comparing performance and render times that the differences became obvious.

My first test compared Premiere Pro CC 2014 with a 7-layer, 4K timeline. The V1 track was a full-screen, base layer of Sony XAVC. On top of that I layered six tracks of picture-in-picture (PIP) clips consisting of RED Dragon raw footage at various resolutions up to 5K. Some clips were recorded with in-camera slomo. I applied color correction, scaling/positioning and a drop shadow. The 24p timeline was one minute long and was exported as a 4K .mp4 file. The HP handled this task at just under 11 minutes, compared with almost two hours for the Mac Pro.

My second Premiere Pro test was a little more “real world” – a 48-second sequence of ARRI Alexa 1080p ProRes 4444 log-C clips. These were round-tripped through SpeedGrade to add a Rec 709 LUT, a primary grade and two vignettes to blur and darken the outer edge of the clips. This sequence was exported as a 720/24p .mp4 file. The Z1 G2 tackled this in about 14 minutes compared with 37 minutes for the Mac Pro.

df_hpz1g2_appsPremiere Pro CC 2014 uses GPU acceleration and the superior performance of the NVIDIA K4100M card in the HP versus the ATI 5870 in the Mac Pro is likely the reason for this drastic difference. The render times were closer in After Effects, which makes less use of the GPU for effects processing. My 6-layer After Effects stress test was an 8-second composition consisting of six layers of 1080p ProRes clips from the Blackmagic Cinema Camera. I applied various Cycore and color correction effects and then moved them in 3D space with motion blur enabled. These were rendered out using the QuickTime Animation codec. Times for the Z1 G2 and Mac Pro were 6.5 minutes versus 8.5 minutes respectively.

My last test for the HP Z1 G2 involved Avid Media Composer. My 10-layer test sequence included nine PIP video tracks (using the 3D warp effect) over a full-screen background layer on V1. All media was Avid DNxHD175X (1080p, 10-bit, 23.976fps). No frames were dropped in the medium display quality, but in full quality frames started to drop at V6. When I added a drop shadow to the PIP clips, frames were dropped starting at V4 for full quality and V9 for medium quality.

Conclusion

The HP Z1 G2 is an outstanding workstation. Like any alternative form factor, you have to weigh the options of legacy support for older storage systems and PCIe cards. Thunderbolt addresses many of those concerns as an increasing number of adapters and expansion units hits the market. Those interested in shifting from Mac to Windows – and looking for the best in what the PC side has to offer – won’t go wrong with HP products. The company also maintains close ties to Avid and other software vendors, to make sure the engineering of their workstations matches the future needs of the software.

Whether an all-in-one is right for you comes down to individual needs and preferences. I was very happy with the overall ease of installation, operation and performance of the Z1 G2. By adding MacDrive, QuickTime and ProRes software and codecs, I could easily move files between the Z1 and my Mac. The screen is gorgeous, it’s very quiet and the heat output feels less than from my Mac tower. In these various tests, I never heard any fans kick into high. Whether you are upgrading from an older PC or switching platforms, the HP Z1 G2 is definitely worth considering.

Originally written for Digital Video magazine / CreativePlanetNetwork.

©2014 Oliver Peters

More Life for your Mac Pro

df_life_macproI work a lot with a local college’s film production technology program as an advisor, editing instructor and occasionally as an editor on some of their professional productions. It’s a unique program designed to teach hands-on, below-the-line filmmaking skills. The gear has to be current and competitive, because they frequently partner with outside producers to turn out actual (not student) products with a combination of professional and student crews. The department has five Mac Pros that are used for editing, which I’ve recently upgraded to current standards, as they get ready for a new incoming class. The process has given me some thoughts about how to get more life out of your aging Apple Mac Pro towers, which I’ll share here.

To upgrade or not

Most Apple fans drool at the new Mac Pro “tube” computers, but for many, such a purchase simply isn’t viable. Maybe it’s the cost or the need for existing peripherals or other concerns, but many editors are still opting to get as much life as possible out of their existing Mac Pro towers.

In the case of the department, four of the machines are fast 2010 quad-cores and the fifth is a late 2008 eight-core. As long as your machine is an Intel of late 2008 or newer vintage, then generally it’s upgradeable to the most current software. Early 2008 and older is really pushing it. Anything before 2009 probably shouldn’t be used as a primary workhorse system. At 2009, you are on the cusp of whether it’s worth upgrading or not. 2010 and newer would be definitely solid enough to get a few more productive years out of the machine.

The four 2010 Mac Pros are installed in rooms designated as cutting rooms. The 2008 Mac was actually set aside and largely unused, so it had the oldest configuration and software. I decided it needed an upgrade, too, although mainly as an overflow unit. This incoming class is larger than normal, so I felt that having a fifth machine might be useful, since it still could be upgraded.

Software

All five machines have largely been given the same complement of software, which means Mavericks (10.9.4) and various editing tools. The first trick is getting the OS updated, since the oldest machines were running on versions that cannot be updated via the Mac App Store. Secondly, this kind of update really works best when you do a clean install. To get the Mavericks installer, you have to download it to a machine that can access the App Store. Once you’ve done the download, but BEFORE you actually start the installation, quit out of the installer. This leaves you with the Install Mavericks application in your applications folder. This is a 4GB installer file that you can now copy to other drives.

In doing the updates, I found it best to move drives around in the drive bays, putting a blank drive in bay 1 and moving the existing boot drive to bay 2. Format the bay 1 drive and copy the Mavericks installer to it. Run the installer, but select the correct target drive, which should be your new, empty bay 1 drive and NOT the current boot drive that’s running. Once the installation is complete, set up a new user account and migrate your applications from the old boot drive to the new boot drive. I do this without the rest (no documents or preferences). Since these systems didn’t have purchased third-party plug-ins, there weren’t any authorization issues after the migration. My reason for migrating the existing apps was that some of the software, like volume-licensed versions of Microsoft Office and Apple Final Cut Studio were there and I didn’t want to track down the installers again from IT. Naturally before doing this I had already uninstalled junk, like old trial versions or other software a student might have installed in the past. Any needed documents had already been separately backed up.

Once I’m running 10.9.4 on the new boot drive, I access the App Store, sign in with the proper ID and install all the App Store purchases. Since the school has a new volume license for Adobe Creative Cloud, I also have an installer from IT to cover the Adobe apps. Once the software dance is done, my complement includes:

Apple Final Cut Pro Studio “legacy” (FCP 7, DVD Studio Pro, Cinema Tools, Soundtrack Pro, Compressor, Motion, Color)

Apple Final Cut Pro X  “new” applications and utilities (FCP X, Motion, Compressor, Xto7, 7toX, Sync-N-Link X, EDL-X, X2Pro)

Adobe Creative Cloud 2014 (Prelude, Premiere Pro, SpeedGrade, Adobe Media Encoder, Illustrator, Photoshop, After Effects, Audition)

Avid Media Composer and Sorenson Squeeze (2 machines only)

Blackmagic Design DaVinci Resolve 11

Miscellaneous applications (Titanium Toast, Handbrake, MPEG Streamclip, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Word, Excel, Redcine-X Pro)

Internal hard drives

All Mac Pro towers support four internal drives. Last year I had upgraded two of these machines with 500GB Crucial SSDs as their boot drive. While these are nice and fast, I opted to stick with spinning drives for everything else. The performance demand on these systems is not such that there’s really a major advantage over a good mechanical drive. For the most part, all machines now have four internal 1TB Western Digital Black 7200 RPM drives. The exceptions are the two machines with 500GB SSD boot drives and the 2008 Mac, which has two 500GB drives that it came supplied with.

After rearranging the drives, the configuration is: bay 1 – boot drive, bay 2 – “Media A”, bay 3 – “Media B” and bay 4 – Time Machine back-up. The Media A and B drives are used for project files, short term media storage and stock sound effects and music. When these systems were first purchased, I had configured the three drives in the 2, 3 and 4 slots as a single 3TB volume by RAIDing them as a RAID-0 software stripe. This was used as a common drive for media on each of the computers. However, over this last year, one of the machines appeared to have an underperforming drive within the stripe, which was causing all sorts of media problems on this machine. Since this posed the risk of potentially losing 3TB worth of media in the future on any of the Macs, I decided to rethink the approach and split all the drives back to single volumes. I replaced the underperforming drive and changed all the machines to this four volume configuration, without any internal stripes.

RAM and video cards

The 2010 machines originally came with ATI 5870 video cards and the 2008 an older NVIDIA card. In the course of the past year, one of the 5870 cards died and was replaced with a Sapphire 7950. In revitalizing the 2008 Mac, I decided to put one of the other 5870s into it and then replace it in the 2010 machine with another Sapphire. While the NVIDIA GTX 680 card is also a highly-regarded option, I decided to stick with the ATI/AMD card family for consistency throughout the units. One unit also includes a RED Rocket card for accelerated transcoding of RED .r3d files.

The 2010 machines have all been bumped up to 32GB of RAM (Crucial or Other Word Computing). The 2008 uses an earlier vintage of RAM and originally only had 2GB installed. The App Store won’t even let you download FCP X with 2GB. It’s been bumped up the 16GB, which will be more than enough for an overflow unit.

Of these cutting rooms, only one is designed as “higher end” and that’s where most of the professional projects are cut, when the department is directly involved in post. It includes Panasonic HD plasma and Sony SD CRT monitors that are fed by an AJA KONA LHi card. This room was originally configured as an Avid Xpress Meridien-based room back in the SD days, so there are also Digibeta, DVCAM and DAT decks. These still work fine, but are largely unused, as most of the workflow now is file-based (usually RED or Canon).

In order to run Resolve on any external monitor, you need a Blackmagic Design Decklink card. I had temporarily installed a loaner in place of the KONA, but it died, so the KONA went back in. Unfortunately with the KONA and FCP X, I cannot see video on both the Panasonic and Sony at the same time with 1080p/23.98 projects. That’s because of the limitations of what the Panasonic will accept over HDMI, coupled with the secondary processing options of the KONA. The HDMI signal wants P and not PsF and this results in the conflict. In the future, we’ll probably revisit the Decklink card issue, budget permitting, possibly moving the KONA to another bay.

All four 2010 units are equipped with two 27” Apple Cinema Displays, so the rooms without external monitoring simply use one of the screens to display a large viewer in most of the software. This is more than adequate in a small cutting room. The fifth 2008 Mac has dual 20” ACDs. Although my personal preference is to work with something smaller that dual 27” screens – as the lateral distance is too great – a lot of the modern software feels very crowded on smaller screens, such as the 20” ACDs. This is especially true of Resolve 11, which feels best with two 27” screens. Personally I would have opted for dual 23” or 24” HPs or Dells, but these systems were all purchased this way and there’s no real reason to change.

External storage

Storage on these units has always been local, so in addition to the internal drives, they are also equipped with external storage. Typically users are encouraged to supply their own external drives for short edits, but storage is made available for extended projects. The main room is equipped with a large MAXX Digital array connected via an ATTO card. All four 2010 rooms each gained a LaCie 4Big 12TB array last year. These were connected on one of the FireWire 800 ports and initially configured as RAID-1 (mirror), so only half the capacity was available.

This year I reconfigured/reformatted them as RAID-5, which nets a bit over 8TB of actual capacity. To increase the data throughput, I also added CalDigit FASTA-6GU3 cards to each. This is a PCIe combo host adapter card that provides two USB 3.0 and two SATA ports. By connecting the LaCie to each of the Macs via USB 3.0, it improves the read/write speeds compared to FireWire 800. While it’s not as fast Thunderbolt or even the MAXX array, the LaCies on USB 3.0 easily handle ProRes 1080p files and even limited use of native RED files within projects.

Other

A few other enhancements were made to round out the rooms as cutting bays. First audio. The main room uses the KONA’s analog audio outputs routed through a small Mackie mixer to supply volume to the speakers. To provide similar capabilities in the other rooms, I added a PreSonus AudioBox USB audio interface and a small Mackie mixer to each. The speakers are a mix of Behringer Truth, KRK Rokit 5 and Rokit 6 powered speaker pairs, mounted on speaker pedestals behind the Apple Cinema Displays. Signal flow is from the computer to the AudioBox via USB (or KONA in one room), the channel 1 and 2 analog outputs from the AudioBox (or KONA) into the Mackie and then the main mixer outputs to the left and right speakers. In this way, the master fader volume on the mixer is essentially the volume control for the system. This is used mainly for monitoring, but this combination does allow the connection of a microphone for input back into the Mac for scratch recordings. Of course, having a small mixer also lets you plug in another device just to preview audio.

The fifth Mac Pro isn’t installed in a room that’s designated as a cutting room, so it simply got the repurposed Roland powered near field speakers from an older Avid system. These were connected directly to the computer output.

Last, but not least, it’s the little things. When I started this upgrade round, one of the machines was considered a basket case, because it froze a lot and, therefore, was generally not used. That turned out to simply be a bad Apple Magic Mouse. The mouse would mess up, leaving the cursor frozen. Users assumed the Mac had frozen up, when in fact, it was fine. To fix this and any other potential future mouse issues, I dumped all the Apple Bluetooth mice and replaced them with Logitech wireless mice. Much better feel and the problem was solved!

©2014 Oliver Peters

Apple’s New Mac Pro

df_mp2013_4_smThe run of the brushed aluminum tower design that highlighted Apple’s PowerMac G5 and Intel Mac Pros ended with the introduction of a radical replacement in late 2013. No matter what the nickname – “the cylinder”, “the tube” or whatever – Apple’s new 2013 Mac Pro is a tour de force of industrial design. Few products have had such pent up demand. The long lead times for custom machines originally ran months, but by now, with accelerated production, has been reduced to 24 hours. Nevertheless, if you are happy with a stock configuration, then it’s possible to walk out with a new unit on the same day at some of the Apple Store or reseller retail locations.

Design

The 2013 Mac Pro features a cylindrical design. It’s about ten inches tall, six-and-a-half inches in diameter and, thanks to a very dense component construction, weighs about eleven pounds. The outer shell – it’s actually a sleeve that can be unlocked and lifted off – uses a dark (not black) reflective coating. Internally, the circuits are mounted onto a triangle-shaped core. There’s a central vent system that draws air in through the bottom and out through the top, much like a chimney. You can still mount the Mac Pro sideways without issue, as long as the vents are not blocked. This design keeps the unit quiet and cool most of the time. During my tests, the fan noise was quieter than my tower (generally a pretty quiet unit) and the fans never kicked into high.

Despite the small size, all components are workstation class and not mobile or desktop products, as used in the Apple laptops or iMacs. It employs the fastest memory and storage of any Mac and is designed to pick up where the top-of-the-line iMac leaves off. The processors are Intel Xeon instead of Core i5 or Core i7 CPUs and graphics cards are AMD FirePro GPUs. This Xeon model is a multicore, single CPU chip. Four processor options are offered (4, 6, 8 and 12-core), ranging in speed from 3.7GHz (4-core) to 2.7GHz (12-core). RAM can be maxed out to a full 64GB. It is the only component of the Mac Pro where a user-installed, third-party upgrade is an easy option.

The Mac Pro is optimized for dual graphics processors with three GPU choices: D300 (2GB VRAM each), D500 (3GB VRAM each) or D700 (6GB VRAM each) GPUs. Internal storage is PCIe-based flash memory in 256GB, 512GB or 1TB configurations. These are not solid state drives (SSDs), but rather flash storage like that used in the iPads. Storage is connected directly to the PCIe bus of the Mac Pro for the fastest possible data i/o. The stock models start at $2,999 (4-core) and $3,999 (6-core).

Apple shipped me a reviewer’s unit,  configured in a way that they feel is the “sweet spot” for high-end video. My Mac Pro was the 8-core model, with 32GB of RAM, dual D700 GPUs and 512GB of storage. This configuration with a keyboard, mouse and AppleCare extended warranty would retail at $7,166.

Connectivity

df_mp2013_5_smAll connectors are on the back – four USB 3.0, six Thunderbolt 2, two Gigabit Ethernet and one HDMI 1.4. There is also wireless, Bluetooth, headset and speaker support. The six Thunderbolt 2 ports are split out from three internal Thunderbolt 2 buses, with the bottom bus also taking care of the HDMI port.

You can have multiple Thunderbolt monitors connected, as well as a 4K display via the HDMI spigot, however you will want to separate these onto the different buses. For example, you wouldn’t be able to support two 27” Apple displays and a 4K HDMI-connected monitor all on one single Thunderbolt bus. However, you can support up to six non-4K displays if you distribute the load across all of the connections. Since the plug for Thunderbolt is the same as Mini Display Port, you can connect nearly any standard computer monitor to these ports if you have the proper plug. For example, I used my 20” Apple Cinema Display, which has a DVI plug, by simply adding a DVI-to-MDP adapter.

The change to Thunderbolt 2 enables faster throughput. The first version of Thunderbolt used two channels of 10Gb/s data and video, with each channel going in opposite directions. Thunderbolt 2 combines this for two channels going in the same direction, thus a total of 20Gb/s. You can daisy-chain Thunderbolt devices and it is possible to combine Thunderbolt 1 and Thunderbolt 2 devices in the same chain. First generation Thunderbolt devices (such as monitors) should be at the end of the chain, so as not to create a bottleneck.

The USB 3.0 ports will support USB 1.0 and 2.0 devices, but of course, there is no increase in their speed. There is no legacy support for FireWire or eSATA, so if you want to connect older drives, you’ll need to invest in additional docks, adapters and/or expansion units. (Apple sells a $29 Thunderbolt-to-FireWire 800 adapter.) This might also include a USB hub. For example, I have more than four USB-connected devices on my current 2009 Mac Pro. The benefit of standardizing on Thunderbolt, is that all of the Thunderbolt peripherals will work with any of Apple’s other computers, including MacBook Pros, Minis and iMacs.

The tougher dilemma is if you need to accommodate current PCIe cards, such as a RED Rocket accelerator card, a FibreChannel adapter or a mini-SAS/eSATA card. In that case, a Thunderbolt 2 expansion unit will be required. One such solution is the Sonnet Technologies Echo Express III-D expansion chassis.

Mac Pro as your main edit system

df_mp2013_2_smI work in many facilities with various vintages of Mac Pro towers. There’s a wide range of connectivity needs, including drives, shared storage and peripherals. Although it’s very sexy to think about just a 2013 Mac Pro sitting on your desk with nothing else, other than a Thunderbolt monitor, that’s not the real world of post. If you are evaluating one of these as your next investment, consider what you must add. First and foremost is storage. Flash storage and SSDs are great for performance, but you’re never going to put a lot of video media on a 1TB (or smaller) drive. Then you’ll need monitors and most likely adapters or expansion products for any legacy connection.

I priced out the same unit I’m reviewing and then factored in an Apple 27” display, the Sharp 32” UHD monitor, a Promise Pegasus2 R6 12TB RAID, plus a few other peripherals, like speakers, audio i/o, docks and adapters. This bumps the total to over $15K. Granted, I’ve pretty much got a full system that will last me for years. The point is, that it’s important to look at all the ramifications when you compare the new Mac Pro over a loaded iMac or a MacBook Pro or simply upgrading a recently-purchased Mac Pro tower.

Real world performance

df_mp2013_6_smMost of the tests promoting the new Mac Pro have focused on 4K video editing. That’s coming and the system is certainly good for it, but that’s not what most people encounter today. Editors deal with a mix of media, formats, frame rates, frame sizes, etc. I ran a set of identical tests on the 2013 Mac Pro and on my own 2009 Mac Pro tower. That’s an eight-core (dual 4-core Xeons) 2.26GHz model with 28GB of RAM. The current video card is a single NVIDIA Quadro 4000 and my media is on an internal two-drive (7200RPM eSATA) RAID-0 array. Since I had no external drives connected to the 2013 Mac Pro, all media was playing from and writing to the internal flash storage. This means that performance would be about as good as you can get, but possibly better than with externally-connected drives.

I tested Apple Final Cut Pro X, Motion, Compressor, Adobe Premiere Pro CC and After Effects CC. Media included RED EPIC 5K camera raw, ARRI ALEXA 1080p ProRes 4444, Blackmagic Cinema Camera 2.5K ProResHQ and more. Most of the sequences included built-in effects and some of the new Red Giant Universe filters.

df_mp2013_3_smTo summarize the test results, performance – as measured in render or export times – was significantly better on the 2013 Mac Pro. Most of the tests showed a 2X to 3X bump in performance, even with the Adobe products. Naturally FCP X loves the GPU power of this machine. The “BruceX” test, developed as a benchmark by Alex Gollner for FCP X, consists of a 5K timeline with a series of generators. I exported this as a 5K ProRes 4444 file. The older tower accomplished this in 1:47, while the new Mac Pro smoked it in just :19. My After Effects timeline consisted of ProRes 4444 clips with a bunch of intensive Cycore filters. The old versus new renders were 23:26 and 12:53, respectively.  I also ran tests with DaVinci Resolve 10, another application that loves more than one GPU. These were RED EPIC 5K files in a 1080p timeline. Debayer resolution was set to full (no RED Rocket card used). The export times ran at 4-12fps (depending on the clip) on the tower versus 15-40fps on the new Mac Pro.

df_mp2013_1_smIn general, all operations with applications were more responsive. This is, of course, true with any solid state storage. The computer boots faster and applications load and respond more quickly. Plus, more RAM, faster processors and other factors all help to optimize the 2013 Mac Pro for best performance. For example, the interaction between Adobe Premiere Pro CC and SpeedGrade CC using the Direct Link and Lumetri filters was noticeably better with the new machine. Certainly that’s true of Final Cut Pro X and Motion, which are ideally suited for it. I would add that using a single 20” monitor connected to the Mac Pro placed very little drag on one GPU, so the second could be totally devoted to processing power. Performance might vary if I had two 27” displays, plus a 4K monitor hooked to it.

I also tested Avid Media Composer. This software doesn’t particularly use a lot of GPU processing, so performance was about the same as with my 2009 Mac Pro. It also takes a trick to get it to work. The 2013 Mac Pro has no built-in audio device, which Media Composer needs to see in order to launch. If you have an audio device connected, such as an Mbox2 Mini or even just a headset with a microphone, then Media Composer detects a core audio device and will launch. I downloaded and installed the free Soundflower software. This acts as a virtual core audio device and can be set as the computer’s audio input in the System Preferences sound panel. Doing so enabled Media Composer to launch and operate normally.

Whether the new 2013 Mac Pro is the ideal tower replacement for you comes down to budget and many other variables. Rest assured that it’s the best machine Apple has to offer today. Analogies to powerful small packages (like the Mini Cooper or Bruce Lee) are quite apt. The build quality is superb and the performance is outstanding. If you are looking for a machine to service your needs for the next five years, then it’s the ideal choice.

(Note: This unit was tested prior to the release of 10.9.3, so I didn’t encounter any of the render issues that have been plaguing Adobe and DaVinci users.)

Originally written for Digital Video magazine/CreativePlanetNetwork.

©2014 Oliver Peters

Final Cut “Studio 2014”

df_fcpstudio_main

A few years ago I wrote some posts about Final Cut Pro as a platform and designing an FCP-centric facility. Those options have largely been replaced by an Adobe approach built around Creative Cloud. Not everyone has warmed up to Creative Cloud. Either they don’t like the software or they dislike the software rental model or they just don’t need much of the power offered by the various Adobe applications.

If you are looking for alternatives to a Creative Cloud-based production toolkit, then it’s easy to build your own combination with some very inexpensive solutions. Most of these are either Apple software or others that are sold through the Mac App Store. As with all App Store purchases, you buy the product once and get updates for free, so long as the product is still sold as the same. Individual users may install the apps onto as many Mac computers as they personally own and control, all for the one purchase price. With this in mind, it’s very easy for most editors to create a powerful bundle that’s equal to or better than the old Final Cut Studio bundle – at less than its full retail price back in the day.

The one caveat to all of this is how entrenched you may or may not be with Adobe products. If you need to open and alter complex Illustrator, Photoshop, After Effects or Premiere Pro project files, then you will absolutely need Adobe software to do it. In that case, maybe you can get by with an old version (CS6 or earlier) or maybe trial software will work. Lastly you could outsource to a colleague with Adobe software or simply pick up a Creative Cloud subscription on a month-by-month rental. On the other hand, if you don’t absolutely need to interact with Adobe project files, then these solutions may be all you need. I’m not trying to advocate for one over the other, but rather to add some ideas to think about.

Final Cut Pro X / Motion / Compressor

df_fcpstudio_fcpx_smThe last Final Cut Studio bundle included FCP 7, Motion, Compressor, Cinema Tools, DVD Studio Pro, Soundtrack Pro and Color. The current Apple video tools of Final Cut Pro X, Motion and Compressor cover all of the video bases, including editing, compositing, encoding, transcoding and disc burning. The latter may be a bone of contention for many – since Apple has largely walked away from the optical disc world. Nevertheless, simple one-off DVDs and Blu-ray discs can still be created straight from FCP X or Compressor. Of course, FCP X has been a mixed bag for editors, with many evangelists and haters on all sides. If you square off Premiere Pro against Final Cut Pro X, then it really boils down to tracks versus trackless. Both tools get the job done. Which one do you prefer?

df_fcpstudio_motion_smMotion versus After Effects is a tougher call. If you are a power user of After Effects, then Motion may seem foreign and hard to use. If the focus is primarily on motion graphics, then you can certainly get the results you want in either. There is no direct “send to” from FCP X to Motion, but on the plus side, you can create effects and graphics templates using Motion that will appear and function within FCP X. Just like with After Effects, you can also buy stock Motion templates for graphics, show opens and other types of design themes and animations.

Logic Pro X

df_fcpstudio_lpx_smLogic Pro X is the DAW in our package. It becomes the replacement for Soundtrack Pro and the alternative to Adobe Audition or Avid Pro Tools. It’s a powerful music creation tool, but more importantly for editors, it’s a strong single file and multitrack audio production and post production application. You can get FCP X files to it via FCPXML or AAF (converted using X2Pro). There are a ton of plug-ins and mixing features that make Logic a solid DAW. I won’t dive deeply into this, but suffice it to say, that if your main interest in using Logic is to produce a better mix, then you can learn the essentials quickly and get up and running in short order.

DaVinci Resolve

df_fcpstudio_resolve_smEvery decent studio bundle needs a powerful color correction tool. Apple Color is gone, but Blackmagic Design’s DaVinci Resolve is a best-of-breed replacement. You can get the free Resolve Lite version through the App Store, as well as Blackmagic’s website. It does most of everything you need, so there’s little reason to buy the paid version for most editors who do some color correction.

Resolve 11 (due out soon) adds improved editing. There is a solid synergy with FCP X, making it not only a good companion color corrector, but also a finishing editorial tool. OFX plug-ins are supported, which adds a choice of industry standard creative effects if you need more than FCP X or Motion offer.

Pixelmator / Aperture

df_fcpstudio_pixelmator_smThis one’s tough. Of all the Adobe applications, Photoshop and Illustrator are hardest to replace. There are no perfect alternatives. On the other hand, most editors don’t need all that power. If direct feature compatibility isn’t a need, then you’ve got some choices. One of these is Pixelmator, a very lightweight image manipulation tool. It’s a little like Photoshop in the version 4-7 stages, with a mix of Illustrator tossed in. There are vector drawing and design tools and it’s optimized for core image, complete with a nice set of image filters. However, it does not include some of Photoshop CC’s power user features, like smart objects, smart filters, 3D, layer groups and video manipulation. But, if you just need to doctor some images, extract or modify logos or translate various image formats, Pixelmator might be the perfect fit. For more sophistication, another choice (not in the App Store) is Corel’s Painter, as well as Adobe Photoshop Elements (also available at the App Store).

df_fcpstudio_aperture_smAlthough Final Cut Studio never included a photo application, the Creative Cloud does include Lightroom. Since the beginning, Apple’s Aperture and Adobe’s Lightroom have been leapfrogging each other with features. Aperture hasn’t changed much in a few years and is likely the next pro app to get the “X” treatment from Apple’s engineers. Photographers have the same type of “Chevy vs. Ford” arguments about Aperture and Lightroom as editors do about NLEs. Nevertheless, editors deal a lot with supplied images and Aperture is a great tool to use for organization, clean up and image manipulation.

Other

The list I’ve outlined creates a nice set of tools, but if you need to interchange with other pros using a variety of different software, then you’ll need to invest in some “glue”. There are a number of utilities designed to go to and from FCP X. Many are available through the App Store. Examples include Xto7, 7toX, EDL-X, X2Pro, Shot Notes X, Lumberjack and many others.

For a freewheeling discussion about this topic and other matters, check out my conversation with Chris Fenwick at FCPX Grille.

©2014 Oliver Peters

Thinking about the Tube

df_mp_1Desktop computers had been on a trajectory of faster performance based on Moore’s Law until they hit the wall just under the 4GHz mark. Then came a variety of ingenious technological workarounds, including hyper-threading, multiple processors (CPUs), multiple cores within a single processor and finally, offloading processing to one or more graphics display cards (GPUs). All of these solutions have benefitted content creation professionals running edit and graphics software. With all of that effort, no one seems to have taken the effort to re-imagine how the hardware should work, nor whether the hardware is really built for what software developers are doing. For example, few applications really make effective use of multiple CPUs in a computer.

Add to this the financial aspect, which points to the growth in laptops and tablets to the detriment of traditional desktop computer sales. Is there even a need for a desktop machine that caters to professional users? Into this uncertainty comes Apple with the new Mac Pro, which I’ve euphemistically called “the Tube” in my title. df_mp_6Apple is the king of re-imagining. After months and years of wondering whether Apple still cares about professional computer users, they blew away the audience at their annual Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) with an innovative new design for the next generation of Mac Pro desktop workstation. Like anything Apple does, a lot of legacy technology was dropped, which has drawn both praise and criticism. Those of us in the camp that predicted few or no slots and more use of Thunderbolt had largely guessed right. But the rest of this machine’s design is literally thinking “outside of the box”.df_mp_2

Right or wrong, the Mac Pro that Apple plans to ship represents design and engineering innovation that IBM, Lenovo, Sony, Dell, HP and others are clearly incapable of delivering. All of their products tend to follow the standard PC “box” formula, with the notable exception of HP’s Z1 – itself a copy of Apple’s iMac. Naturally the round design raises concerns about rack installation and so on, but very few desktop systems used by video pros have that need anymore. If you think round is odd, then take a look at the design of supercomputers like those from Cray.

df_mp_11The new Mac Pro is clearly intended to put the maximum horsepower literally on (or under) the desk of the working video editor, graphic designer, animator, scientist and others. As noted above, many applications don’t make efficient use of multiple CPU sockets, so the Mac Pro seems to be limited to a single CPU, but based on new Intel chips that have a maximum of 12 internal cores. Apple is banking on increased reliance on the GPU to deliver visual performance. Out of the gate, there are two built-in GPUs. Clearly this will benefit core Apple creative software, like Final Cut Pro X, but also others, including DaVinci Resolve and many of the Adobe products.

df_mp_3Look more closely at the video subsystem of this machine. Apple is designing a machine geared for 4K production and post. With multiple GPUs and built-in HDMI output using the 4K-ready spec, the new Mac Pro should be able to cut 4K content “like butter” and handle all monitoring tasks (computer monitoring plus video) without the need for external devices from AJA, Blackmagic Design and others, unless the user has a definite need for these. My guess is that’s why you’ll have the extra GPU horsepower, more so than accelerating FCP X effects.df_mp_5

Connectivity is now based on USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt 2.0. The latter is a 20Gb/s bi-directional data pipe and this Mac Pro has three such busses split over six ports. While there’s been a lot of discussion on the web about whether this is adequate compared with the current PCIe standard, I think it’s too early to say one way or the other. Firewire – once Apple’s darling – has been relegated to history’s dust bin, right next to SCSI, floppy diskettes and other older technologies. In any case, if you need more connections, then Thunderbolt adapters and/or an expansion chassis will be the way to go. Just like Apple’s philosophy with FCP X, this new Mac Pro is more of a “platform” than an all-inclusive solution for people who have every possible type of need. It’s the “hub” that will handle the majority of pro requirements and if you need more, you’ll have to augment the “hub” with third-party products and devices.

df_mp_9That brings us to cost. The internal pieces of this machine aren’t cheap. It’s anyone’s guess what the price will be. There is at least the potential for it to be relatively expensive. On the other hand, Apple has a lot of leverage with its supply chain and may have incentive to offer the machine at an artificially low price. They will be flying the “Made in the USA” banner with this Mac Pro and they also have added more in-house R&D centers across the US. So, in coming years, more of the internal guts could become Apple-manufactured, which could reduce production cost. My guess is that the retail price will be somewhere in line with current Mac Pro machines. After all, a fully-decked-out, current 12-core Mac Pro aluminum tower isn’t cheap either.df_mp_7

In any case, this will be a very low-volume machine. It’s the sports car that defines the brand. Apple may or may not decide to make it profitable. Another variable we don’t know is whether the technology used, such as dual internal GPUs, will be integrated into new iMac models. In that case, a small number of users will actually buy the Mac Pro. Many will drool over it and then end up buying a decked out iMac – no slouch, by any means. df_mp_4Thus, the “halo” effect. You’re attracted by the shiny, black Mac Pro, but purchase the iMac, which generates more bread-and-butter income for Apple. Unlike any other technology company, Apple assesses its bottom line using a holistic approach. If a product contributes to the total revenue of the company, then it’s deemed important to have and to develop, even if that product by itself is not profitable (though, that’s usually not the case with an Apple product). No one outside of Apple’s executive level really knows for sure.

As a video editor, I love what Apple is doing with this machine. Does it work for my needs and will I buy one? I don’t know yet. Depends on price and actual performance, but it’s certainly on the wish list at this point.

©2013 Oliver Peters

Edit suite floor plans

df_editfloor_main

My past articles on edit suite and facility design have focused on equipment and construction tips. For my last post of 2012, I’ll take a look at some layouts that might play into designing your next editing man (or woman) cave. In the linear days, suites used to follow the “bridge of the Enterprise” philosophy, with lots of lights, buttons, knobs, scopes and screens. Newer bays, centered around the nonlinear software world, are more homey and technologically minimalist. Here are six designs that might offer some inspiration.

These floor plans and renderings were generated in Autodesk Homestyler, a free, web-based, interior design application. You’ll have to excuse the fact that Homestyler is limited to generic sprites for furnishings, so I’ve used office desks for consoles and laptops for the editor’s station. Nevertheless, I think you’ll get the idea without too much imagining. (Click on the images for an expanded view.)

df_editfloor_1_sm

Edit Suite Design 1

In most of my sessions, it’s a rarity for the client to supervise the entire process. When they do show up, it’s to review and offer notes, but typically no more than an hour or two at a time. This layout is based on placing the editor at the front of the room, with clients in a comfortable, living room-style seating area towards the back. All are viewing the same centered screen on the front wall. There’s a work space to the side for printers, coffee service and writing.

df_editfloor_2_sm

Edit Suite Design 2

The second room is similar to the first, except that here, a producer’s desk replaces the sofa. This layout works in a smaller space, but is designed for projects where the client/producer is an active part of the editing session. So, the desk, rather than a sofa, is more appropriate.

df_editfloor_3_sm

Edit Suite Design 3

One alternative approach is to move the client seating area into the front of the room with the editor behind them. All face forward towards the same central screen. This layout works best when the editor’s station is elevated or the seating area is lower in a pit-like portion of the room. (I couldn’t figure out how to show that in the software.) I first saw this idea at Videotape Associates (Atlanta) years ago and the idea stuck. You could further theme the room with such touches as a fireplace and other living room accessories.

This layout works well for facilities that do a lot of ad agency work. The clients are there for the whole session, but not actively involved in everything the editor is doing. They have their own space and then can focus on a cut when the editor is ready for them to do so.

df_editfloor_4_sm

Edit Suite Design 4

This is similar to Design 3, except that the client seating is central, with the editor turned 90-degree to the side of the room. I’ve seen this layout a few times in film editing environments. The seating area functions as a mini-screening room for the director. Of course, the editor has to turn to view the screen. Most of the time during actual editing, the editor is watching the desktop monitors anyway, so this really isn’t much of a problem.

df_editfloor_5_sm

Edit Suite Design 5

This room combines space for an actively involved producer with additional client seating in the rear. All face forward, but the editor and producer work side-by-side on an angled console. This provides working space for the producer without encroaching into the editor’s space. By angling the console, you also encourage more face-to-face communication. There’s no need for the editor to constantly turn around to get input nor for the producer to have to watch the back of someone’s head.

In addition, I’ve designed the floor plan with non-parallel walls. This adds a design touch, as well as provides for a better audio monitoring environment.

df_editfloor_6_sm

Edit Suite Design 6

The last variation is an idea originally popularized by Optimus (Chicago). Back in the linear edit days, their suites featured consoles where the editor and producer sat on opposite sides for direct, face-to-face communication. Each had their own set of monitors, so it was possible for the producer to see what an editor might be referring to.

This floor plan is a take-off on that idea, with a larger seating area in the back. The screen is at the front – in the line-of-sight for the seated clients – but at 90-degrees for the editor and producer.

©2012 Oliver Peters