Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Am I a fool for Apple?

Steve Sherrick said:
Once again, I think it's important to remember that there are many approaches to post production which have to do with the type of content you are producing, who you are producing it for, how fast you need to turn it around, etc. There are many markets, many genres, etc. Are you a one-man-band, a large post facility, something in between? These all factor into what tools are necessary. There are still a lot of facilities using classic Mac Pros. How? Their workflows are such that they don't need to attempt to work with 6K+ files at every stage. They use proxies, they use custom in-house asset management, etc. Whereas you may have a one-man-band who wants to work at 6K or as close to it as they can and want state of the art tech to make that possible. So, for all of us Mac lovers, we have to ask ourselves, where do we fall in all of this? Because editing is editing. I can still get things done on my 2007 Macbook Pro running an old version of Avid or FCP 7. Obviously, that would involve a proxy workflow but the point is, I could still get things done it would just require more work on the front end to have those files prepared for that workflow. On my iMac, 6K footage does choke it if I'm looking to work at hi res, but I can dumb it down by choosing to run FCPX or Premiere at lower resolution playback or in Avid transcoding to something easy to edit with such as DNxHD36.

I know many have become accustomed to the instantaneous access of footage in some of the NLEs. If you can start cutting right away, at full res why would you want to do anything else? Well, there are plenty of reasons why, but for some those reasons may outweigh the negatives.

So, while I'll also complain about Apple's lack of offering a timeline for their plans, I'd also say that there's a tool out there for everyone now. People have cut films on far less than a nMP and won many awards doing so. I say get the best machine you can comfortably afford and make the most money you can until you absolutely need to upgrade. If Macs no longer make sense for your business model, move on to PC or Linux.

As for FCPX, I have enjoyed using it on several projects this year. My current thinking, as I just finished color correction on a PBS show and dealing with Premiere Pro is that we will have to become multilingual when it comes to computer platforms, NLEs, etc. I've been forcing myself to work in all of them (ok, most of them) to deal with the fact that I may need to work on Macs or PCs and projects may come in from a variety of NLEs or I may be asked to edit in a certain NLE for a particular reason. Therefore, I believe there is no clear cut winner here. That goes for Mac vs PC, Avid vs FCPX vs Premiere vs Resolve. They all have strengths and weaknesses and the key is to identify those and use to your advantage. That is why it is great to have really smart people on this forum like Mike Most, Jeff Kilgroe, and many others who can share their experiences and help us make more informed decisions.
Click to expand...


I think the frustration comes from the fact that some of us got pretty used to OSX and the combo of apps that run on it. I used to have a Rack onyx II as my workstation, a beefy macpro on one side and a beafy PC on the other. And I for one do not want to go back to such setup. But for Flame users it seams like the only option to move forward now is to leave osx and go back to Linux again and I just hate it. Simply I want to be able to skype, use creative cloud and all the other shit I´m used to and run flame, all on the same computer.

What I dont understand is why there is no serious hackingtosh option like some company that simply builds a substitute. I want a box with 6 1080ti cards, Thunderbolt 2 and 3 ports, lot of PCI lanes, nuts amount of processing power and ram and most of all somebody that can give some sort of guarantee it actually works and yes it needs to run OSX. If that was a thing I would be willing to pay Ferrari amount of money for such machine and I think I´m not alone in that situation so I can not understand what apple is doing. Why on earth do they not let a small team of engineers focus on building "super computers" again. Sure they make more money on selling ihpones but one thing does not take from the other. And to me and I think also to many others the whole apple thing falls flat if they don´t have a godo workstation.
 
Is this thread an Apple Fool's joke? '-)
 
FrankMcPartland said:
I can play 6K on my trashcan --However, I have read that FCPX won't let you play 8K yet....

I am naively hoping for "good" Apple news at NAB (or at least some "crumbs of hope")
Click to expand...

Mine plays 8K just fine.
 
Adam Rook said:
I want down and dirty opinions here. Am I a fool for holding out hope for Apple?

I know this has been discussed before but honestly is it time to jump ship or am I just foolish to hope that Apple will return to the professional market and stop insulting us with inferior tech at premium prices? It's the OS that I like and I'm a FCPX guy so I've invested heavily in that workflow. Plus I just like that workflow but man when 5K r3d files won't play in real-time and FCPX crashes any time I zoom in on my timeline it's beginning to get ridiculous. Especially when you consider you can buy a blazing fast PC that out-specs MacBook Pros and trashcan Macs at every turn for less cost.

Is the writing on the wall and I just need to accept it? Apple has abandoned the very group that brought it back from extinction many years ago.
Click to expand...

If you're crashing FCPX. Check my article on fixing corruptions: http://www.girafxmedia.com/?p=315

FCPX is rock solid, so if you're having issues, that can be easily fixed.
 
Bob Gundu said:
Something is up if you can't play 5K files on FCPX. My trashcan works just fine.
Click to expand...

Thanks for all the feedback guys!

Hey Bob I discovered a couple things. I have two of the original Thunderbolt displays (TB1). When I have both displays running at the same time i cannot get real-time 5K playback. However if I run just 1 display I can (mostly). My thinking is since TB1 is maxed at 10Gb/s this may be where the bottleneck lies. I'm about to upgrade my displays to something with at least Thunderbolt 2 connectivity. Hopefully then I can have two displays again and have enough bandwidth to playback 5K in real-time.
 
Adam Rook said:
Thanks for all the feedback guys!

Hey Bob I discovered a couple things. I have two of the original Thunderbolt displays (TB1). When I have both displays running at the same time i cannot get real-time 5K playback. However if I run just 1 display I can (mostly). My thinking is since TB1 is maxed at 10Gb/s this may be where the bottleneck lies. I'm about to upgrade my displays to something with at least Thunderbolt 2 connectivity. Hopefully then I can have two displays again and have enough bandwidth to playback 5K in real-time.
Click to expand...

Cool. And I assume you are playing back with the performance setting vs. Quality?
 
But where is the 30/32 inch IMac that was going to be OLED TV and lay down touch. That would be big enough to house enough power to complete with the Mac Pro.

They are talking about late year, too far away. Whatever they do hey have to be able to handle a full 8kp60 16 bit raw workflow real time. This may mean dual GPU and CPU replaceable by the user. A 32 inch IMac would allow this with a removable back.
 
Sergio Perez said:
There's hope, everyone. Jarred also shared this on his facebook. Worth a read. An almost unprecedented move by Apple so I think we can rest assured of their commitment here.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/04/apple-pushes-the-reset-button-on-the-mac-pro/
Click to expand...

read the whole thing. incredibly informative! it's amazing to hear Apple admit they were wrong (well, partially) but that they're gonna try to make it up to pro users. i totally respect that. but if you're looking for something amazing to happen asap, the new changes won't be happening till at least 2018...
 
Wayne Morellini said:
But where is the 30/32 inch IMac that was going to be OLED TV and lay down touch.
Click to expand...

There was never going to be anything like that.

Wayne Morellini said:
Whatever they do hey have to be able to handle a full 8kp60 16 bit raw workflow real time.
Click to expand...

They obviously don't need to provide that.

Wayne Morellini said:
A 32 inch IMac would allow this with a removable back.
Click to expand...

They will never build that.



Sorry Wayne, with all due respect and 'understanding' and all that… but those posts…

I'm glad I got that out of my system.
 
Thanks. Are you psychic. Did you see Apples patents or read about there plans before they decided OLED wasn't good enough, of touch, or big computers.... Obviously some very talented people were looking into doing this. Dream big, well you don't have to dream, just follow the news of what the actually had planned over the last 10 years.

Besides, the term dreaming is not the best word, it often is used derogatorily by people that can't figure something out themselves, hence it is a dream for them to try to themselves.

Another one for the quote book. Skeptics are therefore potentially big dreamers, especially if they don't keep there negativity to themselves. However, I'm not applying that to you, I don't think I have seen you do that.
 
So, anyway. If Apple is listening to e community, there you go. Plenty of good stuff in these threads. If they are going to offer an extra fast iMac and new extra beaut display (8k is the way to go for prime photographic, ad, desktop pub and cad markets, let alone 8k footage, and the technology, although out now from OEM suppliers, is rather old, but those none video people need 65 inch for detail work, let alone 32 inch above the small 27 inch. You don't get the big impression on a small screen that real life big objects give viewed more than 6 or 15 feet above? There is a reason "experts" specify 120 - 200 inches for personal viewing standards. 60+ Ines is the minimum compromise size. 27 inch, give us a break. Let's see how many major directors and executives say get the picture to the viewing room so we can view the finale product on the 4 or 27 inch screen, it is usually a lot bigger than that.

So, if Apple wants to go the pro iMac, it should be as I described, with at least 30 inches, toe t toe with the z1.
 
justin ahlmann said:
read the whole thing. incredibly informative! it's amazing to hear Apple admit they were wrong (well, partially) but that they're gonna try to make it up to pro users. i totally respect that. but if you're looking for something amazing to happen asap, the new changes won't be happening till at least 2018...
Click to expand...


Better start saving now.




https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda


http://theconversation.com/the-mani...rnays-and-the-birth-of-public-relations-44393


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_warfare
 
What we do need to to know about now is what the beefier IMac they referred to is going to be like. It is buyable this year by this year by the look of it, and the Imac design should be able to take similar performance to the old trashcan. New integrated and packages and gpu's, such as the exascale 200 watt chiplet blocks (please a mini with this), offer a good compact start towards this. Plus L.Langer in testing put advanced workstations using nvlink to bypass the CPU, reported he was seeing comfortable 8k 90fps (whatever that means in regard to a full workflow). This is the sort of of improvement that should be available to Apple, and AMD also. So, even passing the current trashcan might be possible on a beefier Mac, even matching a dual 1080ti PC. We will have to see what they have up their sleeves, but like what they did with Intel originally, Apple is open to getting the most advanced technology first.
 
Friend just told me yesterday Apple said new Mac Pro next year, redesign from the trash can, Apple admitted they f'd up w the Mac Pro and gfx cards
 
Cupertino has the means, expertise, heritage, customer base...now it depends if there is sufficient will and wisdom to ditch the corporate arrogance, PR BS and actually listen.

Modular workstation is a logical path.
Let's see if vision and reason come back to brand behind the bitten apple logo.
 
32 is the new 27, though I would expect a Pro iMac to stay at 27, simply because it is SOP to have multiple products sharing chassis designs and parts and that's how Apple operates. 27 is also the size at which Apple can source a variety of high-resolution (WQHD/4K/5K) displays from multiple sources, giving them an easier product to build/ship in quantity and price than a high-end model that uses parts that can only be bought from a few sources. If I had any say, it would be 32-inches, with choice of a 4K or 5K panel, but I want certain things that are not going to be sensible from a business standpoint and that size only allows limited suppliers for panels, albeit all HQ suppliers nonetheless.
 
Frankly they have specific display type per 27 inch so you just get that from the few production lines set up for it. If they try different types one person is going to get something to high spec and somebody else it going to get something else. So, at Apples volumes they could get multiple sources of 32. If by production lines 50-65 inch would be more popular.

27 was the new 30 and 30 was probably the new 32. If we don't stop this the trend would be 24 is the newv27, and we get back to the too small to be useful craze. "Hey, look at my new IFinger Nail, it does phone, movies, word processing, internet and messaging... Hold it I'm getting a text now, " H" scroll, "I" scroll " " scroll.... But when you have to stick your finger in your ear to get audio all the time is the problem.

For a beifier IMac, you always had a difference in parts between models, you would simply vary the processing option, make room for a second GPU, but reuse a lot of other regular parts.

Apple is going 8k, and frankly 27 inch is small, I imagine there might be a number of 32 8k options coming, but this gives a chance to use the new Apple display in an IMac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top