Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Computer Specs For Red Post-Production

Julio Quintana

Julio Quintana

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
1,770
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Austin, TX
Website
www.juliomquintana.com
I'm trying to budget for a new Mac Pro, and I wanted to know if someone could give a realistic estimate of what kind of system would be needed to work comfortably with 4K Redcode Raw footage for low budget features(online editing, color correction and masking with shake, etc.).

Please include recommendations for all computer specs from processors, ram, video cards, and raids.
 
Hi,
I believe that a Mac will do the work
* Two 3.0GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
* 8GB (4 x 2GB)
* 500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
* NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 512MB, Stereo 3D (2 x dual-link DVI)
* Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
* Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
* One 16x SuperDrive
* Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI Express card
* Apple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse - U.S. English
* Mac OS X - U.S. English
* Final Cut Studio 2
* Shake
Total of about $12800
and also G-SPEED S
4.5TB
WAS $7,499
NOW $5,999
or MAC RAID Storage
3500GB ADM (7x500GB Ultra ATA)
$8,199.00
and AJA's Io HD not sure for the price
I believe that will do the work, preview will be at 2k if I'm not mistaken.:alien:
 
Is there any reason to get the 8-core mac? Or for that matter, 16 gigs of ram (other than it just being awesome)?

Also, why do I need the AJA Io (MSRP $3495)? It doesn't seem to support 4k footage at all. Can't Redcode Raw be loaded directly into Final Cut 2? Maybe I'm not understanding the workflow.
 
AJA Io HD will let you monitor on a broadcast display. Not 4k mind you, but Final Cut itself is still limited to 2k.

Yes Final Cut supports 4k Redcode Raw but it will only display a max of 2k.

If your workflow is to bring in redcode raw into Final Cut and encode to 108024p ProRes 4:2:2 then Io HD will allow you to display that on a broadcast monitor.
 
Also I should note that if you are going for a 2k workflow then you will need a Kona 3, Multibridge Studio, or Multibridge Eclipse.
 
Maybe someone from Red could chime in with the specs of the Mac providing the demo at NAB? Given that the 8 core has just been released I would guess(?) that Park Road were utilising a Quad for 'Crossing the Line'? Field work was done off a Mac Book Pro. Is Dual Quad Core nice to have, not need to have?
 
We've been using macbook's and mac pro's with 4 cpu's (so two dual-core chips) mostly. That's what was used for the NZ footage and what was used in the NAB booth.
 
Rob Lohman said:
We've been using macbook's and mac pro's with 4 cpu's (so two dual-core chips) mostly. That's what was used for the NZ footage and what was used in the NAB booth.
Click to expand...

rob, does red has a recommended 2k monitoring via duallinked hd-sdi for redcode?
 
laguun said:
rob, does red has a recommended 2k monitoring via duallinked hd-sdi for redcode?
Click to expand...

I'm not Rob or RED... : ) but...

in our suites at NAB, we were looking at output via dual-link 4:4:4 HD RGB to eCinema displays. Monitoring RED footage critically is the same as monitoring anything else critically - high quality output to high quality monitors with critical calibration.

Lucas
-----
ASSIMILATE, Inc.
LA, CA, USA
 
Panicos said:
Hi,
I believe that a Mac will do the work
* Two 3.0GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
* 8GB (4 x 2GB)
* 500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
* NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 512MB, Stereo 3D (2 x dual-link DVI)
* Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
* Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel)
* One 16x SuperDrive
* Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI Express card
* Apple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse - U.S. English
* Mac OS X - U.S. English
* Final Cut Studio 2
* Shake
Total of about $12800
and also G-SPEED S
4.5TB
WAS $7,499
NOW $5,999
or MAC RAID Storage
3500GB ADM (7x500GB Ultra ATA)
$8,199.00
and AJA's Io HD not sure for the price
I believe that will do the work, preview will be at 2k if I'm not mistaken.:alien:
Click to expand...

Of course what would be a great system but it all depends on your needs. If finishing in ProRes is good enough for you then you can save a lot of money.
 
Emery said:
AJA Io HD will let you monitor on a broadcast display. Not 4k mind you, but Final Cut itself is still limited to 2k.

Yes Final Cut supports 4k Redcode Raw but it will only display a max of 2k.

If your workflow is to bring in redcode raw into Final Cut and encode to 108024p ProRes 4:2:2 then Io HD will allow you to display that on a broadcast monitor.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that they will support 4K in the new version? Apparently the old version had a limit of 4000x4000px, but you could get full 4K with an XML hack... Does anyone know about this?

Also, with that computer, isn't it better to go with the top ATI card? I thought that someone said that the quadro FX 4500 was outdated.
 
I think the Quadro FX is only worth it if you need the 3D port. For the rest of us, the ATI will do just as good a job for far less money.
 
I pretty much agree with most the other posts here, but....

Panicos said:
* NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 512MB, Stereo 3D (2 x dual-link DVI)
Click to expand...

Trust me, you don't want this card. Lots of money wasted.
 
Concrete said:
I don't understand why you need an external monitor if you have a calibrated monitor and a program like After Effects that can simmulate viewing in different color spaces.
Click to expand...

Well "Need" is a very subjective thing based on the project and client.
If your shooting to deliver for the web your fine with anything. But if your delivering for broadcast you should have a broadcast grade display. Apple cinema displays are really nice but if you put it beside a cine-tal or ecinema display fed by a SDI or DL HDSDI you will possibly see things that the apple display didnt show you (particularly when interlacing comes in to play). And if your delivering for the big screen then a projector is what you "should" be using.

Now can you get away with just usings a consumer grade LCD, possibly, but you might find yourself spending big$$ at the end of your pipeline to fix a problem you couldn't see.

Personally I'm very particular about my picture examination devices and I have to guarantee that the jobs I do will pass international quality control. Its what my clients expect. Your client's and projects might be different.
 
sander kamp said:
Of course what would be a great system but it all depends on your needs. If finishing in ProRes is good enough for you then you can save a lot of money.
Click to expand...

Well you could also say that a faster more expensive box will save you money.

The "theory" goes like this. A cheaper machine will only save you money once, when you buy it. A faster machine will save you time every time you hit render (which will be often). and because time is money that faster box will pay you back a little bit every day over its life. You charge more for a faster machine and tackle more work in your week. Clients are really fond of paying a flat rate for the completion of a job, if you cut your time in half you win.

Now if rendering/waiting is something you never do then go nuts with the base model.
 
It's not quite that simple though. If you charge for online editing by the hour, and there is less waiting for rendering you end up billing for less hours. It's not always easy to tell clients "I've just bought a new computer, so my hourly rate has gone up". There is an extent to which you are just expected to keep up with the bleeding edge of technology, and the prices you can charge sometimes come down as that technology becomes more commonly available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top