Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Video Editing and Ham radio  (Read 3968 times)
AA5WG
Member

Posts: 497




Ignore
« on: April 19, 2011, 06:19:20 AM »

Hi to all:
Does anyone know when Intel Thunderbolt interface technology will be released and in use for PC?  I am building a video editing PC based machine on paper before I look and buy.  This is my first try at this.  We will be using Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Master Collection.  Which video card do think is better for this, Nividia Quadro 4000 or Nvidea GTX 580?  Any tips to help me not make to many mistakes is greatly appreciated!  I would also like to use the machine for ham radio.

Thank you.
73,
Chuck - AA5WG
Logged
AA5WG
Member

Posts: 497




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2011, 06:22:00 AM »

I forgot to ask, what companies build good computers without putting caplets on the machine?
Thank you.
Chuck - AA5WG
Logged
W5DQ
Member

Posts: 1209


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2011, 08:33:57 AM »

.... without putting caplets on the machine? ......

Never heard of a caplet WRT computers. What is a caplet?  Huh
Logged

Gene W5DQ
Ridgecrest, CA - DM15dp
www.radioroom.org
KB0ASQ
Member

Posts: 102


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2011, 09:23:26 AM »

I have to admit, I have been in the computer business for 15+ years and I am not sure what he means.  I am interested too.
Logged

Allen KBØASQ
http://kb0asq.com
K1TCJ
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2011, 09:48:48 AM »


I suspect "caplet" is a typo for "craplet", i.e. pre-installed software of dubious value.

FWIW when I built a video editing system ten years ago I chose to do so on the Mac platform, and I'd do the same today.  The new version of Final Cut Pro, which was only just announced this week at NAB, blew a lot of people away, and at only $300 I will definitely be upgrading from the "consumer" version, Final Cut Express.

Just for grins, try searching Google for "Final Cut vs. whatsis" where "whatsis" is the Windows editing suite you're considering.  You might be surprised by the results.


« Last Edit: April 19, 2011, 10:01:45 AM by K1TCJ » Logged
KB0ASQ
Member

Posts: 102


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2011, 10:57:45 AM »

Ah, we call that crapware.


I suspect "caplet" is a typo for "craplet", i.e. pre-installed software of dubious value.

FWIW when I built a video editing system ten years ago I chose to do so on the Mac platform, and I'd do the same today.  The new version of Final Cut Pro, which was only just announced this week at NAB, blew a lot of people away, and at only $300 I will definitely be upgrading from the "consumer" version, Final Cut Express.

Just for grins, try searching Google for "Final Cut vs. whatsis" where "whatsis" is the Windows editing suite you're considering.  You might be surprised by the results.



Logged

Allen KBØASQ
http://kb0asq.com
AA5WG
Member

Posts: 497




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2011, 06:28:53 PM »

Crapware.  Got it.
Chuck
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 5903




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2011, 08:22:22 PM »


FWIW when I built a video editing system ten years ago I chose to do so on the Mac platform, and I'd do the same today.


I would not today for sure. Apple cost too much and lost cutting edge in editing long ago. PC platform is more powerful and customizable. Buy/build a 6 core MAC for under a grand, (actually at any price) you can a PC. Modern CGI movies are not made or edited on MAC's either. (mostly Linux boxes in parallel on a massive scale)  If Apple had open sourced their hardware 25 years ago, this might have been a Apple world today but they did not because they were too greedy and wanted to keep it all in house and lost that game forever. They will loose I-phone and I-pad game one day too. It is only a matter of time because to many resources are being devoted to this new craze for Apple to beat back for ever. And Apples pig headedness to not support Flash (which everyone else does) because they want you to buy their video format movies will backfire too one day. The ONLY reason that Apple had a early lead up to maybe 8 or 10 years ago is because mainstream PC's (MS) was slow to adapt/come with 32 bit OSes and then it took a while for 32 bit apps too. That is history now and now PC's are moving to 64 bit main stream.
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
K1TCJ
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: April 20, 2011, 08:27:36 AM »


Hmmm.  It would appear that W8JX is not an Apple fan.

> PC platform is more powerful and customizable.

By "PC platform" do you mean the x86 processor architecture, the operating system, the video editing application, or all three?  While a particular app running on a specific processor and OS may outperform another, it makes no sense to assert platform superiority without specifying all three of these components.  We're comparing video editing platforms, not the relative generic merits of one 64-bit OS versus another.  IMHO the editing app itself is far more important than the OS or processor to the average amateur video editor, which is why I suggested the OP search for comparative reviews of Final Cut versus other video editing apps.

> Buy/build a 6 core MAC for under a grand

While fast rendering times are certainly nice, most amateur video editors don't need a six core system.  Granted, rendering a simple cross fade ten years ago on a 450 MHz PowerPC processor took a couple minutes and was pretty painful, but I'm perfectly happy with the rendering times today on my 2.4 GHz dual core iMac.  For example, I created the reasonably complex spinning logo that begins and ends the promotional videos for the big band I play with, and it renders in fifteen or twenty seconds on my hardware (the clips themselves were edited by someone else -- on a PC using Pinnacle software, BTW), and that's with the sources and target on the same drive.  Segregating these to eliminate disk thrashing would improve rendering times far more than a faster CPU or a couple more cores.

> Modern CGI movies are not made or edited
> on MAC's either.

Movies that depend heavily on CGI require a *lot* of multi-layer rendering, and yes, a Linux-based rendering farm is the best way to do this.  Most amateur editors aren't doing heavy CGI, however; they're doing simple dissolves, cross fades, wipes, and maybe some animated inserts and title overlays.  For the most part these activities are not particularly resource intensive.  And while Hollywood may not use Macs for big CGI extravaganzas, they're still used to edit a lot of mainstream movies.  Wikipedia's Final Cut Pro page lists forty films made in the last ten years that were edited on a Mac, including last year's Eat, Pray, Love, The Social Network, and True Grit.

> If Apple had...they were too greedy...
> They will loose I-phone and I-pad game
> one day...Apples pig headedness to not
> support Flash

Now the discussion has descended into an old-fashion anti-Apple rant.  I'd be happy to debate all of these points with you in an appropriate venue, but to do so in this thread would take it way off topic.

EDIT:  Upon rereading the original post I realize the OP is already committed to using Adobe Creative Suite, which renders most of this discussion moot.


« Last Edit: April 20, 2011, 09:17:17 AM by K1TCJ » Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 5903




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2011, 03:33:32 PM »

I can tell you are a Apple fan. It is strange how apple quietly moved to x86 processors some time ago when they used to claim how great their design was.  Also strange how you talk about Apple being cutting edge for video editing and then shift to you do not need 6 cores for ham radio. This debate will go nowhere. I will close with this. The ONLY reason Apple computers even exist today is that without them MS would have had a true monopoly. This is the ONLY reason MS makes Office suite for them and donated a few hundred million to them in 90's when they were in a twist. Where it not for that, MAC would be history today. BTW go on line and try and find a wide range of apple M/B to build new systems with. This could have maybe been a Apple world today if Apple had fully opened hardware to cloning but WINTEL did and took over. 
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
AA5WG
Member

Posts: 497




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2011, 05:19:05 AM »

Hi to all:
Does anyone have information on the Thunderbolt data transfer system for PC's?  That is, does anyone know when it may be released for pc?  Apple is getting ready or is already releasing it.
73,
Chuck
Logged
KB0ASQ
Member

Posts: 102


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #11 on: April 21, 2011, 06:34:10 AM »

My guess would be the ubiquitous "When there is demand for it".  You are the first person I have seen mention it outside the usual computer circles.  It takes Intel about 6 months to release a chipset after it is announced.

Hi to all:
Does anyone have information on the Thunderbolt data transfer system for PC's?  That is, does anyone know when it may be released for pc?  Apple is getting ready or is already releasing it.
73,
Chuck
Logged

Allen KBØASQ
http://kb0asq.com
K1TCJ
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: April 21, 2011, 10:49:49 AM »


According to a ZDNet article about Thunderbolt at NAB, Intel limited participation in its early developer program and is only just now gearing up for a full-blown release of Thunderbolt.  The SDK isn't generally available yet and won't be until later this quarter.  We may see PCs from one or two manufacturer that were part of the early developer program, but it sounds like it may take a while before we see wider availability.

And as KB0ASQ points out, market demand will have a lot to do with it.  I think the article I mentioned above puts it quite well: "Thunderbolt is making a stronger showing with more vendor support and more customer interest - judging by the demo traffic - than I’d expected. Granted, the NAB video crowd is especially bandwidth hungry compared to civilians, but they also buy a lot of gear."


Logged
K0BT
Member

Posts: 186




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: April 21, 2011, 02:06:26 PM »

I forgot to ask, what companies build good computers without putting caplets on the machine?
Thank you.
Chuck - AA5WG

Chuck,

A utility called (appropriately enough) "PC Decrapifier" will detect and blow away all the crap and trial software .  It works and it is free.  Funny how there's enough annoyance out there for someone to write a program to address it...

Bob,
K0BT
Logged
WA6MJE
Member

Posts: 71




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2011, 02:10:53 AM »

Hi to all:
I am building a video editing PC based machine on paper before I look and buy.  This is my first try at this.  We will be using Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Master Collection.  Which video card do think is better for this, Nividia Quadro 4000 or Nvidea GTX 580?  Any tips to help me not make to many mistakes is greatly appreciated!  I would also like to use the machine for ham radio.
I am currently using Adobe CS5 Master Collection on an HP dv8t laptop and am very happy with it. A couple years ago I was on Adobe CS3 also with a laptop.  I like the HP that you buy online since you can pick everything you want on it. 64 bit windows, Quad processor, and 8GB of ram does nicely along with 2TB of hard drive space, and the best video card you can select.  The Adobe license allows you to install two copies of their CS5 software, so I install the 2nd copy on another older machine which I use as my "render farm" to free up my laptop work station. About every year or so I build a new laptop with as much as they have. HP no longer makes the dv8 with an 18 inch monitor, so I ordered the dv7 last week and it will be here in May.  I like the Adobe edit suite mostly because of how well everything integrates.  When I make up a graphic in Photoshop, no need to render it, just drop the native Photoshop file on the timeline and it works fine.  If I need to later tweak the graphic I am a right click away.  Same with dropping After Effects raw files on the timeline. The simplicity of this tool chain saves a lot of time on how I did this work even ten years ago.  I do not find enough difference between my laptop and absolute state of the minute technology to make it worth my while.  Investing in cutting edge  technology is like buying ice sculpture in the middle of July.  One month later you are behind again.  I spend more time editing, and very little time rendering that my laptop does just fine.  I have about five workstations in my office, so if my laptop gets involved in a render, I just move to another that has older versions of Adobe, and do work while the render finishes.  I do educational video production full time for a living, am on a low budget (by Hollywood standards) and get a lot of work out the door every day that all my customers seem happy with. I no longer chase bleeding edge technology or agonize over nuances between competing high end video cards.  At the end of the day most high end stuff works great. If I add up how much money I have spent on video technology since back when I bought a Video Toaster on an Amiga 25 years ago I would be a gazillionaire. I now find that technology is just a tool.  It is more important to think about creativity and productivity than technology.  So I do not get hung up (any more) perseverating over equipment nuances. Been there, and done that and found it was not worth the effort. 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!