I'm looking to buy a new machine that cuts (through) 4K footage without a problem. I do a lot of basic editing and don't use a lot of effects. Some of my documentary projects can get quite big though, and contain up to 100 hour of footage.

I was thinking about a new Mac Pro. I'm currently working on a mid 2010 Mac Pro (2 x 2.4 Ghz quad core Intel Xeon with 12 GB of RAM)

I have a budget of around 4K. Preferably no more than 4K, as I intend to get a new (4K) camera as well so I could use the saved money towards the camera.

I had intended to get the 6 core Mac Pro with 16GB for 3650,- and then add another 16GB third party RAM later. Than add a 4K monitor for around 600,-

My questions are:

1) Am I silly to think I can use this new (maxed out) iMac 5K retina to run a business on?
2) Will the difference between the 6 core Mac Pro and the iMac be enormous for 'basic editing'?
3) What kind of affordable 4K screens are there for editors?
4) What else should I consider?

Thanks for the input!

As a reseller for both the Apple edit system AND the production/camera gear, I would say this all comes down to where you want to spend your money.

Sure the Mac Pro will be more powerful. It also has more Thunderbolt ports for expansion. But for the price, the iMac 5K is an incredible value.

Yes - you can do "basic" editing on it. Will it take a little longer to process some effects? Yes. Is that money better spent on your camera and other items? You have to decide.

I think the iMac 5K is going to be huge for helping get more people into 4K workflows.

Allan Barnwell
Omega Broadcast Group

Of course you can run a business on the new 5K iMac. What sort of business are you planning on?

The 5K iMac is plenty for basic editing, even in 4K. It's the level of complexity you plan on regularly getting onto that would shift the decision over to a MacPro. The MacPro has better video boards which will help in playing back real-time effects and rendering but you may not need this. 4K with color correction and filters may stutter in the iMac but it will still render perfectly.

Thanks, guys. I guess the only way to really know is when you've used a machine for a few projects but unfortunately that's something you don't get a chance to. I will go to the Apple Store and transfer some 4K material to the iMac and play around with it a little. I'll post back my experiences.

I went to the Apple Store today here in Amsterdam and had a disappointing encounter with the iMac 5K. They only had the slowest configuration instore and had a FCP X demo with 6 streams of 4K GoPro footage. So all I got was stuttering playback. After I said that the only way I could know if this (or rather, a maxed out iMac 5K) machine was the right one for me, was if I could have it for a few weeks, he said that that could be arranged.

So I was told they'll get in touch with me. To be continued.

6 simultaneous streams of 4K? If that is what it takes to induce stuttering then the computer is fine for regular 4K editing.

6 simultaneous streams of 4K? If that is what it takes to induce stuttering then the computer is fine for regular 4K editing.

With all due respect: that's reverse reasoning and doesn't make sense ;-) ! How can you deduct that a machine will do something because it won't do something else?!

After talking to Apple employees and reading up on the web, it becomes clear that the only real proof is hands-on experience, not conclusions or speculations based on specs. I was hoping someone out there had done a few weeks of 4K editing and could share his or her experiences.

The point for me was that I thought it was not very smart of Apple to display their weakest 5K iMac with a demo it couldn't handle. You walk in the store, play the FCP demo and the first thing you experience is a spinning ball. Bad start...

Jeroen,

When you did your tests at the Apple store, what video format were you using. what was the data rate and what was it stored on? It could be that the hard drive was unable to keep up with demands once you had reached six streams

Geoff..

With all due respect: that's reverse reasoning and doesn't make sense ;-)

William's remark does make sense, I don't know if you have been editing 4K material before? I have two 4K camera that have 50mbs and 100mbs codecs and on my i7 3770 I can run one stream in realtime but as soon as I do 2 streams in a multicam setting it starts to stutter.

The entry level Imac has a I5 processor so if you say it stutters doing 6 streams of 4K you have no reason to be disappointed, I would be very surprised if it even would be able to handle 6 native streams in realtime, even 2 or 3 would be stretching it.

Before you make any assumption you need to know what type of codec was used, was it already converted into a intermediate prores format or where the native files on the timeline which makes a huge difference. If they have it on demo I suspect it was already converted to a much friendlier editing codec and it was the harddrive that couldn't keep up dealing with 6 streams simultaneously.

Sorry, Noa, you don't understand the point. It's the reasoning that doesn't make any sense, not the conclusion that I'm disappointed with an iMac not being able to play 6 streams of 4K.

All I'm saying is that you can't say a machine will perform well in one area because it won't do something else. That's just bad reasoning. But that's not really the issue here, so forget it.

Unless you actually TRY something, you can't really claim anything based on specs or numbers. I have enough experience and disappointments to testify to that...

Jeroen,

When you did your tests at the Apple store, what video format were you using. what was the data rate and what was it stored on? It could be that the hard drive was unable to keep up with demands once you had reached six streams

Geoff..

It was their own demo, all prores. They should have known that this configuration would not be able to keep up with the data. Bad product presentation therefore...

It was their own demo, all prores

You didn't say that before but this makes all the difference, in that case it's the harddrive that couldn't keep up, you just need to add a raid harddrive. My point was clear, you can't edit 6 streams of native 4K footage in realtime on a i5 processor, unless you use a intermediate codec and assure datatransfer doesn't become an issue. I also have enough experience and disappointments to testify to that...
You have to ask yourself, are you planning to edit 6 or more streams in a multicam setup? You said you did basic editing with some effects, then this i5 machine will handle one or 2 streams in 4K prores without an issue.

Well, Noa, I mentioned it was their own demo twice and you could 've figured they wouldn't put H264 in the timeline...

Anyway, hopefully I'll get the iMac 5K on trial and I'll be able to answer my questions. And share my findings here with the community.

I mentioned it was their own demo twice and you could 've figured they wouldn't put H264 in the timeline...

What do you expect Jeroen, you fail to mention any important specifics and you say you are disappointed about the performance and then have us all guessing what the bottleneck could be and then tell us we should have figured it out ourselves? :) lol

If anyone has any real-life experience with the iMac 5K and editing 4K, I'd love to hear it.

What I said made sense in this sense: if a person struggles to carry 100 pounds but manages to get it from one place to another successfully then we can be assured that they will be able to carry 50 pounds easily. Why do you need six streams of 4K running at once? What are you intending to film, a six camera concert in 4K and you want to multicam switch it on a budget? Guess what? You can do that on a regular iMac now using proxy files. Yes, it requires some minor extra work but it keeps you in your budget.

We keep coming up with new forms of video that goes beyond the capacity of average computers. Today it's 4K, tomorrow 6K or maybe 8K. These are pro formats as HD and DVCAM were considered in the past as examples. Once you venture into the "pro" format of the moment expect to make investments.

There are people who fixate on the newest formats when there are options that are more reasonable for their needs. Years ago I worked on a project and the producer was obsessed with the old Panasonic 200 memory stick camera even though I had the JVC HD100. Even though cinema projection tests showed that HDV pretty much looked great on the big screen he felt that expensive at the time DVCProHD was the way to go. Well in the end he bought the camera and support equipment, I operated it, the project was edited and finished but in the end nothing came of it and the producer lost a lot of money. Instead of fine tuning the project he worried about technical stuff that didn't make a difference to how the audience reacted to the project. Here, Noa uses 4K in way that compliments his already accomplished work process but he certainly can produce excellent work with now plain HD. I am sure you can too. Presently I am not going to get 4K, except as a rental for clients, because what I do at the moment doesn't require the overkill of 4K. HD in it's various flavors is just fine now and I am creating work that is projected in cinemas on large screens. A friend is dumping his Canon 5D for a GH4. He usually gives the raw footage to clients but when he does edit it's usually a single line timeline and he knows his older laptop will handle it just fine.

Sure the Mac Pro will be more powerful. It also has more Thunderbolt ports for expansion. But for the price, the iMac 5K is an incredible value.

Yes - you can do "basic" editing on it. Will it take a little longer to process some effects? Yes. Is that money better spent on your camera and other items? You have to decide.

I think the iMac 5K is going to be huge for helping get more people into 4K workflows.

Allan Barnwell
Omega Broadcast Group
I full agree with Allan.

The Mac Pro hits the pocket immediately. The iMac is more soothing on the pocket.

By the way, clients (broadcasters) still want the C300 footage and I guess will continue to ask for some more time. So iMac is perfectly fine for me.

Unless we invite the clients to come and watch the edit process, it may be better to utilise more money on the front end things (equipment etc which the clients will see). That is the logic businesses use and hence hire pretty woman for the front desk and men to work in the backend like mules. :) Well one can always buy the iMac and call clients to see the project on that superb 5k screen. And for complex projects, may be editing proxies instead of directly cutting in 4k?
Cheers,
Sabyasachi

This precise question was asked of Sam Mestman, the FCP X workflow architect for FCPWorks in LA. They're the guys who do most of the high end consulting for the Hollywood studios interested in adapting an FCP X workflow into their operations.

His advice (given in public on Chris Fenwicks FCP X Grill 100th episode podcast) was that if your focus is EDITING (or assistant editing - the job where stuff gets prepped, keyworded, and organized for editing) a 5k Retina iMac is the best current tool.

If your focus is high end constant color correction or compositing. THOSE are the areas the dual GPUs will make enough difference to warrant the use of a MacPro.

Sam's a smart guy who uses this stuff at the highest of the high end daily. So I trust his judgement.

FWIW.

I am in the same exact situation right now... deciding to purchase the new 5K iMac or Mac Pro.

I have 2 Sony 4K camcorders and 3 Canon 5DIIs... and do editing and color correction.

I just wanted to point out that the iMac which includes a 5K monitor is a steal. If you price out any other 5K monitors, they run at least $2000 just for monitor, and you have not purchased a video card.. or a computer.

But with that said, the iMac, even maxed out has a "slow" video card. Of course the Mac Pro has better GPU specs, but I have heard rumors there will soon be a 5K Apple Thunderbolt Display -- AND THE CURRENT Mac Pro will NOT BE ABLE TO RUN IT AT 5K. And,as we all know the Mac Pro video card is not upgradeable. So Apple will be releasing a NEW Mac Pro to go with the new 5K Display.

This makes investing in the current Mac Pro a very limited option.

If you need a 5K monitor, go for the iMac now. It works. When Apple releases the next Mac Pro and Display, you can upgrade and get a completely new setup.

If you only need a 4K monitor, go for the current Mac Pro and a Asus PB287Q 4K monitor for only $600. But remember, you will be stuck with 4K monitors and not be able to run a future 5K monitor.

Also, if you get a 5K iMac... get the 1TB SSD drive upgrade. Run all Thunderbolt RAIDs for storage externally.

my 2 cents.

I went with the Retina 5K even though I'm not blown away by the speed, but I guess I've always had unrealistic expectations... ;-(

If I had bought the Mac Pro, it probably wouldn't have lived up to my expectations either.

These machines do become faster but at the same times the demands on computers grow on par with their abilities. So in effect these machines edit 4K as fast as the older machines edit 1080P... quite a speed bump... but I don't notice the speed change as much as I'd like to...

I like the iMac for it's screen and it serves my needs well enough as far as power is concerned.

I chose to get the 3TB fusion disk because I knew I'd be getting a RAID system. Besides, Apple SSD's are just too expensive.

So far it has been very stable with FCP X. The only quirk I've encountered was yesterday when short bursts of audio were inaudible while playing back an interview in the timeline. Recording was fine so there's something on the Mac not working properly. I'm editing off a thunderbolt RAID 5 system.

Today the same timeline plays back fine...?!

They're still consumer computers...wonderful yet fallible...

Three points here:

1) The MacPro video cards are exchangeable so upgrades in the future are possible. Since they are custom designed cards built specifically for the unusual MacPro chassis we will have to wait for Apple to announce new cards. A single 5k card is unlikely because....

2) A 5K display could be available for your MacPro right now: Dell UltraSharp 27 Ultra HD 5K Monitor ? UP2715K (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&sku=UP275K3). To get 5k you theoretically have to use two Thunderbolt 1.2 ports until Thunderbolt 1.3 is available which an issue with Intel CPUs inside the MacPro. And Thunderbolt 1.3 will require a new CPU in all PCs and likely a new computer in the case of the MacPro. Unfortunately neither AMD or Apple have updated the unique MacPro video card drivers to drive a single monitor over two cables and Dell does not make this clear in their PR either. Some PC video cards are able to do this right now. Seems that the iMac has a bit of unique engineering going on inside. You want a MacPro with 5k? Make some noise with Apple and AMD, doesn't seem to be a huge outrage going on yet.

3) Regarding the audio drop outs on a RAID5 array. The nature of RAID5 means that the array has to take time out to make a back-up on a regular basis. This is the PAR drive which enables you to rebuild if any of the other drives fail. The momentary loss of audio or even missing frames on playback are the side effect of the array doing it's job. Takes a little getting used to but it's a sign that all is well with your array.

Thanks for clearing up that audio issue, William.

1) The MacPro video cards are exchangeable so upgrades in the future are possible.

Here is a complete guide on how to break down a 2013 Mac Pro:

https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Mac+Pro+Late+2013+Teardown/20778

It is quite complicated. Not for the average user to upgrade anything except maybe RAM.

Although "possible".. no third party companies sell ANY video cards (or upgrades) for the MacPro. Highly unlikely Apple will ever sell an "upgrade" path to the current 2013 MacPro.

If you want to run a 5K monitor on a 2013 MacPro desktop, you can't. And as you pointed out, it is impossible to get a third party Dell 5K monitor to run on the 2013 MacPro. So why buy a desktop model that you know has a major upgrade limitation?

A better question is: Why is 5K so important to do video work? Answer: It isn't.

Two 4K monitors, possible right now, is enough unless you are working on something so cutting edge that doing it on a standard computer set-up is an unlikely option. 5k gives a person the ability to run 4K at full resolution white still reserving some screen space for other windows. Great if one monitor is all you have. A MacPro can run several 4K monitors at once. What would 5K bring to the table at this point in time?

A better question is: Why buy the first Generation MacPro that will never support a 5K monitor (even though you stated that the video card could be swapped).. when you can wait and buy the soon-to-be released 2015 Mac Pro that will support TWO 5K monitors.

And if you can't wait, then buy the less expensive 5K iMac now.

Running two 5K monitors is better than running two 4K monitors.

soon-to-be released 2015 Mac Pro that will support TWO 5K monitors.Apple has made no such announcement and rumors are all over the map. I'd recommend against making a buying decision on a speculative commentary such as this.

Running two 5K monitors is better than running two 4K monitors.

That's an interesting statement. What are the practical reasons behind that besides having money to spare?

That's an interesting statement. What are the practical reasons behind that besides having money to spare?

Because it goes up to 11.

That's an interesting statement. What are the practical reasons behind that besides having money to spare?

Are you sticking with your statement that users will be able to upgrade the video cards on the current MacPro?

Why would Apple release a 5K screen? I wonder why anyone would need that...??? And I see Dell has released a 5K monitor as well... what could be the practical reasons?.. must be a lot of people with "money to spare".. yeah... that's it.

Derek, I did not say a card was available or in the future. If you read my post, there are several obstacles to a 5k monitor on the present MacPro: one of them is the lack of driver software for a two connection solution, the other, hardware issues beyond Apple's control for a single cable solution. The driver updates are addressable right now but nobody involved has mentioned it as an upcoming release. Why? Who knows? Maybe because the demand isn't there right now.

Please give all of us legitimate reasons that a 5k monitor is is going to improve our output that two 4k monitors or one 4k and a second 2k monitor can't cover.

Just for reference, a Dell 5k monitor is around $2000 and a decent NEC 4K monitor is around $1000 on Amazon.

Thanks for clearing up that audio issue, William.

jeroen-

i was wondering if you had any updates on your imac retina 5k as a fcp x edit tool?

have you done any heavy color correction or work with raw footage?

any and all thoughts are appreciated.

be well.

rob
smalltalk productions/nyc

jeroen-

i was wondering if you had any updates on your imac retina 5k as a fcp x edit tool?

have you done any heavy color correction or work with raw footage?

any and all thoughts are appreciated.

be well.

rob
smalltalk productions/nyc

No heavy corrections, Rob. I don't really do that- yet... Until I start shooting S-Log and use Da Vinci hopefully later this year. Light corrections, yes, all the time with 4K material from a GH4. What can I say? It seems fast enough, really no complaints.

RAW- nope.

The machine crashed once yesterday- for the first time. No idea why. I was uploading a bunch of footage using FileZilla.

I enjoy working with the iMac Retina, it feels good, the screen is great, for the quality and real estate. I like the 3TB harddrive. It has made me forget my 2011 Mac Pro faster than I thought...

So... no surprises, major insights or news, just a good solid editing machine for all my work. 4K, HD, long and short stuff...

And so it comes:

OS X 10.10.3 Now Supports Dell's Dual-Cable 5K Monitor on Retina iMac and Mac Pro - Mac Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2015/04/13/os-x-10-10-3-dell-5k/)

Just got an the 5K iMac i5 3.5 about 2 weeks ago and I have to say that this computer is amazing. I got it for work and I can see myself purchasing this computer for my home in the next couple months.

I have been shooting footage on a gh4 (so 4k) and I have had absolutely no issues with slowdown so far. I've only worked on a couple projects (one being a 2 minute video with around 40 individual clips) and it has run very smoothly. I am having issues with Lightroom being slow, but I hear that may be more about Adobe than my machine.

I absolutely would not hesitate to get this computer again.

And so it comes:

OS X 10.10.3 Now Supports Dell's Dual-Cable 5K Monitor on Retina iMac and Mac Pro - Mac Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2015/04/13/os-x-10-10-3-dell-5k/)

Who needs 5K at that pricepoint? I prefer a decent, affordable 4K monitor...

Absolutely, I agree.

I've been thinking along the same lines and researching users comments and opinions. One is hard pressed to push the iMac price to four grand with all the bells and whistles. Do the same thing with a Mac Pro and you can be at 10K quickly, before you add a monitor or two. I decided to go with a loaded 5K iMac to get up to speed on 4K editing. I'll find a dozen other uses for it if it proves too inefficient of the 4K task, and I'll bite the bullet on the Mac Pro. For that difference in investment, it's almost worth going iMac just to see how it does the job.

How is the iMac Retina 5K monitor for colour grading? Is it good? Do you further need to calibrate it?

I've been out on assignment and haven't had time to pick my 5K iMac unit up from the Apple store. When I get back to town and get it up and running, I'll give you a quick review. Funny thing about calibration, I have spent hundreds of dollars on color calibration tools/software over the years and I always end up going to "Adobe RGB 1998" as my color choice . Did the same thing on this new 15" MacBook Pro that I got a few weeks ago. The spyder calibration units and the other display choices never look as good as plain old RGB 1998 to me.

Apple now includes color space choices for Rec709 and SMPTE. These are better for color grading however you still need to be careful especially with third party monitors. Download grey scale charts (preferably a linear gradient from left to right and a step chart with at least a dozen grey scale increments more is better) and import them into FCP or whatever program you use to edit. See how the chart looks on the timeline. If the blacks drop off to quickly or the light grays go white too soon (the step chart will really show this), you need to start calibrating first with the monitor itself in the case of a third party monitor or via software in the case of an Apple monitor. Apple monitors happen to be very well calibrated out of the box but they may not be exactly broadcast or cinema quality. If your work is for the web then you are probably OK. Hardware calibration works only if you have the monitor already set to see a full gray scale.

hello everyone. I want to replace my classic imac 27" i5 from 2009 which still works...slowly...a good machine..and I want to get the latest 27" 5K i7 but...is too much for my budget..so looking at buying used.
I came across a late 2014 i7 with 32GB Ram, 4GB video and a 3TB fusion drive...this sound fantastic..
I know that the latest 2015 imacs have a newer processor but the late 2014 is a a great machine except that while doing some research I keep coming across forums discussing overheating issues...I know that some people will always freak out over computers but some of those high temperatures are not ideal I think...
I read that the new 2015 5k imacs run cooler so all those reports about the earlier model cannot just be geeks overreacting..I will use the computer for FCP 7 (if I can really install it! I know it's old but works for me) or Premiere 5.5 or even FCX...some AFX- not intensive...some exporting to Pro Res and converting those videos (some as long as 2 hours) to H264...
fellow videographers who own the late 2014 5k imac with an i7 processor and the 4GB video card...what's your experience? Are those reports of overheating real or an overreaction?
thanks a lot for your input...

Erick

Never had any issues with mine...

thanks for the feedback Jeroen. I guess that some intense -gaming etc activities could make the imac work really hard...my cameras are all 1080p now but some 4K might be in the future and I believe you have a GH4 which records in 4K and the video I just watched looked great- interesting project by the way...like a document of human existence. From babies to over 90! wow... amazing document.
I'm considering buying it for $3k CDN which is about $1700 less than buying a new imac from Apple here in Canada-with similar specs...
thanks
E

Glad you liked the video, Erick, thanks.

Shot most of that with the GH2 and some with the GH4. Have done a lot with the GH4 though and never felt the computer was struggling. What I did find though was that working with HD was ridicilously fast!

But I received my Sony FS5 this weekend and as soon as I have the time, I will start working with the camera and its files on my iMac- and that should be the real test.

The XAVC codec from the FS5 is supposed to really strain your editing station...

I need your opinion on the suitability of the iMac with the following specifications for 4k editing. iMac with i7 skylake processor is not available in my country. iMac specs:
Late 2015 retina 27 inch
3.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i5 processor
32GB memory
2TB Fusion Drive1
AMD Radeon R9 M395 with 2GB video memory

I am told that apple online store is not available in my country, and the i7 is a configurable option. So it is not available. Please let me know if the above specs are fine for normal 4k editing with heavy VFX.

Cheers,
Sabyasachi

Glad you liked the video, Erick, thanks.

Shot most of that with the GH2 and some with the GH4. Have done a lot with the GH4 though and never felt the computer was struggling. What I did find though was that working with HD was ridicilously fast!

But I received my Sony FS5 this weekend and as soon as I have the time, I will start working with the camera and its files on my iMac- and that should be the real test.

The XAVC codec from the FS5 is supposed to really strain your editing station...

jeroen-

congrats on the new fs5!

it is always nice to have another tool in the shop.

i welcome any thoughts you can share on the xavc-l (long gop) footage from the fs5 working on your imac 5k in fcpx.

422/10 bit hd footage along with 420/8 bit 4k footage would be ideal.

even better would be a quick edit and a lite color grade.

my basic question is whether in working with sony's new xavc-l will most machines struggle with several streams, some transitions and a color grade.

if so, then i imagine a form of optimizing/transcoding or proxy work is in order.

thanks in advance for anything you care to share.

beer or coffee whenever you are in nyc!

be well.

rob
smalltalk.media/nyc

Hi, I need some really serious Help, Please…

Background: I have a Kodak scanner Model 570 and scanned all my 1950’s era photos in B & W and have them in a folder or album in my iMac, all 380 of them. They have been cropped, adjusted patched up to the absolute best that I can make them with my Apple Photos App.

BTW that little scanner is the best thing I have ever seen, it makes perfect scans, don’t know why they don’t make them anymore, best 40 bucks I ever spent.

Project: Now that I have them in an album or folder in my Mac I want to share them with my ungrateful siblings, relatives, etc that I had to beg, borrow and steal from just to get the photos’s they all had, but lied and said they did not have. I want to put the photos into a Kick Ass Slide show with Music, Captions, Titles, Narrations, Credits, Bells and Whistles and get it together into a epic slide show that you just cannot walk away from, the type of show you just gotta see what is coming next and I want to do it on the cheap.

Problems: I just don’t happen to have 400 bucks laying around doing nothing for a copy of Photo Shop.

Problems encountered so far: I have searched the net and fallen for the free this, and the free that, only to find they don’t do what I want, or it is really not free, or the download is free, but if you want to use it, you gotta pony up a CC Card number, or to find the cheapie program I have on my computer is better, and most of them are full of other commercials for stuff not related to what I want to do anyway.

I need something that takes a dummy like me by the hand and leads me step by step thru the process and does most of the hard work by itself. I don’t mind paying if it does what I need it to do, but so far everything is just one big commercial for something I don’t want.

When completed I want my Lazy, Almost Dead to Me, relatives to have to click on one link to make the magic come alive. They are all so lazy. Did I mention that they are lazy already??

I know there is several of you out there reading this that know exactly what I need and probably have done something like this yourself.

Please help me out, goona be 78 soon, want get it done while I still remember who I am looking at in the pictures.

Bill

Bill,

The Apple Photos app has a very good (although simplistic) slideshow capability. If you want to add captions, titles, etc, I would recommend iMovie. Put some ken burns effects on the photos, add some titles and you're good to go. Nothing beats free.