I bought a new 27″ iMac when they went on sale Friday, specifically for video editing. And, because I’ve had a lot of requests recently, I wanted to tell you what I bought and why.
WHAT SIZE IMAC?
I bought: 27″ iMac
All versions of Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere like large screen sizes. It allows us to see more of the image with more detail. In my case, because this system is exclusively for video and audio editing, the bigger screen was an easy decision.
I also have a second 27″ Apple monitor sitting unused on a shelf that I want to experiment with. I’ve generally found dual monitor displays at client sites to be more trouble than they are worth. But, I’ve never worked with one for a long period of time, so I’m looking forward to seeing how this new setup works.
However, for my webinars, I use a smaller 21″ Mac, because I find software easier to learn when the screen sizes are kept smaller.
CPU SPEED
I bought: 3.4 GHz, Quad-Core Intel Core i7
CPU speed is important, but it isn’t everything. The speed and connection of your storage play a much bigger role in overall system performance than the CPU. So does the speed of the graphics card.
In the old days, the CPU did all the work. Today, that load is shared between a variety of components. For this reason, I decided to get a fast CPU, but use the money I saved in not buying the fastest CPU to getting faster storage. Especially for multicam work, faster storage provides more benefits than a faster CPU.
Given the speed of today’s processors, just about any CPU is more than fast enough to edit any flavor of HD video.
FUSION DRIVE
I bought: 1 TB Fusion drive
I upgraded to the 1 TB Fusion drive. This new technology from Apple combines the speed of SSD (Solid State Drive) with the storage capacity of standard spinning hard disks.
However, the Fusion drive delivers the fastest speeds when it is accessing the same material over and over. This means that it is optimized for the operating system and applications. Since we are constantly changing media, a Fusion drive won’t delvier the same level of performance with our media.
I have long been a fan of storing media to a separate drive, rather than on the boot drive. In the past, this was primarily for performance reasons. Now, the internal drive is faster, but an external drive allows far more storage and flexibility.
I strongly recommend using an external RAID system, connected via USB 3, or Thunderbolt (more on that in a bit), because it will store more than any single internal drive, provided more than enough speed, protect your data using the data redundancy in the RAID, and allow easy upgrading by simply swapping out devices.
For me, the ideal situation is the Fusion drive for the OS, and an external RAID 5 for all media.
RAM
I bought: 16 GB RAM
I upgraded to 16 GB of RAM. Both Premiere and FCP will use all the RAM you have available. So will video compression software. 16 GB is a nice balance between performance and price. And, unless you are creating some truly massive edits, you won’t notice enough difference between 16 and 32 GB of RAM to justify the additional cost.
GRAPHICS CARD (GPU)
I bought: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX
This was a harder decision. Both Premiere CS6 and Final Cut X take advantage of the graphics card. However, in the CS6 release, Adobe only initially supported the graphics cards in the MacBook Pro. (Traditionally, Adobe only supports nVidia cards and all the Apple gear uses ATI.)
Now that the new iMacs include nVidia, I’m hoping (but do NOT know for sure) that Adobe will quickly support the graphics cards in these new Macs. I’ve sent a note off to my friends at Adobe to see what I can learn and will let you know what I find out.
NOTE: Even if Adobe doesn’t support the graphics cards, Premiere Pro CS6 will run perfectly OK using just the CPU. It won’t do as much, or work as fast as when the graphics card is involved, but you can still use Premiere on these new systems.
This isn’t the fastest GPU that’s available, but it is the second fastest. Again, for me, this was a balance between performance and price. Video editing requires a fast overall system, balanced amongst all the major components.
GPU RAM
I bought: 1 GB GDDRS
The RAM in a graphics card determines how many elements, for example frames of video, it can store for processing.
3D software and Motion makes extensive use of GPU RAM. However, video editors are using it principally for pixel painting. Since I am an editor more than a motion graphics designer, I don’t need the extra GPU RAM. So, I stayed with the base level of 1 GB.
KEYBOARD AND MOUSE
I bought: Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad (wired) and mouse (wired)
Wireless gear is great, until your system starts acting up. At which point, you need a wired keyboard for maintenance. Also, there are a number of very useful keyboard shortcuts in all my applications that take advantage of the keypad.
If I were shooting a television commercial, I’d use a wireless keyboard and mouse because it looks cool on camera. Because I am editing television commercials, I’m using a wired keyboard and mouse because they work great, decrease my stress, allows me to easily do maintenance on my system, and don’t require batteries.
EXTERNAL STORAGE
I bought: (um, nothing yet)
Since ProRes 422 is the default video codec of Final Cut Pro X, and a great codec to use for Adobe Premiere, I need storage that is big enough and fast enough to handle this format.
Prores 422 requires about 18 MB/second of data transfer between the computer and storage. Because much of what I shoot is 3-5 camera multicam projects, this means I need to move about 100 MB/second of data.
The problem is that FireWire 800 tops out around 80-85 MB/second. Gigabit Ethernet tops out around 100 MB/second, assuming your switch and server can handle the speeds, and most data switches that cost less than $200 can’t handle that much data over a long period of time.
NOTE: A “switch” is a device that allows multiple computers to connect to the internet or a server by switching data from one device to another. These are made by NetGear, LinkSys, Cisco, and others. A “server” is a computer with a large hard disk or RAID that allows multiple computers to share the same files. Servers can be a simple as a Mac Mini, or as complex as an Avid Isis system.
Larry
This means that I need storage that connects via either USB 3, or Thunderbolt. (This is an iMac, which means that plug-in cards are not an option.) Yes, I could buy converter boxes – for example, from Thunderbolt to eSATA, or mini-SAS, but these boxes cost several hundred dollars apiece. If I were integrating existing hardware, this would be an inexpensive way to go. However, I’m buying all new gear.
It is at this point that I’m puzzled about why storage vendors are having such a hard time shipping RAID 5 Thunderbolt-based storage devices. Yes, Promise Technologies is out there, and they recently dropped their prices. But where are the traditional storage vendors? G-Technology and LaCie both offer RAID 0 (which is fast, but provides no data safety in the event one of the hard drives in the unit dies), but no RAID 5. Drobo was way late in shipping their Thunderbolt storage and I haven’t had a chance to look at the shipping product. And, as far as I know, traditional RAID vendors haven’t even announced RAID 5 storage with Thunderbolt connectivity.
It is troubling to me that this new format is taking so long to take shape and appear in quantity in the market. Is this a licensing issue? Technical or integration issues? Are there hidden problems inherent with the Thunderbolt format that are holding things up? I have been inquiring about this for months and have not gotten a clear answer from any vendor.
So, I decided to hold off buying storage until I could do more research. My iMac is still a month away from shipping, so I have some time to figure this out.
ARCHIVING
I bought: (also, nothing yet)
Long-term data storage, today, means LTO tape. The problem is that all the tape vendors – Cache-A, The Tolis Group, XENDATA – provide solutions much closer to $10,000 than to $2,000.
This is the other big issue in our industry: how do we protect the assets that we shot for 5, 10, 20 years into the future? If you are a major studio, money is no object and there are many solutions. However, if you are an independent producer, or small production company, dollars are hard to come by. There are no good archiving solutions that are reasonably priced.
I spoke with the three founders of Ultrium, the consortium of HP, IBM, and Quantum that invented LTO, about when they expect to provide Thunderbolt-based LTO storage? All three said that they had nothing to announce and the consortium did not have a position on how devices connect to computers.
Again, we could take existing gear – currently costing $7,000 – 9,000 and use Thunderbolt converter boxes to connect it to an iMac, but, this simply takes a unit which is already too expensive and makes it even more unaffordable.
NOTE: The Tolis Group announced yesterday new gear aimed at creative producers. The ArGest line supports both LTO-5 and LTO-6, and the Thunderbolt version, which still requires a converter box, starts at $6,898. (Information about this new product is not yet on their website.)
I’ve said this before and say it again: The LTO vendor that can figure how how to provide a direct-attached LTO drive that works with a Mac and connects directly via Thunderbolt for less than $4,000 is going to make a lot of money.
For now, I REALLY need some way to archive my media. but none of the units out there support either my budget or my computer.
SUMMARY
Buying any computer is always a trade-off between dreams, performance, and budget. I’m looking forward to getting my new system. I’m also looking forward to figuring out what I can use for external storage. To me, THAT is the key to successful video editing – storage that is large, fast, secure, and affordable. That, and some way to back it all up.
I’ll keep you informed as I decide what to add for the remaining pieces. As always, feel free to share your opinions.
Larry
85 Responses to Configuring An iMac For Video Editing
← Older Comments Newer Comments →-
Dimitri says:
December 4, 2012 at 4:17 am
-
Maureen says:
December 4, 2012 at 3:55 pm
-
kursad yonet says:
December 5, 2012 at 6:26 pm
-
Larry says:
December 6, 2012 at 1:01 am
-
Breht says:
December 6, 2012 at 1:11 pm
-
Craig says:
December 6, 2012 at 2:58 pm
-
Larry says:
December 6, 2012 at 3:04 pm
-
WTL says:
December 6, 2012 at 4:43 pm
-
Mike South says:
December 10, 2012 at 8:42 am
-
Larry says:
December 10, 2012 at 10:46 am
-
Austin says:
December 10, 2012 at 12:20 pm
-
Larry says:
December 11, 2012 at 12:32 am
-
Austin Hitchcock says:
December 12, 2012 at 11:19 am
-
Larry says:
December 12, 2012 at 11:35 am
-
Don says:
December 17, 2012 at 12:05 pm
← Older Comments Newer Comments →I would go for the maximum configuration when buying a iMax 27″ for video editing and motion graphics. Use a Pegasus 4TB or 8TB Thunderbolt and you don’t realize that your Thunderbolt drive is external, it’s so fast it is almost like using an internal drive. I prefer the 768GB flash drive considering you’re archiving all video files on a external disc.
Although Pegasus is based on traditional drives, why not use the fastest internal drive with a flash memory. Think of buying something that you will meet your requirements, not only today, but also within one or two years. I would not doubt … choose a flashdrive as an interal drive, a thunderbolt xTB external drive. Flash memory isn’t cheap … but nevertheles the fastest to edit smoothly with large video material (from fullHD to 2K and even 4K in the future). No or Yes ? 🙂
I have been training at Light Iron to use the Lilypad and Outpost carts on set and was told that they come with a LTO writers built in. I was told the robots that write 6 tapes at a time are around $6000 but that a single writer was around $1600. I’m pretty sure, I would only need a single writer for archival purposes.
hey Larry great job .Thanks and i would like to ask you about After Effects.Can your configuration handle that too.
Theoretically, yes. However, Adobe has not said anything formal about whether they will support the graphics card in these new iMacs.
larry
I hope they do support the new graphics card in the iMac, that’s one of the programs I tend to use most often. To be honest I wanted a Mac Pro but Apple did a B.S. silent upgrade to them and won’t add USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt to them for some reason. I’ve read that they’re releasing a new Mac Pro in 2013 so I was considering getting something to hold me over until then, either a maxed out Mac Mini with an SSD and 16 Gigs of RAM or this new iMac with 32 Gigs of RAM. Apple charges around $500 to max out the RAM on the iMac when you can get the same amount of RAM from Crucial for $180. The problem is the new iMac is glued shut and you need a heat gun to remove the screen and you literally have to take the entire computer apart then flip the logic board over to access the “user replaceable” RAM. That’s soooo messed up! I’m currently running everything off my dual core i7 MacBook Pro attached to my 30″ cinema display so the Mac Mini at quad core with 16 gigs or Mac is an upgrade for me. But I would definitely like to know about Adobe utilizing the graphics card in the iMac.
I think people here don’t understand the challenges Apple faces in designing the new MacPro replacement.
1) There doesn’t seem to be any Xeon motherboards with Thunderbolt implementation.
2) All Thunderbolt computers to date have the GPU on the motherboard as I understand.
Either Apple is going to do some amazing workaround or Intel is working with the to introduce an amazing new computer. That it’s taking so long probably means this will have Thunderbolt and they are working through these challenges. Theres’s nothing “BS” or any abandonment of “Pro” by doing this.
I do have my own speculation about where Apple is going with this but I do think it will be radical, new, initially unique to Apple (and Intel) technology.
Keep in mind that FCPX takes advantage of AVX technology found only in Sandy and Ivy Bridge chips which don’t exist in current MacPro Xeon processors. This is probably why many people report that FCPX seems faster on various Thunderbolt Macs than many MacPros. The MacPro replacement will likely have at least a Sandy Bridge Xeon if not newer depending on what happens with motherboard, Thunderbolt, GPU implementation.
Apple’s decision on USB3 is also tied to Intel technology. Intel only started implementing USB3 on their motherboards recently. While that hasn’t been a problem for desktop manufacturers who use fast busses, it has been for laptops. Note that the Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle USB3 is only certified for a single MSI laptop. USB3 have been uneven at best. Apple, which likes uniformity across its product line, waited for reliable motherboard implementation so users can get consistent performance with consistent design from Apple.
Apple is NOT a “consumer” company. They are a commodity company. Design uniformity and consistency means increased parts orders at lower prices and easier implementation and support.
Thunderbolt is primarily used for Video I/O, RAID, PCIe chassis. Now even the MacMini has 4 lane PCIe access as does the MacBook Air. Your very expensive “pro” devices are no longer limited to desktop use.
Even iOS devices are not “consumer” even though they certainly hit that market. There’s a large number of very professional apps used for both content creation and business management. I certainly don’t consider my PrompterPeople iPad Prompter “consumer” nor do the professional journalist looking at the PadCaster.
That Apple makes products that can meet the “consumption” needs of the “consumer” and the content creation and business management needs of the “professional” is a testament to their success as a COMMODITY manufacturer. Each product hits a wide market allowing for large parts orders across several related hardware products.
Given the pattern, you’re probably going to see the same thinking in the MacPro replacement. While it won’t be a broad reach machine, it may satisfy a wider array of “pros” than the current narrow focused MacPro. I can explain why bit that involves even more speculation I’d rather not go into at the moment.
In any case the MacPro replacement will probably be a major technology advancement. If anything, with Thunderbolt, Apple is probably more focused on “pro” hardware than they have ever been.
Craig:
Some VERY interesting thoughts – thanks for sharing them.
larry
I’m an editor with a 2008 MacPro – four internal drives, four more connected via an second SATA card, and three Drobos (two four bay and one five bay). One is connected to my Time Capsule for DVD storage. The other two are FW800, with one for current project storage, and the second as completed project storage.
I’ve never been a fan of tape. Spinning, redundant disks, I am. And of course, I have off-site backups of everything. Drives are relatively cheap now, and it’s easy enough to manage.
Larry,
Great article here. I am mostly interested in what you come up with for your storage solution. I’ve just been reading your August article about RAID systems – Im looking to build a RAID5 for my 2009 Mac Pro.
My question is – what’s the best way to go about this? Is the best way to buy a good ’empty shell’, and fill it with say 4 matching drives? I was thinking USB3 might be the way to go (3 drives won’t make thunderbolt necessary) – but I still am trying to work out how to get my Mac Pro to read the RAID. Presumably I would need a USB3 card. Would I also need the Apple RAID card? (I didn’t order this when buying the mac originally).
Or maybe ESATA is still a good way to go?
Sorry – pretty clueless on this. Can’t seem to find any good examples of anyone building their first Mac Pro RAID5 online. Maybe one of your readers could also weigh in?
Thanks in advance!
For pure speed, Promise is probably the best choice. For greatest flexibility, look at Drobo. For low cost, look at G-Technology. Here’s a product review I wrote yesterday about the Drobo 5D: http://www.larryjordan.biz/product-review-drobo-5d/
Larry
Hi Larry
Thanks for the article.
I too will be holding off on storage till the prices drop a little.
What sort of results can expect if I partition my 3TB fusion drive, leaving one half for media and scratch disk? I image final cut would be on the SSD. My alternative is an external FireWire 800 drive.
Thanks
Austin
Austin:
I would not recommend partitioning the Fusion drive. Since we have no control over what gets stored on the SSD drive – the OS handles that independently of us – and since media is not played often enough to take advantage of the SSD, I would recommend doing a test between an external FireWire drive and storing on the Fusion drive. The FireWire drive will be more convenient, but, I suspect, the Fusion drive will be a bit faster.
Larry
Hi Larry
I was just talking with an Apple tech and he said that video media should be stored to an external drive. The reason is that the fusion drive will drop frames due to the speed difference of the two sides of the fusion drive.
What kind of benefits will I see when editing if I use a Thunderbolt Raid over nonraid?
Thanks
Austin
A RAID provides greater speed and greater storage capacity.
Larry
Craig,
Enjoyed your post very much, especially your observation that Apple is a ‘commodity’ company. I agree completely that they’ve broadened their products’ reach by blurring what a ‘pro’ is, ie: ‘consumers that want pro features, plus people making money at video who aren’t Hollywood,’ and that this broadening is fundamental to their procurement and manufacturing processes (as well as profitability) — all good things.
The problem is, however, that 4-lane MacMinis will never touch what 4-slot MacPros are capable of doing. If I understand correctly, a Quadro card by itself requires 16 lanes (view this excellent commentary for more: http://vimeo.com/35122338). Also, iOS devices running apps that pros find useful is more an indirect benefit of these well-powered devices’ media capabilities being exploited by savvy developers, than anything that Apple has done strategically.
We’ll see what they come out with next year, but after FCPX I get a little nervous when Apple ‘re-imagines’ anything that has to do with pro video. They used to serve pros well, and in fact needed the business. But times have changed. Today they just don’t make enough money there for me to believe that they’re focused very much on ‘pros’ at all.