whats the difference between the two 13"s?

it's a matter of hours. no really if you don't do some serious video encoding or something like that you are not able to notice any difference. i mean you could film it in slo-mo and wouldn't notice a difference in the playback

I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Seconds or minutes of what? If you're doing video encoding, sure you'll notice a difference, but if you're using it for standard uses, you likely won't notice a difference.

alust2013 said:

If you're doing video encoding, sure you'll notice a difference, but if you're using it for standard uses, you likely won't notice a difference.

Click to expand...

Could I interject with a question?

I have not done any video work to speak of. But... I think I would like to get into it a little bit more. This would not be on a professional level, and I imagine I would be using clips from a regular (non-video) camera or maybe a Go-Pro HD camera. Thinking of iMovie 11 or FCE for editing.


So, my question: What is "video encoding"? Like I said.... (obviously) I haven't done any video to-date. Would what I described above be "encoding"? Does all video work include encoding? Or only some certain types?

(Right now I have a 2010 MBP, 2.4ghz 4g RAM. Upgrading to 8g RAM seems like a no-brainer no matter what I do. But I want to take a big-picture view, and maybe that means a whole new computer? OTOH, I'm not the type who has to have the best or new unless it would really make a difference. But, I'm not trying to make this into a thread about my computer, so I really just want to know about "video encoding.")

Thanks

The difference is 1 minute 6 seconds

Miss Terri,
U
You are fine with what you have for a long while. Although the 8 mgs might be worth it.

Don't get caught up in the hype. Run those apps now and see for yourself.

Miss Terri said:

So, my question: What is "video encoding"?

Click to expand...

It's merely "rendering" your digital edit, from say FCE into the various formats for viewing. Or... converting an existing movie format to another.

The encoding process requires tons of "frame-by-frame" compression to keep the resultant size manageable which is why it's so CPU intensive.

Thanks buckwheat987. Heh, I don't even like getting a new machine (too much trauma wondering if it will be a good one, etc.), and I'm still a bit caught up in it. Probably moreso because I just got this machine a short while ago and could maybe even exchange it for a new one. But then I think "Hmm, a new 13"? A 15" so I could get rid of the glossy screen? Forget movies and get an Air for portability?"

Heh, so I should probably just upgrade my RAM and not do anything more until I figure out what I would even want to change to, if I changed.

OTOH...

Grouchy Bob, Oh, so it's the same as rendering. Aha. Well I was with a friend over the holidays, and he was doing video stuff on a huge, whomping ASUS gaming machine (seriously, you could heat a room with the exhaust coming out the side vent - it was a beast) and even that took ages to render video. So I guess it is really demanding. I didn't realize that was the same as encoding.

Aaand, I'm not sure how "into it" I'm going to get, yet.

Thanks to both of you for the input, and to Funkymonk for the use of his thread

Miss Terri

Late 2010 MBP 13" - 2.4ghz - 4g RAM
Mid 2008 MB --- died
Early 2002 iBook 14" - 600mhz - 640m RAM --- still kicking!