Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Final Cut Pro 6, Final Cut Extreme, Xserve RAID

tenspoth said:
:) :) :) :)

COOL! MAN!

I do motion graphics and always cut and edit with final cut. I love this!!!! I can't wait for after effects SE7EN!!!!! gonna blow my mind! YO YO YOnah plus final cut six! it's mt wet dream baby! render que will no longer exist! exept for when i dream about the good old days of avid. i need the acom baby!

whole man Cal ish for the fish in the pan i'm so excited!.

word to apple not pear.


:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Have you seen AE 7 yet, it has a much better interface, but it isn't anything revolutionary. Kind of a let down if you ask me.
 
pknz said:
My god thats expensive. Not that I know much about this type of thing but all the numbers and letters thrown in make it sound pretty top of the line. 40" Screen? Go Apple.
Click to expand...

4K is native 35mm film 'resolution' (or at least what it gets scanned in at for editing purposes). Awesome stuff. Loooong render times.

I wish Apple would spend some of that $10,000 per seat (although I've heard $7000) on licensing some patent technologies from Avid. Basic functions like trimming are still not great in FCP. Speak to ANY Avid editor who does a lot of film and tv editing. The reason that some of the largest facilites around the world aren't switching to Mac is for that simple reason. Big shame.
 
corywoolf said:
Have you seen AE 7 yet, it has a much better interface, but it isn't anything revolutionary. Kind of a let down if you ask me.
Click to expand...

It really isn't that much of an improvement. So it has stretchy palettes instead of a gazillion floating ones? Big dealio. Can we please have a Motion-like realtime preview engine instead? Not going to happen because they would have to maintain 2 totally different code bases. Not worth it for adobe, sadly.
 
Everyone should realize that is for high high end work. This is 16mm and 35 work. Viewing a 2K imagine is rediculous already on a 30 inch and a 50+ inch display is going to cost well over $5,000 as it should be. It's not playing Halo on it, it's for people with serious money that are doing serious film editing. YES you will need dual quatro cards in there. Yes you will need an Xserve Extreme attach to your quad. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole rig goes for $20,000. That is a steal compared to $100,000 set up with Avid. So everyone be happy for Apple and stop bitching about the prices. This most likely isn't for you.
 
Ha, maybe we'll be seeing some octo-macs soon so they have something that can actually edit and render at 4520x2540.....:D

D
 
TyleRomeo said:
So everyone be happy for Apple and stop bitching about the prices. This most likely isn't for you.
Click to expand...


Dude. Chill. People are bitching because at the thought of a screen larger then 30" sitting on their desk...and they can't get it....
mecry.gif


:)
 
Good stuff, but honestly until they introduced the Quad i thought they were forgetting about their Pro's and getting a little Consumer-happy. I still kind of think that Apple is shifting away from the professional lineup, which is a shame. I got a quad, and love it. But Apple is still not updating their pro hardware enough to keep pace. I hope this changes with the Intel transition. After all, the specs for Final Cut Extreme do call for "high end" hardware.
 
TyleRomeo said:
A LOT OF MONEY. But this isn't for the average Joe consumer that wants a bigger screen. This is for viewing a 4K image. Name one monitor that can do that.
Click to expand...

They are going after the Avid Nitris and adreniline with this. Most 4K systems use HD projectors for playback at the moment. This should be a lot more fun.
 
SiliconAddict said:
Dude. Chill. People are bitching because at the thought of a screen larger then 30" sitting on their desk...and they can't get it....
mecry.gif


:)
Click to expand...
Sweet Lord... a 50" HD-LCD cinema display! There's gotta be a point where the display is so big that if you look at stuff in the corner you could really hurt your neck. :p
 
the silver fox said:
They are going after the Avid Nitris and adreniline with this. Most 4K systems use HD projectors for playback at the moment. This should be a lot more fun.
Click to expand...

Yes, but how many projectors can actually display every last pixel of a 4K image. I don't know of any, pretty soon you'll be able to to that in your bedroom. That blows my mind. Go Apple.
 
Randall said:
Sweet Lord... a 50" HD-LCD cinema display! There's gotta be a point where the display is so big that if you look at stuff in the corner you could really hurt your neck. :p
Click to expand...

Yah but think about getting 54 of these things along with the necessary computing power. You could make yourself your own personal holodeck. :D Imagine sitting in the middle of your screen saver. :eek:
 
TyleRomeo said:
Everyone should realize that is for high high end work. This is 16mm and 35 work. Viewing a 2K imagine is rediculous already on a 30 inch and a 50+ inch display is going to cost well over $5,000 as it should be. It's not playing Halo on it, it's for people with serious money that are doing serious film editing. YES you will need dual quatro cards in there. Yes you will need an Xserve Extreme attach to your quad. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole rig goes for $20,000. That is a steal compared to $100,000 set up with Avid. So everyone be happy for Apple and stop bitching about the prices. This most likely isn't for you.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Of course, because it's Apple, everyone wants it anyway. Even if they never use more than PhotoShop and a bit of FCP or AE.

This is purely for film work, the market that Apple has been trying to break into for a LONG time with the purchase of Nothing Real etc etc. Now that it has the ear of a few people like WETA, although they use Linux, not Mac, it should make the job a little easier.

Up until now, because FCP hasn't really been a serious contender in hi-end work (yes, yes, with some notable exceptions), big players like ILM wont get macs in studios as it costs them too much in IT support for both. Things like this might make people sit up and take notice.
 
BlizzardBomb said:
You can't just assume they'll keep the same amount of pixels per inch. If it's true I would guess at a 40" or 42".
Click to expand...
Why not? there is already a disgusting amount of pixels per inch. They don't need more do they? I guess higher resolution on the same size display is a possibility.
 
odedia said:
For anyone who wonders how they can drive that thing, just remember that the NVIDIA 6800 DDL was able to drive TWO 30" displays, for a total of 8 megamixels. this new resolution totals 11 megapixels, so an NVIDIA 7800 GTX with 512MB shouldn't have any trouble dealing with this thing.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you're incorrect. The reason the 6800DDL can drive two 30" displays is because it has a Dual-Link DVI connector. I believe DDL maxes out at 2560x1600, meaning it can't go higher, because theres too much bandwith (though it may be higher then 2560x1600, there is a cap). THAT is the reason a special card is needed for the 30". It has really nothing to do with video memory.
 
This looks to be probably a 42"/50" HD display designed for the media room and not for your computer.Although someone will use it that way I'm sure!

With the specs for this stuff it makes me wonder just WHAT does Jobs have up his sleeve for MWSF?

WOW !!
 
WildCowboy said:
Some quick math on that display suggests that if the pixels are the same size as those on the 30-inch, this will be a 50-inch display.

You can only guess how much that will cost.

And as Dreadnought pointed out, how do you drive that thing?
Click to expand...

Will be interesting to see if it becomes part of a consumer HDTV strategy to go with whatever Mac mini media center Apple has cooking. (Apple's 30-inch cinema HD, for example, is $2,500, which is comparable to Sony's 32-inch Bravia LCD HDTV ($2,700 at Best Buy).

Would it take much more than good marketing for Apple to let its display line loose on the TV market?
 
SiliconAddict said:
A LARGER display? Are we talking larger then the 30" sweet lord! :eek:
Click to expand...

If I had to bet I would say the "bigger" display will not be much larger then the current 30" display. Instead it will have more pixel packed into that form factor.

Mix in a little resolution independent UI (ala Mac OS X 10.5, or some point release of Mac OS X 10.4) and special case handling in Pro apps and you have a usable crisp looking UI with high resolution image/video display capabilities.

Personally I am not sure hardware yet exists for this, well not at any price point near consumer level... so if true this will be a very high-end professional package in the 10s of thousands range.

EDIT... Of course it also is a good possibility that this is a dedicated display (or internal/external projector) that Final Cut can utilize for playback with pixel correct resolution.
 
the silver fox said:
Absolutely. Of course, because it's Apple, everyone wants it anyway. Even if they never use more than PhotoShop and a bit of FCP or AE.

This is purely for film work, the market that Apple has been trying to break into for a LONG time with the purchase of Nothing Real etc etc. Now that it has the ear of a few people like WETA, although they use Linux, not Mac, it should make the job a little easier.

Up until now, because FCP hasn't really been a serious contender in hi-end work (yes, yes, with some notable exceptions), big players like ILM wont get macs in studios as it costs them too much in IT support for both. Things like this might make people sit up and take notice.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. Wait until Murch gets his hands on one of these systems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back