To editors who use rMBPs

[hibanzai]

I want a rMBP (preferably 13") for normal use, andvideo and photo editing.
Now i know lightroom usability with raw on the new macbook pros are effortless, what concerns me is the video editing.

I use adobe premiere, and after searching the adobe forums, i realized that they have ridicoulously high standards to what machines should be used for editing, and what is considered unusable. What i need is a light laptop that can edit 1080, avchd, mp4, etc... I dont think i'll play with 2k, but might play test footage on it.

I also want to go for the midrange 13" macbook pro retina. 8gb ram, 256gb hd, and intel iris graphics, which i presume is 1gb. Will this suffice? I also intend to have windows 7.

Thanks!

 

[raniel]

Although it can do the tasks you plan for it. its much better if you get the highest RAM and ssd you can afford for future proffing

 

[hibanzai]

Although it can do the tasks you plan for it. its much better if you get the highest RAM and ssd you can afford for future proffing

Good to know that it will work with those formats just fine. I was sceptical about the avchd format. As for future proofing, i'd agree with you if i keep laptops for more than two years. As such, i will probably be seeking the newest, fastest technology in two to three years time.

I am however considering 16gb for ram, and an external hd for media that i can purchase later on. 265 gb isnt much, but the extra cost for the 512 upgrade is eyewateringly expensive, the whole laptop is to be frank.

 

[thekev]

Good to know that it will work with those formats just fine. I was sceptical about the avchd format. As for future proofing, i'd agree with you if i keep laptops for more than two years. As such, i will probably be seeking the newest, fastest technology in two to three years time.

Unless GPGPU worms its way in, you aren't likely to see much of a difference in 2 years. Look at the last 2. Intel has been running short on room to push further X86 performance. There is obviously the issue of wear and tear, so I can see some people keeping up with the purchase cycle.

 

[hibanzai]

Unless GPGPU worms its way in, you aren't likely to see much of a difference in 2 years. Look at the last 2. Intel has been running short on room to push further X86 performance. There is obviously the issue of wear and tear, so I can see some people keeping up with the purchase cycle.

This makes me wonder if I should go for an early 2013 macbook pro 13 open-box, if I can find one with max'd out ram and maybe a decent sized HD. The only difference in this case is 3rd gen intel, worse battery life, but based on your comment not that bad in comparison in terms of performance, and the intel 4000 graphics.. which I think is 1gb, correct me if am wrong, as opposed to the new intel iris.

 

[thekev]

This makes me wonder if I should go for an early 2013 macbook pro 13 open-box, if I can find one with max'd out ram and maybe a decent sized HD. The only difference in this case is 3rd gen intel, worse battery life, but based on your comment not that bad in comparison in terms of performance, and the intel 4000 graphics.. which I think is 1gb, correct me if am wrong, as opposed to the new intel iris.

It should be fine. If it's not, then I doubt the 2013 model would be. They aren't drastically different. I am almost certain the HD 4000 can only grab up to 512 on OSX. I'm not sure about iris. There are some cases where a specific amount of vram is required. Photoshop (since you mentioned photo editing) requires it for very specific things. It speeds up things like warp and liquify a little, because gpus are extremely fast at parallel calculations. You can find tests on barefeats, but take them in context. Most people use extraneous filter functions during a very small percentage of their total editing time. The same goes for video equivalents. The thing I dislike about testing methods are that they aren't always realistic settings. He did a liquify one where he swept across the mesh with broad strokes. If you do that, it produces topological errors which means a lot of weird math in an attempt to give you a result. In real use on high res files, it might shave off a couple seconds here and there. It would have been more useful if they did these things years ago, back when cpus performed very slowly on such functions.