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

Top Spec 15" Capable of Editing FULL HD?

G

GeorgeCWB

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 28, 2010
56
0
I apologise if this is a stupid question, I have seen Many repeated threads yet this one surprisingly has been left out. Maybe it's because it's a silly question, I bought a full HD camcorder the other year... and yes, I HAD done my research.

However there was one major aspect that I had left out, editing. It appeared that even my 3.06ghz Duo Asus G71 couldn't handle it. It also appeared that technology hadn't advanced enough for HD to be edited successfully.

Now that my 15" MBP Arrandale, 2.66ghz, 256SSD, 8GB, High Ress Matt Screen is on the way. The thought occurred to me, is it now possible to edit the full HD? I am talking complete 1080i.

Keeping in mind it's capable of being turbo boosted to 3.33ghz.

Any help is much appreciated. :)
 
What app(s) are you going to use? For Final Cut Studio and iMovie it's fine as they aren't multicore but After Effects is.

BTW, 1080i isn't "full HD" :cool:
 
Hellhammer said:
What app(s) are you going to use? For Final Cut Studio and iMovie it's fine as they aren't multicore but After Effects is.

BTW, 1080i isn't "full HD" :cool:
Click to expand...

It's not? Says that on the camcorder! LIES!!!

Anyway, As of yet I haven't considered what program to use. However which software is most recommended to take advantage of the multi-threading that these new Arrandales support?

How is Adobe Premiere?
 
GeorgeCWB said:
It's not? Says that on the camcorder! LIES!!!

Anyway, As of yet I haven't considered what program to use. However which software is most recommended to take advantage of the multi-threading that these new Arrandales support?

How is Adobe Premiere?
Click to expand...

From what I've heard, After Effects and Premier CS5 supports hyper-threading ;)

~mtt.
 
Well it should be... my mid 2007 iMac (which according to geekbech is slower than mbp 2,4 i5) runs final cut, color and after effects just perfectly...
 
GeorgeCWB said:
It's not? Says that on the camcorder! LIES!!!

Anyway, As of yet I haven't considered what program to use. However which software is most recommended to take advantage of the multi-threading that these new Arrandales support?

How is Adobe Premiere?
Click to expand...

I think it supports multiple cores, at least After Effects does, so it'd be best performance vise.

How intensive stuff are you going to do? Just cut&copy&paste stuff or something heavier?

INeedAMacBook said:
yea... isn't 1080p full HD? or did you mean to say 1080p not 1080i
Click to expand...

Yeah, 1080p is "Full HD"
 
maaesko said:
Well it should be... my mid 2007 iMac (which according to geekbech is slower than mbp 2,4 i5) runs final cut, color and after effects just perfectly...
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. My 13" 2.53ghz MBP runs FCP no problem. I edit in HD everyday.
 
Hellhammer said:
I think it supports multiple cores, at least After Effects does, so it'd be best performance vise.

How intensive stuff are you going to do? Just cut&copy&paste stuff or something heavier?



Yeah, 1080p is "Full HD"
Click to expand...

Urm, I'm quite sure that 1080p is 1080 progressive and 1080i is interlaced.
Forgive me if i'm wrong but isn't interlaced the superior of the two?

I have a Sony HDR-UX3, aged 2-3 years. It produced AVCHD format which 2-3 years ago was impossible to edit. Hopefully CS5 will rectify that :)

I am sorry? Non linear editor? That doesn't ring any bells.

I plan to do some quite CPU heavy editing.
 
Physics class told me that 1080p is better than 1080i.

When the monitor is refreshing, progressive does every pixel on the way down and on the way back up. Where as interlaced, does every other one on the way down and then the others on the way back up.

For most things, they look the same, but I guess if we are talking fast sports shots, you may see a difference.

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I only got a B in physics. :rolleyes:
 
millertime021 said:
Physics class told me that 1080p is better than 1080i.

When the monitor is refreshing, progressive does every pixel on the way down and on the way back up. Where as interlaced, does every other one on the way down and then the others on the way back up.

For most things, they look the same, but I guess if we are talking fast sports shots, you may see a difference.

Correct me if I'm wrong, as I only got a B in physics. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

My bad, a quick google proves me wrong :)
 
MBHockey said:
Check out this video. Easy to understand why 720p looks better than 1080i with fast moving scenes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-JXfyvlPh0
Click to expand...

That's why I said, for film based content. Film is 24fps. TV shows are usually 30fps. An 1080i/60fps video would be deinterlaced to 1080p/30fps, making it indistinguishable from 1080p.

The only time where 1080p is better than 1080i is 60fps content (like sports, for example).
 
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