- Insufficient screen resolution: this means you can not see the full interface and consequently have to guess what option to choose. You will be working in the blind.
- 5400 RPM: Below minimum requirements, which is at least two physical disks. Slower than molasses in winter and effectively unworkable.
- Intel HD Graphics 3000: Does not support CUDA acceleration, slower than even a basic ATI/AMD card.
Summary: Forget it. MBP is not suitable.
Smoothly? Do you consider exporting a 1 hour time-line in 200 hours smoothly, then discovering that on the interface you could not see, you chose a wrong option and you have to start again with 200 hours encoding?
Alright, Harm Millaard, calm down. You seem rather excited that my situation completely fails me.
I merely asked for feedback, not to be gunned down with sarcasm.
On a more professional note, I do understand the points that you raised up, thank you.
Some ideas for a Laptop Video Editing PC from past discussions
-NOTE only 1 hard drive in above, so you will need to add a 2nd drive or use eSata for video files
-or Google "ASUS G74SX-BBK7" (without the quote "" marks)
For effective HD video editing, a laptop with the following
-the newer Intel sandy bridge 2720 or 2820 quad processor
-and nvidia graphics preferably the 460m, 485m is a bit much
-1280x900 display with OpenGL 2.0-compatible graphics card
-and 8 or 16 gig ram and Win7 64bit Pro
-and 2 internal 7200 HDDs minimum
Thank you John Smith. May I just ask why there needs to be 2 HDDs?
SATA is half duplex. That means a one way street. Either reading or writing, not both at the same time. Encoding entails reading a file, waiting for that process to finish, then writing intermediate results, then reading the next file, then writing the next intermediate results, wait for the OS to write to a pagefile, reading, writing, etc.
Reading from one disk and writing to another disk goes twice as fast, with a third or more disks you can distribute the load even better.
What works better, transporting a hockey team in your Beetle by making multiple trips from your house to the hockey field, or having your neighbors help you driving the team by using multiple cars in a single haul?
There really should be at least three (System, Projects/Scratch, Media/Export), which is why Laptops aren't the best choice for editing.
>May I just ask why there needs to be 2 HDDs?
My 3 hard drives are configured as...
1 - 320Gig Boot for Win7 64bit Pro and all program installs
2 - 320Gig data for Win7 swap file and video project files
When I create a project on #2 drive, the various work files follow,
so my boot drive is not used for the media cache folder and files
3 - 1Terabyte data for all video files... input & output files (*)
(*) for 4 drives, drive 3 all source files & drive 4 all output files
Search Microsoft to find out how to redirect your Windows swap file
Trying to use only ONE Hard Drive for Video Editing
You are a music conductor, with a baton that you use to point to various parts of the orchestra... this is like Windows pointing to various parts of the hard drive to do Windows housekeeping or to load program segments for various functions
Now, at the same time and with the same hand... while still using the baton to conduct the orchestra... pick up a bow and play a fiddle... this would be doing something with your video file at the same time as all the other work
You as a person cannot do both at the same time with the same hand
A computer is a LITTLE better, in that it can switch from one kind of task to another very quickly... but not quickly enough for EASY video editing
You need AT LEAST two hard drives (separate drives, never a partition http://forums.adobe.com/thread/650708 for more) with Windows (or Mac OS) and software on your boot drive, and video files on a 2nd drive so the boot drive is not slowed down by trying to do everything
I find that the three drives I use work very well for me, for editing AVCHD video... some people use a 4th drive, so video INPUT files are on drive three and all OUTPUT files are on drive four... I only bought a mid-tower case instead of a full tower case (my bad... but had to fit in the space available on my office desk!) so I use the three drives that will fit
Depending on your exact hardware (motherboard brand & model AND USB2 enclosure brand & model AND external hard drive brand & model) AND the type of video file, you may... or may NOT... be able to use an external USB2 hard drive for SD (Standard Definition) video editing
A USB3 hard drive connected to a motherboard with USB3 is supposed to be fast enough for video editing (I don't have such, so don't know) but eSata DOES have a fast enough data transfer for video editing... I have not used the eSata Dock below... for reference only, YMMV and all the usual disclaimers
Harm, Jim, John, thank you for your answers. I think I can fully appreciate the complexity of the situation.
Such a shame, though. Thanks anyway!
Editing a single, static picure in Photoshop or Photoshop Elements does not require a super powerful computer
Editing even SD (Standard Definition) video means you are loading 30 pictures per second of video, or 25 per second in PAL land... plus audio
That requires a LOT more computing power... and AT LEAST a 2nd hard drive... even more power/drives for HD (High Definition) video
Simply put... a standard laptop will not work well, if at all, for video editing
I would like to add one exception (??) to the three drive rule. If you have a very fast RAID array then you can easily get by with essentially two storage functions, the OS/Applications drive and everything else on the one RAID array. Of course this still means more than three physical drives
I'm working as editor at small production house. Last week our main editing station fried up and as we had tight deadline I installed trial version of Premiere CS5.5 on my personal MBP 2,4Ghz. It's working... but as expected painfully slow.
Few things are a must:
1. external raid 0 - I have WD My Book Studio II (4Tb) - without that DSLR footage sometimes hung up.
2. external monitor - I have Apple 27" - with 13" screen only - it's a mess.
3. and RAM upgrade from standard 4 Gb to 16 Gb - it may speed up a little bit the process or allow to open another soft, e.g. AfterEffects or Photoshop.
I had to combine HDV and DSLR footage in 2 layers with basic color correction and few effects. Cutting was without major blackouts or hung-ups. But effects rendering was slow. Lenght of the clip was <10 min. Rendering ot Mpeg4 took ~ 1 hour .
So do the math - is it worth or not.