3 ms·

There are plenty of editors who would love to be able to edit 4 8K (or 12K!) streams in real time :) I still deal with 1080p and get annoyed at my hardware's l

There are plenty of editors who would love to be able to edit 4 8K (or 12K!) streams in real time :) I still deal with 1080p and get annoyed at my hardware's limitations. If I could justify a Mac Pro and Apple's accelerator card, I'd get them in a heartbeat. For certain applications, no matter how good the hardware you have is, there's always a desire for more, faster hardware.

mikece 5y ago
"There are plenty of editors who would love to be able to edit 4 8K (or 12K!) streams in real time :)" Is that really a common scenario? I can see editors at the big studios using monsters like this (because the studios can afford it) but are we talking about a market of hundreds or thousands? Is this something a free-lance video person would use?
- theklr 5y ago
  Not yet, but that future is nigh. And if you’re discussing workhorse computers, I’d at least want that capability for when the time comes.
- mjburgess 5y ago
  I think this is an overstatement anyway. It's more likely that these cores will accelerate increasingly complex effects applied to one 4k/8k stream. M1 is fast at editing, but not particularly fast when you factor in processing.
- jamesfmilne 5y ago
  No, 8K is not really reality at the moment, but editing UltraHD is reality, and being able to easily edit or composite 2/3 streams of UltraHD with some complex effects in realtime is desirable. It's a bit mind-bending for those of us who remember the SGI Octane and Onyx days to think that 100x as much computation is available at 100x less power-consumption. (That's 10,000 times more efficient, for those following along at home.) Between that and the almost infinite instantaneous computation power available in the cloud at the press of a few buttons (and sufficient capacity on one's credit card), we ain't in Kansas any more.

3 ms·

There are plenty of editors who would love to be able to edit 4 8K (or 12K!) streams in real time :) I still deal with 1080p and get annoyed at my hardware's l

by geerlingguy 5y ago

mikece 5y ago
"There are plenty of editors who would love to be able to edit 4 8K (or 12K!) streams in real time :)" Is that really a common scenario? I can see editors at the big studios using monsters like this (because the studios can afford it) but are we talking about a market of hundreds or thousands? Is this something a free-lance video person would use?
- theklr 5y ago
  Not yet, but that future is nigh. And if you’re discussing workhorse computers, I’d at least want that capability for when the time comes.
- mjburgess 5y ago
  I think this is an overstatement anyway. It's more likely that these cores will accelerate increasingly complex effects applied to one 4k/8k stream. M1 is fast at editing, but not particularly fast when you factor in processing.
- jamesfmilne 5y ago
  No, 8K is not really reality at the moment, but editing UltraHD is reality, and being able to easily edit or composite 2/3 streams of UltraHD with some complex effects in realtime is desirable. It's a bit mind-bending for those of us who remember the SGI Octane and Onyx days to think that 100x as much computation is available at 100x less power-consumption. (That's 10,000 times more efficient, for those following along at home.) Between that and the almost infinite instantaneous computation power available in the cloud at the press of a few buttons (and sufficient capacity on one's credit card), we ain't in Kansas any more.