Thank you David. Your knowledge is so much appreciated. As well, your products.
Even Windows XP Professional does support the Quad Cores. You can have up to 2 CPUs with unlimited cores each, in WinXP Pro. For more than 2 physical CPUs you need Win2k3 Server.
If you compare Dell and Apple prices, you have to look closer, as Apple uses the more expensive Xeons (Intel Server CPU) and Dell the cheaper Core 2.
The Xeons have some bigger cache and some more Pro features - like the ability the have more than 2 CPUs (not cores!) switched together.
freezer is right, Windows 2000, XP & Vista (except for Home Basic!) supports 2 physical processor packages. Doesn't matter how many cores are in those packages.
You can also get the Xeons from DELL, but I think they are only in there server line of products (not the workstation line).
For more information about Vista and CPU's & cores: http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_02.asp
*cough* Boxx *cough*
NAB 2007. More than one option for your 2K and 4K workflows.
Forget the Dell. Boxx and Apple rock.
Assuming you have the horsepower to work with 4k files, it seems to me that you'll need to invest in some pretty expensive gear to view it. This is a question which has been on my mind for awhile as I've been going through the Red threads. What kind of monitor do you need in order to view your 4k footage? What kind of video card? What do you need in terms of hard drive space and speed to do a feature length production?
It seems to me thus far that the suggested workflow is shoot at 4k, edit in 2k or less, which makes me think, OK just keep it to 2k then. For a closed loop indie production house looking to be based on Red, it seems like going to a full blown 4k system will be cost prohibative with a low ROI. For a bigger budget studio, I can see where the investment would make sense.
I would say for many productions 2k in the workflow will be enough. If you shoot 4k and process it down to 2k, you will benefit from the better source resolution. You could easily do a pan or zoom into the 4k if needed. For me this is the biggest benefit for working in post when going the 2k route.
Well those are pretty obvious benefits and well covered for anyone who's been reading these threads. I'd like to get back to the question of, what do you need to do 4k editing, or at a minimum be able to view the 4K footage? Is it the general consensus that you can view it with a 2K monitor and don't need to see the 4K footage displayed pixel for pixel? I was hoping someone would pipe in with some 4K editing equipment recommendations. If I missed the thread with that info, please point me there.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|