FCS2 (FCP6.0.1) using ProRes on a MacPro 3ghz DP Quad Core - beta products?

Just wondering if anyone else is suffering at the hands of FCS2 on a new Intel.
We have just bought the biggest machine Apple offer, with FCS2 as a clean install. The project is being cut in ProRes, and is causing us nightmares.
Constant "out of memory" errors, super frequent crashes and now the system is refusing to find the SmoothCam plugin. We have reinstalled FCS2 already, and it still does not find it.
Our old G5 edit suite is also running FCP 6.0.1, and thankfully is no where near as buggy, but the Intel workstation is dragging the project backwards.
I have repaired permissions, reinstalled the software, cleaned the caches, deleted the preferences. The only thing I have not done is format the hard drive, and start again. Any other tips before I nuke the system?
Cheers
Alister

ok, I have rebuilt the machine from scratch. reformatted and started again. installed all updates and such.
opened existing project, and rendered, and the whole thing has gone south again. maybe not where I thought the issue was.
I then changed the timeline from ProRes HQ (ProRes crashed just as badly) to anything else, and all works fine. so far I have tried Photo JPEG, Apple Intermediate, 8 bit Uncompressed and they all render, play and edit fine - even though the source footage is still ProRes HQ....
curioser and curioser.
I havent bothered swapping out the RAM yet, as this seems to be identifiying the source of issue.
So, I guess I just sit back and wait for an update???
Cheers
Al

Similar Messages

I have a WD 2 tb hard drive that I want to use to back up my Mac Pro quad core. How do I create a back up startup disk? Also, when I used Time macine, it only backed up users and not the system or library folders. Ideas?

I have a WD 2 tb hard drive that I want to use to back up my Mac Pro quad core. How do I create a back up startup disk? Also, when I used Time macine, it only backed up users and not the system or library folders. Ideas?

Welcome to Apple Support Communities
Time Machine should be enough to make a backup of your files. Also, it should back up all folders, so open System Preferences > Time Machine > Options, and make sure that there are no folders included in the excluded items list.
If you want to create a bootable clone of your hard drive, you need to use an app like Carbon Copy Cloner or the Disk Utility's Restore feature > http://pondini.org/OSX/DU7.html

Can I use USB 3 with my 2.8Ghz Quad-core

I have an early 2008, 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon Mac Pro, can I use USB3 Devices with it?

Yes, they are all backward-compatible.
If you wnat USB-3 speed, you would need a PCIe card.

Should i use nodes with a MacPro 3ghz?

I remember reading that logic v7.2.3 enables the computer to fully utilize all four processors.
-Does that mean nodes wouldn't help?
I actually know next to nothing about nodes. Is my assumption right? Namely, that activating them increases performance with quad processors.
-Is there a downside?
-Is it different for Intel models?
MacPro 3ghz, 8 gig RAM, 3 raptor drives (10k rpm) Mac OS X (10.4.8) Logic 7.2.3, Machfive MOTU software sampler

i hope you're right phillip. I haven't really finished setting up logic yet, so i can't be sure. by setting up, i mean loading dozens of synths and leaving them there, so when writing, i can simply change tracks and hit record. My dream has always been to work this way, to maximize work flow while writing.
Until an hour ago, i felt the same way... i have dozens of synths up there and the disk/cpu monitor barely shows anything. Then i hit play, (there were like four synth tracks and a couple apple loops playing) and simultaneously played the keyboard. A message came up saying something like "logic was unable to execute command due to speed", or something. I clicked ok and continued loading synths.
Then i loaded an exs preset and immedietly played the keyboard. logic suddenly crashed. (the first crash on this machine so it was a sad moment)
i don't mind waiting a second to play the keys after loading samples. I'm just concerned that I might already be reaching the limits of this computer.
My plan was also to load like 36 instances of machfive software sampler, each filled with 16 channels of samples.
Then, i'd love to have several dozen apple loops up there, muted, but ready to unmute in an instant. Then, of course, audio tracks at some point.
soooo, 36 synths, 36x16 channels of soft sampler, like 80 apple loops, and a couple dozen audio tracks, all available at once. Obviously, only a tiny fraction of this would ever be playing at once, but ideally, all sitting up there, waiting to play.
Do you think i'll be able to do all this easily?
Even after hearing my plans, you still think nodes aren't necessary?
I sure hope you're right, cause i spent every last cent on this **** thing.
MacPro 3ghz, 8 gig RAM, 3 raptor drives (10k rpm) Mac OS X (10.4.8) Logic 7.2.3, Machfive MOTU software sampler

Can I use ProRes on a - already existing - projet?

Hi everyone,
I've bought FCS2, and so, I have FCP6.
I've currently an existing project in FCP (it come from FCP 5.1.4, and FCP 6 actualized it).
I would like to know if I can convert my project data (my DV stored one my hard drive) into ProRes (DV PAL 48kHz) or if I need to create a new project to use ProRes.
I'm especially interested in ProRes, because I'm run FCP6 on a laptop, and ProRes permit me to use less ressources when I work.
Can I set ProRes (PAL) for all my projects even if some projects didn't have been imported into ProRes. Will FCP 6 annoy me?
Thank in advance,

There's some basic FCP knowledge needed here. Search / browse the manual for the parts where "clip" and "sequence" are defined and explained.
Your clips are DV. You can drag them from anywhere - another sequence, the browser, whatever.
The sequence is the timeline. Its output format is defined separately from those of the clips. If the clips don't match the sequence they are translated on RT playback, rendering, and output.
If you were to "capture DV media directly to ProRes", then you will have recompressed it for no good reason - before you even start editing.
On your last question: it has nothing to do with tape. It has to do with the compression. DV is a VERY lossy codec, thus the bit about going through DV twice being a hosing.
If you send your stuff back to DV you are for the most part recompressing it to DV anyway, so having used a DV timeline would be no loss. ProRes is much less lossy, but like uncompressed formats it can't be recorded natively to videotape.
Many variations on this answer depending on what one is actually doing. Probably confused it more...

Using ProRes in HD Production

Is anyone using ProRes in HD Production?
If so:
What is your source material?
What are you mastering too?
Are you using the HQ 220 or Medium 145?
Any noticeable difference between the HQ and Medium quality?
What capture card are you using?
Are you having any problems?
What has been your overall experience?
As part of FCP6 ProrRes has been out for a while but there's surprising little debate about it which leads me to believe that few people are using it, it works great and there's no need for discussion or there isn't a need for it.
We recently completed an HD project with 11 DVCProHD cameras, about 6TB worth of data. We are thinking we would like to switch to Sony HDCam and then capture to ProRes 145.
Any insights or thought would be greatly appreciated.

Is anyone using ProRes in HD Production?
Yes, as a render codec for XDCAM HD.
What is your source material?
XDCAM HD
What are you mastering to?
Occasionally back to XDCAM disc, otherwise just file export.
Are you using the HQ 220 or Medium 145?
145.
Any noticeable difference between the HQ and Medium quality?
Have never used HQ so can't comment (using ProRes as a render codec, for an otherwise native XDCAM or HDV edit, is preset to use 145 only)
What capture card are you using?
Not applicable
Are you having any problems?
No
What has been your overall experience?
Rendering to ProRes is faster than rendering to XDCAM HD!
As part of FCP6 ProrRes has been out for a while but there's surprising little debate about it which leads me to believe that few people are using it, it works great and there's no need for discussion or there isn't a need for it.
There was endless debate about it at the outset, but folks quickly seemed to agree that it was a good thing, superior as a compressed HD edit codec to DVCPROHD, which many had been using for lack of a better option... and then they all just got on with their work. Some adopted it right off the bat, others didn't like the filesize and so stuck with DVCPROHD
I'm inclined to agree with you, that (relatively) few people are using it and that those that are are finding that it works great and there is no need for discussion. The majority that aren't using it are not doing so because they have no need for it.
Thought you were using the BitJazz lossless codecs?

To save time, could I get away with just using ProRes Proxy?

Might be a dumb question. But please play along with me...
I've been battling with FCP-X since it first came out. Beach balls, crashes, failed auto saves, you name it. Sluggishness is my middle name. But I think it might be because I'm trying to force too much quality through my older, less powerful machines and my little firewire 400 hard drive. All three of my Mac are 3-4 years old, all are from the old "Core 2 Duo" era (not quad core processors), and are all maxed out at 4GB of RAM. While I've read that many people are having performance problems with FCP-X even on brand spankin' new suped-up Mac Pros with lots more horsepower than I'm running, I've long thought that my machines and their lack of power by today's standards may be at the heart of my sluggishness problem, especially given that most of the material I work with is shot in 1080 HD. (I've never actually tested it in FCP-X, but I'm assuming that things would speed along more like I've been used to in the past if I would just do everything in Standard Definition 480, but that ain't gonna happen.)
Like many, I shoot most everything in 1080 HD (usually 24p, sometimes 30), unless I'm occasionally shooting 720 HD at 60i for later slowing down to slo-mo.
Here's my question: Most everything I edit is for web delivery, and 99 percent of it is for my own use (not clients). Mostly podcast-like stuff, although occasionally I'll create something for my business website. Most of what I do is talking head type stuff, not a lot of motion (except for the 720/60i slo-mo stuff, which usually has some motion, which is why I shoot it at 60i for slowing down). Most of what I shoot is green screen talking heads, intended to be keyed in front of some innocuous background like some of the generators in FCP-X. I want it to look good. Even great. But given the limitations of power on my machines, I also don't want to invest an eternity in rendering and processing time. The work I'm doing with video just isn't that important. It's mostly for grins.
Until last night, I had been working exclusively in ProRes422 (aka "Optimized"). But last night I shot some footage and imported it into FCP-X, encoding it ONLY in ProRes Proxy. And frankly, I couldn't discern any difference. It looked every bit as good as the 422 stuff I'd shot before. There was absolutely no difference to my naked eye. That said, the footage I shot last night to test this out was not shot in front of the green screen (I'll test that out today or tonight), so maybe the Proxy footage won't key as well. (I've been stunned at how good the keyer is in FCP-X, but up to this point I've only been keying ProRes422 footage, not Proxy.) But really, based on just eyeballing the footage, I couldn't tell the difference between the Proxy footage and all the other footage I'd shot previously that had been imported and converted to "Optimized" ProRes422.
I'm not looking to deliver anything for broadcast television (if I were, I'd for sure use 422). I'm not doing any feature film type stuff. My video work consists mainly of stuff just for me, for my own personal amusement (and for the amusement of anyone who might watch it on the web). It's intended for YouTube, Vimeo, or occasionally (in smaller dimensions than 1920x1080) for deployment on my company website. Mostly, it's just me doing podcast-type stuff. Occasionally I'll shoot and edit something for church, or for friends. I like to think the production values of my stuff tend to be higher than, say, the footage Aunt Delores shot at Uncle Ralph's birthday party (okay, A LOT higher than that!). But my stuff isn't going to air on "Good Morning Flatbush" either (unless, on the off chance it should happen to go viral).
So let me make my question as clear as possible: Could I not get away with just using ProRes Proxy throughout my entire work flow, end to end, never switching over to ProRes 422 even when exporting? Honestly, it has taken hours just to render the keyed green screen footage on a 15 minute video, and just the other night, it took the better part of 4 hours (after it was already rendered) to export a 15 minute ProRes422 sequence to YouTube (and then the darn thing timed out, essentially wasting all my time). I'd rather just stay in Proxy the whole way through if doing so would streamline my workflow without compromising too much quality in the "look" of the video. Based on my very limited use of Proxy (just testing it out last night for the first time), I couldn't tell the difference. Maybe for web deployment, Proxy is all I really need.
Have any of you just stayed in Proxy the whole way through, never switching to 422 even when exporting? Might this be an acceptable work flow for some of us, especially those of us on older, less powerful machines? Is this a viable solution? Do any of you work this way? What's your level of satisfaction?
Thoughts?

A lot of what I'm shooting is being shot on a Canon XA-10. Some (and certainly all of the 720 footage, but some of the 1080) is shot on a 7D. And still more is shot on either an iPhone 4S, or even on a Flip Ultra (720p, 30fps).
Most is shot on the XA-10.
What I'm trying to avoid is the excessive render times (doesn't the ProRes 422 footage have to render as well?), and the ridiculously long times it takes to export. Would all that not be reduced significantly by sticking to Proxy the whole way? And what would the trade-off be? I mean, I honestly can't see any discernible difference. Maybe I will when I try to pull a decent key. (Haven't gotten that far yet in my Proxy experimentation.)
Of course, editing in Proxy and outputting using 422 requires that FCP-X encode to BOTH when importing, right? Doesn't that add yet another bit of time to the overall process?
I'm trying to streamline, and to reduce the overall amount of time I'm spending doing this stuff.

Do I need to reinstall FCS 2 to use ProRes on Lion?

I just moved to Lion on my Mac Pro. I'm mostly working in Adobe After Effects and Premiere now, but I still would like to use the ProRes codecs.
I still have FCS 2, which I understand I can install on Lion with a little bit of trickery. I don't know if FCS is totally stable on Lion, and the thing is I may not even need FCS at all… but I'd love to keep ProRes. Is there a way I can continue to encode using ProRes without needing to reinstall FCS 2 via Rosetta?
Thanks,
Clint

I figured it out. I can simply copy the ProRes codec from the Quicktime folder on my Snow Leopard drive to the corresponding folder on my Lion Drive. (I clean installed Lion on my second drive, so I still have my bootable Snow Leopard drive available for things like this)
Now I can encode using ProRes with my Adobe apps without installing or reinstalling my Mac Pro Apps.

Quality of Clip captured using ProRes and clip converted to ProRes

I have captured the same clip in both HDV 1080160 and ProRes 422.
After editing the HDV version I export it using QT Conversion using the compression type "Apple ProRes." I then use the standard Compressor "DVD: Best Quality 90 minutes" preset unaltered. It looks fine in the Compressor Preview window. I then import the resulting files into DVDSP, and the quality is good.
After editing the ProRes version I export it using QT Movie using the current settings. I then use the standard Compressor "DVD: Best Quality 90 minutes" preset unaltered. It looks fine in the Compressor Preview window. I then import the resulting files into DVDSP, and the quality is bad.
Both clips are "ProRes" when imported into Compressor, and they both look fine in the Compressor preview window. The difference is that one was captured in HDV 1080i60 and converted to ProRes using QT, and one was captured in ProRes and exported as a QT Movie. Surprisingly, at least to me, the clip originally captured in HDV and then converted to ProRes looks much better than the clip originally captured in ProRes when they are imported into DVDSP. Both .mov files are compressed using the same Compressor preset, and the preset is unaltered.
I assumed the clip originally captured using the FCP ProRes preset would yield the better quality, but this isn't the case. I've tried capturing using ProRes 422 HQ, and the results are the same. I must be missing something, but so far I cannot explain it.
Thanks

I have tried at actual, full screen, using 1080p30 size from the original compressed to 4mbs (something my system can handle without blinking), 720p30, etc. etc. etc. Nothing stops the jumps. Even the activity monitor shows only 5%-15% processing being used by QT and/or FCP.
I plan to pull my old G5 out of the closet, it runs 10.6.8 and is still rock solid for video editing in FCP7. If it plays smooth on that 8 year old system then I know it's Mavericks. I'll try that tonight. It floors me though why the original 1080p30 will playback perfect via FCP and Motu, but once I turn of external monitoring and just try to play it via the preview monitor it is jumpy as **** and then the exported file does the same thing. So strange. I even deleted prefences of FCP and that does help with screen playback initially, but it always gets jumps in it after playing for a while.
I knew I should not have started using Mavericks and I HATE FCP10.

When to use ProRes? or If?

I have an uncompressed 10 bit movie on a USB drive in 720 x 486 format and I'm starting to work with FCPro for the first time in years. I understand that ProRes is an editing format and not an output format. My goal is to output to a standard def DVD. All the pro res sizes seem to be for HD. I'm just wondering if or when using ProRes is appropriate with my files?
Thanks
jeff

At this stage of my project, I am color correcting the original film. That is about all I'm going to do with it except crop it for compression to 720x480 from x486. That will be one file for the dvd. I may have another film or two to put on the dvd [they are family films, short duration, transferred from old media like 8mm] and a slde show or two of old photos. The original film I received was uncompressed 10 in black magic at 720x486, and after emailing with Larry Jordan, I finally understood that the presets only affect capture of raw material and do not change an already encoded mov. I'm probably going to start over and apply the color corrections from favorites.
So, I have 2 questions that have come to mind in response to your help:
1. When creating for a DVD, does it make any difference if you put all the films [if there are more] on the same track if each film is going to be accessed by a separate play button? Is it just wiser from a workflow perspective?
and
2. I don't understand what you mean by "accessing more streams." Are you saying running the file through compressor, after being edited, won't work as well or at all if the original file is on a USB drive?

Using ProRes

Hi,
I was given advice in another thread to use ProRes to improve performance. I didn't know what that was or even really what a codec was but I've been reading up on it so I have some more questions now.
1. I discovered how to transcode clips in the Event Library by right-clicking on the clip. Will this get automatically applied to clips in the timeline? I'm mostly done editing a project but it's going very slowly at this point because it's gotten fairly complex.
2. So from what I've been reading ProRes is a lossy codec but export codecs are lossier, so using ProRes won't actually change the end quality at all if, for example, I'm putting this online or on a DVD or something. Is this correct?
Thanks for the help.
Dave

This is my pet simple explanation of ProRes 422.
(I was confused by it for years, but a Ripple Training tutorial on MultiCam Editing finally cleared it up for me).
Most video cameras use very high compression to store media on cards or tape. If the native camera files you are working with play back and edit well with FCP X, strictly speaking, you don't need to transcode to ProRes (but it helps - especially if you have multiple camera angles and effects, titles etc - and with colour correction).
If your playback is problematic, it's best to transcode the material. You can do this at any time. ProRes 422 is not so highly compressed as native camera footage, so it's far easier for your Mac to play it back (not so much unpacking to do). The downside of the footage being lightly compressed is that it takes a lot more disk space.
If disk space is at a premium, use Proxy. Native 1920 x 1080 footage becomes 960 x 540 when converted to ProRes Proxy, so it this takes a fraction of the disk space but is much lower quality. This is absolutely fine for editing - but you must remember to choose 'Optimised or Original Footage' in FCP X Preferences before you export otherwise you'll export 960 x 540.
I use some XDCAM EX footage from a couple of Sony EX1 Rs and some H.264 from a Canon 5D mk2. Until recently, I edited the XDCAM footage natively but I transcode the H.264. Now I'm using Proxy more - especially for multicam editing.
I sincerely hope your Projects, Events and Media are on a fast (Firewire 800) external HD (Formatted OS Extended). Keeping them on your system drive makes it difficult for your Mac to operate. It's also a very good idea to hide Audio Waveforms in your Timeline when you don't need them. They waste a lot of processor power.
Andy

ProRes HQ on a Mac G5 Quad?

I've been trying to work on a project in 10 bit uncompressed 1920 x 1080 HD and the data transfer speed is not allowing me to view my work realtime. I see 2 options - get a big (6 maybe 12 TB) RAID or move to ProRes HQ.
My question - can I work in FCP with ProRes HQ on a Mac G5 Quad (4 x 2.5 GHz with 8.5 GB RAM) or do I need to have a Mac Pro?
I'm still on FCP 5.1.4 and should probably upgrade to 6, and I'm working with a professional post house so I'm getting my files from them on Hard Disk and delivering back to them in FCP and they transfer to HDCam.
Any insights are much appreciated, and if there are any cautionary tales about ProRes HQ I'd sure like to hear them in advance!
Thanks!
Mark

WORK WITH...yes. CAPTURE WITH...no. ProRes requires an INtel Mac to capture...or hardware with onboard encoders like the AJA I/O HD. And note...ProRes HQ is for 2K footage and higher...designed for RED. Regular ProRes is what you want to use. Both are 10-bit, and ProRes looks great, and is 2/3 the size of HQ.
IF you want work with ProRes, you need to upgrade to FCP 6. The codec does not come with, FCP 5. If you upgrade your QT to 7.5.5 or higher it has a built in decoder, but that allows playback only.
If you stick with FCP 5, you need to either infest in a big Raid to handle uncompressed, or capture to DVCPRO HD, which is a fine codec. Especially working with HDCAM...both are 8-bit formats.
Shane

Using a Mac Mini Server quad Core i7 for FCPX ?

I am a student trying to
configure a final cut pro X edit system with a budget of around $4K.
I have over 400 hours of video (some Hi-8 but mostly mini-DV tapes).
For the Mini-DV tapes I plan on ingesting video into FCPX
directly from the camera via firewire DV. I will be using a Sony GV D800 to ingest
the Hi-8 tapes via firewire DV as well. I already have a 30" Apple Cinema Display.
H.264 will be used to deliver finished content to the web and/or Blu-ray.
I was leaning toward the macbook pro 17" but then I realised that a Mac Mini Server
could be configured with the same number of cores and RAM for less money.
Mac mini Server
2.0 GHz Quad Core Intel i7 -- same number of cores as macbook pro 17"
8 GB RAM
750 GB Serial ATA Drive 7200rpm + 256 GB Solid State Drive
Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter
Apple Magic Mouse + Magic Trackpad
Other Peripherals:
Promise Pegasus 8TB R4 Raid System in RAID 5 configuration or equivalent
Sonnet Echo Express PCIe 2.0 Thunderbolt Expansion Chassis with
Matrox Compress HD MAX encoding card
LaCie d2 Blu-ray 12x
Do the extra cores in the server make up for the difference in GPU?
(2.7 GHz Mini dual-core i7 with AMD Radeon HD 6630M graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR5 memory) VS (2.0 GHz Mini Server quad - core i7 with Intel HD Graphics 3000 processor and 384MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory)
Am I thinking about this configuration the right way? Is there
any overhead given that the mini will be a server? Anything missing?
thanks for your help,
Tom

Take it back for a replacement while you are within 14 days from purchase.

I attempted to use netflix on my MacPro safari 10.5.8, I get a blank black screen when I attempt to watch a video, Has anyone encountered and solved this dilemma?

I attempted to use netflix on my MacPro safari 10.5.8, I get a blank black screen when I attempt to watch a video, Has anyone encountered and solved this dilemma?

I also have downloaded netflix "Silverlight" I believe successfully...at least acoording to the popup at the end of the Silverlight download "You have successfully downloaded Silverlight"

I recently bought two iMac quad core i5 processor speed 2.5 Ghz. Every time I use Air Drop and I send a file from one iMac to the other, a black curtain drops and I am asked to restart the computer!!! What can I do?

I recently bought two iMac quad core i5 processor speed 2.5 Ghz. Every time I use Air Drop and I send a file from one iMac to the other, a black curtain drops and I am asked to restart the computer!!! What can I do?

That's a kernel panic and indicates some sort of problem either with the computer's hardware or software. Visit The XLab FAQs and read the FAQ on diagnosing kernel panics. It would help to post the panic log: Mac OS X- How to log a kernel panic.
Meanwhile, try booting the computers into Safe Mode then restarting normally. If this is simply a disk repair or cache file problem then this may fix it.
You can also try creating a new admin account on each computer then booting into the new account. This would help determine if the problem is related to a bad file in the user accounts.

FCS2 (FCP6.0.1) using ProRes on a MacPro 3ghz DP Quad Core - beta products?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for