IMac for Video Editing

Hi all,
I've been a PC user for the last 15 years, and have been looking for a system to support my interest in photography and film-making.
Being an iPhone/iPad user, I would like to expand my 'appleification' to a new Mac. Whilst I can't afford a MacPro, would someone be as kind to suggest what iMac specification would be best suited to this use?
The video I would like to edit is 1080P 25fps (.MOV MPEG-4 AVC, H.264), I already have a ReadyNAS for storage, and would be looking at the 27" screen only. I need performance that will easily cope with the full HD video, without noticeable lag whilst editing. I'm assuming that if the system can handle this task, my RAW photo-editing, web-design etc.. will also be fine.
Many thanks for your help.

I use a 27" 3.06 Intel Core Duo iMac with 4 Mb RAM running 10.5.8 to edit HD Video using Final Cut Pro 6.0.6 and have no problems editing. For storing media I have a Western Digital 1Tb external Firewire Hard Drive. Capturing the video is via a "Log & Transfer" procedure which can take a bit of time as the video is automatically transcoded into a codec that Final Cut Pro can use (I have it set to use ProRes 422). Once captured, editing is smooth and quick and actions are undertaken by the Mac almost instantaneously. Output is relatively easy as well. As with all HD Video the huge amount of data manipulation makes heavy demands on any system but I have no complaints. I would imagine that the latest iMacs and the latest versions of the Operating System and editing programs are even more efficient than my set up. For editing simple jobs I have found that Apple's iMovie is pretty effective and use it where I don't need all the bells and whistles of a high end editing program. I also run Adobe Photoshop CS4 which easily deals with RAW and of course Apple's iPhoto.
Although I don't do any web design however, in view of the above, I expect that the iMac you are considering will handle anything you throw at it.
If you can get to either an Apple Store or an authorised retailer tap their expertise to help you decide which programs you need as Final Cut Express and Photshop Elements (which are much cheaper) may be sufficient. There are I believe other non-apple/ non- adobe editing and photo manipulation programs which run on Macs but I have no experince of them so a little research might be advisable to see if any of them fit your requirements.
I hope that helps.

Similar Messages

  • What is the best set hard drive set up on an iMac for video editing?

    what is the best set hard drive set up on an iMac for video editing? i only have one internal 2tb hard drive.

    CIANCIO.mov wrote:
    so is it best to edit directly off your LaCie fire wire drive, or off the internal HD and store on the external?
    The second.
    Which one is faster to edit with?
    The internal will operate  faster but editing uses both the Final Cut Application (on the internal), and the external which is used to store and access the video that you have shot and on which is stored the Capture Caches, and which also stores and accesses the various other caches such as Video Render, Waveform etc.
    Does a faster hard drive decrease rendering time?
    I think it must, but I have never timed it.
    whats Faster, having another internal drive or a thunderbolt or firewire 800 external drive?
    I think that a second internal drive would be faster than an external Firewire drive. However, a Thunderbolt drive is said to be very fast, but I do not know whether it would be faster than a conventional internal drive. This question would best be asked of the Final Cut Discussion Groups because thay might have experience.
    i would love some specs, and input on different drive setups for an imac with a single 2TB Hard dirve.
    Again, the discussion groups would be the best place to answer this.
    enyone. thanks,
    Rendering long sections of video in the Final Cut software does take a long time, especially when it is imported from another source, such as a .mov, and when something simple like a transition is inserted or even moved or altered, or a filter is applied, rendering must be carried out in that area to see the effect properly. So you are on the right lines in thinking about how to speed it up.

  • Which of these would be the best iMac for video editing?

    Hello, pretty simple question, which of these 2 iMac configurations would be best suited for video editing? I want to use Final Cut Pro X and Adobe After Effects (not cutting edge effects just simple stuff).
    Option 1 - 21.5 inch
    3.1GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
    16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X8GB
    1TB Fusion Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 1GB GDDR5
    Option 2 - 27 inch
    3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 3.8GHz
    8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X4GB
    1TB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 775M 2GB GDDR5
    For some reason Apple don't offer more than 1GB of dedicated video ram in anything but the maxed out 27inch. Personally, I’m not fussed about the bigger screen and  I would say that having the faster processor, double the ram and a fusion drive would be more beneficial than the extra gig in the video card  but I’m not 100% sure, what do you guys think?
    Thanks.

    If you do a significant amount of video editing the larger display is nice but not absolutely necessary. I’d also recommend an SSD or Fusion drive rather than the stock mechanical drive which really is dog slow. If you choose an SSD 8GB will be plenty though 16GB is better if you go with the smaller model.

  • Which iMac for Video Editing?

    Hi Folks,
    After about 7 years with my Dell 4550 I am close to making a purchase of a new Mac and leaving the Windows world - Yeah!!! My decision is now coming down to how much I should spend on the video card. Basically it is a 300-500 premium to upgrade to the discrete video cards compared to the integrated graphics in the 2.66 model (granted you do get a ~10% faster processor at 2.93 as well).
    What I am wondering is that for video editing (using iMovie) is there a significant difference in performance of the machine based on the video card? I do not play video games on the computer much as I have a Wii and XBOX already to have that area covered. Primarily I will use it for iTunes, iPhoto and HD Video (have a new baby we need to record!)
    So my choices are mainly these three configurations to select from:
    iMac, 24-inch, 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    Part Number: Z0FP
    2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
    1.0TB Serial ATA Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
    $1599
    iMac, 24-inch, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    Part Number: Z0FQ
    2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
    1.0TB Serial ATA Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 256MB
    $1899
    iMac, 24-inch, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    Part Number: Z0FQ
    2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
    1.0TB Serial ATA Drive
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 512MB
    $2049
    iMac, 24-inch, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    Part Number: Z0FQ
    2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
    4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
    1.0TB Serial ATA Drive
    ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB
    $2099
    Since I will not be gaming, are the more expensive video cards worth the premium in relation to video editing, iTunes and iPhoto main purposes of the computer?

    I wouldn't stress it much. I recently bought a new iMac, but for years I have been editing my home movies with iMovie on my old G4 eMac. Granted these are standard def movies, not HD, but the point is, a lot of video editing doesn't require a lot of video horsepower. Most of your time will be spent scanning through thumbnails, picking parts to cut out, etc. None of it requires fantastic video displays and most of the time you are not paying attention to the quality of the playback (as long as it isn't stuttering) and are more concentrating on the content to figure out what you want to keep, trim, edit, etc. 90+% of the time you are not actually watching a lot of video simply playing.
    So get what you can reasonably afford. If you can afford the best model, then go ahead and get it. But if money is a little tight and you have to make some tradeoffs, with digital video you will want to put money towards storage. Hard drive space gets used up FAST. So get the 1TB upgrade and invest some cash toward one or two large external hard drives (one dedicated just to storing your video and then the other for back ups, extra misc. storage, time machine, etc.). Fortunately external hard drives these days are about $100 give or take per Terabyte. For the drive you will want to use for your video work, I suggest spending the extra cash and getting a model with Firewire 800 connection, not just USB.
    Have fun,
    Patrick

  • New 21.5 iMac for video editing - which graphics

    I am thinking of upgrading a 3 year old Intel iMac to one of the new ones. The only beefy think I want to do on it is video editing with iMovie. My main question is whether I would benefit significantly from specifying the ATI graphics rather than Nvidia for this task. I suspect that it will be more than good enough with the cheaper graphics, but any thoughts ?

    Simon (UK) wrote:
    Choosing a faster discreet GPU with its own memory is always the way to go, especially for video
    So is first class air travel and 5* hotels However, there is a law of diminishing returns on the cash outlay. If I admit it my 3 year old Mac is up to the job, but I like shiny new Macs. Just wanted a feel for whether I would actually notice a significant performance improvement between those machines when running iMovie.

  • Going from iMac to MBP retina for video editing

    I appreciate that this question probably gets asked reasonably regularly but I have a few specific points I'd like some help on.
    I've been using a pretty high specced iMac for video editing for a couple of monthes;
    Current model 21.5 - 2.8ghz with i7 processor
    250GB SSD
    16GB RAM
    I also run off a second 24inch monitor
    My main workflow is Premiere Pro 5.5 for editing, After Effects 5.5 for compositing and effects and Da Vinci Resolve 8 for grading. I push the software reasonably hard (footage doesnt stray above full HD res so far though, I use 5D mk2 video footage 99% of the time) and I've been super happy with how the iMac keeps up.
    The general work that the iMac has to chew through is - big Premiere Pro projects with a reasonable amount of dynamic linking with AE. After Effects is used for mostly compositing with quite a lot of visual effects. Resolve is used for grading with a lot of 3D tracking, noise reduction and normal grading stuff - same as the others...quite intensive).
    However..... I have no portable computer and not enough money to invest in a decent one in addition to the iMac. I don't go a week where having a good MBP wouldn't have been a massive help. I'm not a massive geek when it comes to macs. I appreciate that the iMac is a desktop and should outperform any laptop but there are loads of things on the MBP retina that seem to level the field. I'd look at the following spec;
    2.3GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz
    16GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
    256GB Flash Storage
    As far as I see the MBP has;
    the better USB3 sockets (a godsend when you have 64 gigs of footage to download).
    More thunderbolt sockets (I could use two external monitors).
    Faster RAM (1600mhz against 1333mhz).
    Better screen res (although I have some questions on that).
    More graphics RAM (1GB against 512mb)
    So thats a lot of things that look better. Im not worried about the small 256mb HD as only the footage Im currently using will be on the MBP's HD itself.
    So my questions are as follows;
    How should the two units stack up against eachother performance wise when being given quite intensive tasks from Premiere Pro, After Effects and Resolve (the MBP just simply being a notebook.....the MBP having faster RAM....the iMac having a faster processor etc)?
    How should the graphics compare (the iMac having a 6775 chip with 512 memory and the MBP having a 4000 chip with 1GB memory)?
    How should the screens compare. The MBP obviously has a massive PPI boost but.....is the colour balancing meant to be good enough. So far I've been more than happy to use the iMac for colour grading).
    Am I asking too much of the MBP to run two extra monitors when at home...?
    Am I just being stupid getting rid of a desktop for a notebook as my main working computer...?
    Any help that you knowledagable people can give me will be massivly appreciated...
    Thank you!
    Alex

    I think the MBP Retina would outperform the 2011 iMac as far as CPU due to the updated Ivy Bridge processor. Since the CPU's are similar (hyper threading) the clock speed is important, but the MBP Retina can have TurboBoost of up to over 3GHz. That's faster. Remember, the iMac is still in the 2011 model. The MBP Retina is a 2012 model.
    GPU Wise, the NVidia GeForce 650 outperforms the Radeon 6775. http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html. Now, the Intel HD 4000 isn't really about performance (in my opinion), so if you do get the MBP Retina, turn off automatic graphic switching.
    Editing photo or video on the MBP Retina would be amazing. The display is really quite vibrant. Have you had the chance to see a MBP Retina in action? I would definitely do it, if you're serious about dropping that kind of cash.
    I don't think using 2 monitors is too much to ask at all; I would love to have a triple monitor setup with coding and that sort. But I can live with one . I also think it's a great idea to use the MBP as a desktop. I currently do it, and have been since January 2011.
    One other thing to add, you may want to look into a USB3 hub (with full speed), so you could hook up a large USB3 drive to store files on.

  • Which video card for video editing?

    I am about to order my first iMac. I've always had MacBook Pros and have never had to choose a video card as I always just got the one that came with the laptop. I will primarlily use the iMac for video editing using FCPX
    I do not know what kind of impact the video card has on vdeo editing with FCPX.
    I do not play video games and I do not create complex 3D graphics.
    Will I notice any better performance if I go for the faster, more expensive video card that is offered for the iMac?

    AppleBrianJones wrote:
    …  will I notice a difference in performance if I go for the faster, more expensive video card…?
    not on edit.
    on Im-/Export, a 'faster' GPU with more VRam could make a difference.
    but ... 'waiting' 12 or 15minutes? ... is a 20% improvement, but less than a coffee/cigarette/hello-my-dear-texting. Plus,you can do other things meanwhile ...

  • Best affordable choice for video editing & other stuff?

    I've been a PC user forever. I'm looking to enter the world of Mac. I do video editing with Adobe CC on a windows 7 Destop PC with an i7 Quadcore and have a nice LED monitor. I'd like a Mac capable of doing graphics well and has the processing power of an i7. I was thinking of a Macbook rather than than a iMac because I don't need the built in screen - I already have a very nice LED monitor. I also like the idea of portability. So I figure i could hook up the Macbook to my LED monitor when at my desk, and then be able to port it around when I wanted to go mobile. Is this reasonable? Is a macbook laptop capable of this kind of processing? I know my HP Powerbook with Win7 struggles doing this kind of stuff even though it has a dedicated nVidea Graphics and is an i7 2.3GHz with 16G memory, so I never use my HP laptop for video editing. I thought about the Mac Pro, but that is WAY out of my budget. Is there a Macbook that would be good for video editing and not break the bank? Like I've said, I'v discounted the idea of getting an iMac because of space & (I already have a decent size LED monitor that I'd like to continue to use and share with my Windows PC.

    the last 2 and the bottom of this link would be more than adequate: http://store.apple.com/us/buy-mac/macbook-pro

  • Which configurations are really important for video editing?

    Hi everyone,
    I'm a newbie looking for the best compromise budget Mac for AVCHD 1080p video editing with Final Cut Pro X, Adobe Premiere CS6 and Adobe Aftereffects. The storage space is not important as I'm planning to keep all the files on a Thunderbolt-connected EHD (any comments on this?).
    Currently, I'm working on a iMac 27'' 3.4GHz i7 16GB 1600 MHz DDR3 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675 MX 1024 MB and would like to get a personal machine that also works (as) smooth, but for a smaller budget. These are the options I currently have:
    1. Mac mini (late 2012) MD387xx/A
    2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5
    16GB DDR3 SDRAM
    Intel HD 4000
    500 GB HD
    Thunderbolt USB 3
    802.11n WiFi + Bluetooth 4.0
    2. iMac 27'' (mid 2011)
    2.7GHZ Intel Core i5
    16GB 1333 MHz DDR3
    AMD Radeon HD 6770M 512 MB
    1TB HDD
    3. MacBook Pro 17'' (early 2011)
    2.3GHz Intel Core i7
    8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 RAM
    AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB
    Intel HD Graphics 3000 512 MB
    500 GB SATA Storage
    How important is the duo- or quad-core?
    Which graphic card would be the best suited for video editing and graphics on FCPX/AfterEffects?
    Which one would you go for if looking for a stable, strong performance for up to 5 years?
    Thanks in advance for any tips!

    I would also post here:
    https://discussions.apple.com/community/professional_applications/final_cut_pro_ x

  • Which Macbook Pro for Video Editing

    I'd like to buy a macbook pro for video editing on the go and with all the available features, I can't tell which is best.
    I use final cut pro 7 and all footage is HD.
    RAM?
    7200rpm vs. 5400 ?
    DUAL CORE vs. QUAD
    INTEL GRAPHICS?
    RETINA?
    It's all very confusing, especially since I haven't looked into buying another mac since I purchased an iMac in '07 (which still rocks).

    - Get either a 7200 or SSD internal drive
    *You'll need an external hard drive that runs at least 7200rpm for your media (scratch disk)
    - If you can affor it, go with a Quad Core
    - For graphics, I believe all the new MacBook Pros come with Intel HD Graphics 4000
    - As for CPU speed and RAM, they really go hand in hand with video editing.
    - CPU speed doesn't help if you do not have sufficient RAM cover all of needed video/audio/effect editing and rendering processes.
    - Slower CPU with more RAM means that procesess get covered by the additonal RAM, but will take longer to render and preview during editing.
    *So when choosing CPU and RAM, do not sacrifice one for the other.
    You can always upgrade RAM later if you can't afford it now.
    - Retina? Doesn't make much of a difference for you. You're not editing 4k video so chose what you like better, or   can afford.
    Here a post that goes over some basics

  • Which of these macs would you choose for video editing?

    The main difference is the MBP has an Serial ATA drive, and the Air has a Flash drive.  Also the MPB has 2.9Ghz, and the Air has only 2.0Ghz.  Which one would you pick for editing with Final Cut Pro X? (Also curious which one you would pick even if video editing wasn't a concern for you, thanks!)
    MacBook Pro 13.3” - Dual-Core i7 2.9Ghz ($1269 refurb, or $1399 new at BestBuy)
    Eligible for OS X Mountain Lion Up-to-Date Program
    Originally released June 2012
    13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen display, 1280-by-800 resolution
    8GB (2 x 4GB) of 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM
    750GB Serial ATA @ 5400 rpm
    8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
    Intel HD Graphics 4000
    Or
    MacBook Air 13.3” - Dual-Core i7 2Ghz ($1449 refurb)
    Eligible for OS X Mountain Lion Up-to-Date Program
    Originally released June 2012
    13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen display, 1440-by-900 resolution
    8GB memory
    512GB flash storage
    720p FaceTime HD camera
    Intel HD Graphics 4000

    Zenman1969 wrote:
    Thanks for the answer.  Didn't realize the 13" MBPs differed from the 15" MBPs.  I thought the screen was the only major difference. 
    Apple fools a lot of people with that. The 13" is really a MacBook and not a "Pro" machine.
    The best machine for video editing depends upon what your going to do, full on production or casual home stuff.
    A 15" MacBook Pro and a iMac for the casual lightweight stuff and iMove can do the job.
    The new MacPro coming out for the heavy duty stuff.
    The industry seems to be moving away from Final Cut Pro X as it's been consumerized or something, lacking needed features and moving towards Avid on powerful Mac's or Windows 7 towers.
    http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/07/does-apple-still-care-about-creative-pros/
    http://www.avid.com/US/
    So perhaps a mix of Avid and Final Cut Pro X if your serious about furthering your career.

  • Using external monitor for video editing.

    Hello all,
    I own a IMAC that I use for video editing on FC7. I was wondering via Thunderbolt to VGA (or any other way) if there was a way to use an external moniter as my canvus and the internal comands to do so. Also the opinons of doing this. Good? Bad? any good ideas?
    Thanks.   

    Eeewww! Oh, the horror of what you are trying to suggest! 
    No.  A video signal for a computer display and a video signal intended for TV are very very different things.  If you want to PROPERLY see what the video you shot looks like, a computer monitor is the LAST place to look.  You want to use an HDTV at least.  I'd even say avoid computer displays with HDMI inputs...but even those are better than VGA.  VGA is a very low quality connection.  DVI, HDMI...those are better. 
    But if your intention is to view your video at full quality...an HDTV is your better option.

  • Best monitor for video editing?

    Hi,
    I have been saving up for a Mac for sometime now and have decided to buy the new Mac Pro when it comes out this December.
    I understand that it doesn't come with a monitor so I have been looking into which one would be best to get. I have never had to buy a separate monitor before as I have always had an iMac so maybe there is one that is very popular that most people use that I don't know about. It would mostly be used for video editing on Final Cut and a little bit of Motion and then other general things like music, photos, documents etc.
    Ideally 24" or 27" and under £400.

    I don't want 2 monitors, so a single 27inch model just what I need... plenty of room for PPro, or I can have a Word document and a Text file open and side by side
    John,
    That is personal taste and there is no discussing taste. However, from my perspective, and that is personal, I prefer 3840 x 1080 resolution with dual monitors over 1920 x 1080 with a single monitor, but that is because I very often have Firefox, Filezilla, Dreamweaver and some other applications open at the same time, switching between the Adobe forums, Gmail accounts, Notebook results from the PPBM5 data submissions, PPBM5 form submissions, MySQL access, phpadmin pages to update the database, the PPBM5 results pages and various DW .php pages for the maintenance of our database and switching back and forth between various versions of PR. I occasionally really run out of real estate with all these applications and could not consider a single monitor with only 1920 x 1080 resolution, even if it were a 105" screen. In the future I would even like to have a four monitor setup (with MPE hardware support) in a two by two configuration, so that I can freely move my application screens around.
    If that happens, notice I say if and not when, my preference for a monitor would be something like 4 Samsung F2380 monitors. Small bezel, great display and panel, affordable.

  • I am planning to buy mac mini 2.5Gzh. I will be using it mainly for video editing and I am planning to upgrade up to 8GB. Is it a good buy or should I try some other alternative.

    I am planning to buy my next desktop. I will be using this mainly for video editing. I am not a professional video editor, I normally do home made videos for youtube, like tutorial, DIY project etc. I use Nikon D3100 camera and some basic green screen techniques as part of recording. So my basic video editing would be just syncing audio, editing videos to cut un-necessary frames etc and some basic effects. I am also planning to buy final cut pro.
    So my question is should I buy the mac mini or Imac?

    Great advice from RRFS!
    For video editing, do go for 16 GB of RAM ffrom OWC & consider the twice as fast i7 2.6 model, see Geekbench scores here..
    http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac-mini-core-i5-2.5-late-2 012-specs.html
    http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac-mini-core-i7-2.6-late-2 012-specs.html

  • Used G5...Okay for video editing???

    Hello there. I am looking to buy a Mac explicitly for video and music editing as well as perhaps Internet browsing. For now I just wanted to focus on the video editing part. Since this computer will only need to do these things for me, I will be able to keep the hard drive very clean (I hope). Now, I was interested in getting a used one from this website:
    http://www.gainsaver.com/Catalog/Detail.aspx?&CCode=1015^Apple&CCode=1024^iMacs& cICode=65467
    I was wondering if you guys had any opinions on that sort of thing. Notice that you can add whatever specs, ram, etc. you want so essentially even though it's older computer I could still optimize it for video editing, right? Let me know if this is a good plan or if it's really necessary for me to get a newer model. Keep in mind that it will cost a heck of a lot more even though the specs could be essentially the same and that I'm also pretty new to video editing so I won't be doing anything crazy... yet.
    Also, any important differences I should know between Final Cut Express/Pro? Thanks guys!

    As stated before in:
    http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=13148516#13148516
    and apparently ignored by you, the Mac in your link is NOT a G5. That means notta, negative, nil. I hope that is clear, if I need translate it to a different language, I will, or somebody else can. It is closer to be described as a G6, only Apple never called it that. Apple ran through the gamut of G processors with their joint venture of IBM & Motorola. Once it moved to Intel, it dropped the G prefix from the processor name.
    For all intents the G1 was was the 68xxx series processors by Motorola.
    For all intents the G2 was the 6xx series processors by IBM and Motorola.
    G3, G4, G5 were the last of the IBM and Motorola processors Apple used through 2005, and left over machines that didn't get the Intel processor change until later in 2006.
    Are you intending to buy the Mac in:
    http://www.gainsaver.com/Catalog/Detail.aspx?&CCode=1015^Apple&CCode=1024^iMacs& cICode=65467
    ? Because if you are, do NOT seek out software that is G5 compatible as it may not work with the Mac in that link. You want something known to be Intel Core2Duo compatible. You got this thread posted in the right forum, but persisted in saying "Used G5" in the subject line.

Maybe you are looking for