Logic 7 on a new mac pro

Can't be done right? Has to be 8? Won't load songs in 7 at all?
stretch

Logic Pro 7.2.2 is not compatible with DAE/TDM on a Mac Pro INTEL.
You will see only "CoreAudio" as available choice, when trying to engage your audio hardware.
We have to wait for any announcements in this regard, maybe at AES or DigiDays in San Francisco.
Best,
21th

Similar Messages

Installed my logic 9.0.0 on my new mac pro, updated it to 9.1.5, it accepts my serial, but then asks me for an "original serial" that I don't have..? What should I do ?

Please Help !
I bought Logic studio, with logic pro 9.0.0 last year, worked perfectly on my macbook pro.
Just got a new mac pro, with macos 10.7 Lion.. I install the software, serial works,
then I update the software,because 9.0.0 can't open in os 10.7, and after accepting my serial,
it asks me for an "original serial" that I have no idea about..
sry for the english..
Please HELP, I cant survive without logic more than an hour !

I think this is a known problem with Lion and some installs of Logic, I've seen it mentioned before.
Contact Apple.
Here is a related thread.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3218471?start=0&tstart=0

HT200169 Having a problem with Logic 9 on a Mac Pro.Working on a lenghty song and apparently session got corrupted.Doesnt let me export tracks,program crashes.Already tried start brand new session with the tracks imported into it but still wont export.Sug

Hello,having a problem with Logic 9 on a Mac Pro.Working on a lenghty song and apparently session got corrupted.Doesnt let me export tracks,program crashes.Already tried start brand new session with the tracks imported into it but still wont export.Suggestions?

Thanks, Ian. Yeah, that's how I do it now...or with the controls in the left side pane. Still, I would have liked that quick on-the-spot edit capability...especially while sketching.
Ian Turner wrote:
Sorry Mark, you are out of luck as it does not do that - it works the same as L8. The way I would achieve that with more accuracy and control would be to route all the tracks you want to fade to a Bus then use volume automation on the bus. To do this you will need to add a standard audio track, then re-assign it using (Control Click on the track header) to the Bus track. You can then automate volume/plugins etc on the Bus track.
Ian

How do you new Mac Pro owners like your machine with Logic?

Don't mean to be a PITA but I need to get this right before I drop three to five grand on a new set of music tools. I'm trying to decide between Mac Pro and iMac for use with Logic. Seems there are a lot of posts regarding glitches with the new Mac Pro and Logic, whereas the posts from people with older G4s and G5s seem to indicate they are running rock solid. So you new Mac Pro folks or anyone else, please weigh in. Is the new Mac Pro "glitch heavy" or is it just a matter of tweaking the system to where it runs smooth? In general, how do you new Mac Pro folks like the way it works with Logic?

I'm mostly pleased with my MacPro 2.66. Almost no crashes with Logic, although I experience a few more bugs here and there than with my G4. Occasional CoreAudio errors, I have to restart CoreAudio if my external word clock is set to the wrong sample rate when I open a session, there seems to be a bug between high fader levels (above +4dB) and panning... little things like that.
Then again, compared to my G4, the FireWire bus is screaming fast--with most sessions, I can run a buffer of 128 samples at 96k with my MOTU 828mkII, while my G4 would sometimes glitch at 96k with 512 samples. At 96k, 256 samples, my MacPro/828mkII rig is rock-solid... I informally tested it by recording 12 test tracks simultaneously for 20 minutes, with the CPU nearly maxed out (which was difficult to do--took a bunch of Space Designers and Ultrabeats)--absolutely zero clicks or pops.
And of course, WAY more processing power than my G4.
I'm assuming that MacPro compatibility is a fairly high priority for Apple these days, so hopefully the bugs will get worked out soon. And as things are, Logic is definitely usable on a MacPro--the bugs I encounter rarely slow down my work.
So, far from perfect, but as far as new technology goes, I'd say Logic on the MacPro is above average.
Good luck!
James
[email protected]

New Mac Pro 3.0GHz v 2.8GHz for Logic

Assuming you put the same amount of RAM etc in a Machine is there going to be much of an advantage if I get a 3.0GHz compared to a 2.8Ghz Mac Pro?
The computer would be the assembly point for Audio from a Farm of 2 Mac minis, Possibly my G5 PPC (mentioned below), & a Muse Receptor (uses ethernet for midi and audio).
I am running VSL Vienna Instruments - Full orchestral package plus other Libraries. The new Mac Pro would run Strings, Pianos + RMX, Chris Hein Guitar etc and would also mix down inputs from the Mac Minis via a MOTU 2804. Altiverb first reflections are on each orchestral group and there is one main bus for the Tail. Core Audio on my G5 dual 2GHz with 4gig of RAM suffers from overload unless I freeze anything I can. I will initially go for 10GIG of RAM (Apple 2 as supplied + 8 from 3rd party) That would leave 2 slots spare.
Message was edited by: dodecaphonic

You won't notice much difference between 3.0 and 2.8, you might be able to measure a bit less than 7% benefit in contrived benchmarks, but all other things being equal, shouldn't notice a difference running Logic.
Unless you're pushing to so hard that you need that extra 7%... but if you are, things aren't likely to be running very happily on either 2.8 or 3.0.

New Mac Pro - 6 or 12 cores for Logic?

Hi
I'm about to place an order for a new Mac Pro, to replace our previous Mac Pro.
Does anyone know if the 12 or the 6 core model is likely to deliver the best performance with Logic? The 6 core is clocked higher than the 12 core - 3.33GHz v 2.93GHz - and it's hard to get a handle on whether the additional cores are likely to compensate for the lower speed.
Does anyone who knows more than me about this stuff have a view? Is Logic even able to fully utilize all 12 cores?
On our current 8-core system I tend to see activity across 4 or 5 cores only, and the times we hit performance issues are when 1 particular core is being maxed out, even though others are idle or running at low load. That said, we're still using OS 10.5 so maybe load balancing is improved with 10.6.
Any help or advice very much appreciated.
Jules
http://www.trailermen.com

Trailerman wrote:
Although there are things you can do to try and balance the load, in my personal experience, once you have a CPU overload issue affecting one core, it's very hard if not impossible to resolve it.
What plugin can max out a core by itself? Of course it's possible but I have yet to see anything even come close.
I'm inclining towards the 12core Mac Pro in the hope that load balancing becomes more developed, and because Apple confirmed to me yesterday that Logic WILL use all cores of a 12 core machine, and also told me they at it will run more efficiently on a 12 core than a 6 core machine.
I would never believe anything coming from apple tech support or other customer reps, there are tons of documented examples of people getting info that was wrong.
And even if it's true, if they didn't give you a time frame it could mean that Logic will use all 12 cores with a software update...and that update could be two years from now. Did they give a timeframe? Or did they mean that the current version of Logic will use all 12 cores?
Also, the 12 core machines actually have 24 cores including the hyperthreading cores, did they address whether those are/will be supported? They work fine on the current quad i7 and quad xeon machines, but not on the octos since there seems to be a limit of eight cores.
And I would hope it will run more efficiently on a 12 core than a 6 although I'm not ruling out the possibility of poor performance on either with the current version of Logic. We'll see when they ship and people get to run Logic on them.
I'd be curious to read that part of the chat log if you're willing to post it.

New Mac Pro overkill for Logic Pro X?

Hi all,
Is the new Mac Pro overkill for audio work? I use Logic Pro X and mainly use huge sample libraries with Kontakt, so I would get 64gb memory, a Lacie 10tb Thunderbolt drive to store the samples and 2 Apple Thunderbolt displays. Or would an iMac suffice?
I don't want to upgrade my old 8-core, dont want a previous gen 12-core, and the price doesnt matter.
Thank you.

If you do want best ideal in performance for audio, then PCIe SSDs are great even now. And may really need TB2 to shine and share bandwidth.
SSDs with near zero seeks and latency and low prices for Samsung 840 EVO 1TB or 750GB are very appealing.
I would wait until - OS X has had two updates to refine drivers; 3-6 months for any needed changes in firmware for EFI and SMC (which seem to be a regular of ALL new Macs and Mac Pro models); even tweaks to production and TB2 chipsets and such, maybe even those new AMD GPUs.
Version "1.0" hardware and OS really, and of course vendors will now begin to really have some hands on and expect apps, Apple no exception - to need updates.

Which new Mac Pro for Logic?

Well, they're out and on the AppleStore and I have about £2800 burning a hole in my pocket...
My question is, for that money I can configure either an 8-core machine running at 2.26GHz, or a quad-core running at 2.93GHz. Can anyone tell me which route is likely to be better for running Logic with lots of tasty plug-ins? I've budgeted for 8Gb of RAM and a second hard drive for sample data, so it's just the processor(s) left to decide on.
At the moment I'm running it on a 1.83GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro, where it limps along painfully, so I don't really have any experience of how well it utilises extra processing cores. I'd welcome any advice.

Hey MIke I agree that some thought should given to technology 5 years down the road but you are making my point about chasing technology. Its all a guessing game. Look at TVs. Look at phones. Etc.
Technology is moving so fast that you have to just use your gear in the moment and hope for the best.
It is not realistic in 2009 to predict 5 years down the road. Its just a big guess. What about the Mac pros that come out in 2 years. Will they make this years new Mac Pro obsolete? People will be having this same discussion in 2 years? They might not even make a desktop in 5 years. Look at the power of laptops now. Desktop sales are very weak and if this trend continues they will fade. I bought my 8 core almost a year ago and I would have had to wait a year if I chose to chase technolgy. When I bought my Apogee Ensemble I did think to myself that great they will probably release a new Ensemble with more Mic inputs. But I am glad I got it and use it and no worries. We are at the mercy of Apple so they will dictate the future and they arent going to tell consumers their 5 year plan anyway. Ok I will shut up.

Which new Mac Pro for Logic Studio?

Hi everyone,
I'm on the verge of ordering a new Mac Pro, but am tossed up over the quad 2.93 or the Octa 2.26. I'll be using it mainly for composing with Logic Studio. I find its a bit of a pain to record the sounds from my Motif ES8, so I'm going to start using software instruments more.
Does anyone know if Logic uses multiple cores? I googled this and couldn't find much on it.
If I get the quad, I'm going to load it to the max of 8G RAM. If I get the Octa 2.26, I will get 12G RAM. Will Logic take advantage of the extra RAM?
Right now, I'm leaning towards the quad 2.26. I keep my Macs for a long time. I currently have a 4 year old G5 iMac with 2G RAM.
Thanks for any opinions.

I'm With Dual G5 PowerPC version 3.1 (90nm thecnology)
Logic works fine, but when I need to recording with Omnisphere or Kontakt 3... or any Live Instruments... (anyway I'm able to use the Maximum power request patches of all 3rd party plugs that are installed in My G5)
I need MORE SINGLE THREAD POWER... because Logic and most of 3rdparty plugs allow you to use ONLY ONE CORE (or processor).
The ability to overclocking of the Nehalem processor is very interesting...
you will be able to have up to 3.3Ghz in a single thread operation!
So... I'm not sure to buy a new Mac before Snow Leopard... because I can use my G5 smoothly and if needed I have my Black Macbook for adding power (I have 2X Motu interface (828 MK3 and Mk2).
But if hypothetically I were to buy now...: the best Mac value for money semms to be the Quad 2.93 with full Ram set 8GB!
I don't believe about Multitrhead is needed for Live Audio performances
The power on the single core is very important...
I love to export as Audio the tracks
when I use 3rd party Instruments the ammount of crash risk during the Mix down the percentage are:
with Instruments in Live mode about 80% during professional mixdown
With Audio tracks 0% of crash diring professional Mixdown
Logic Pro is a rock solid DAW if used only with Audio tracks and Logic native instruments!
I'm able to MIX more than 160 Stereo tracks with My System...
I can wait for Snow Leopard Machines.
G

Is New Mac Pro Compatible with Logic X

Im interested in getting the new mac pro. Is this compatible with Logic X plugins does anyone have it yet working with Logic pro. I have a Mac Pro 3.33ghz 6 core. Is this 10 times better or just a little. I already have good SSD drive so loading and streaming samples is lightning fast.
thanks

hi i have another question i don't know if anyone knows. in Logic X when I pen the mixing board the scrolling lags for a second and stutters lags for a couple of movements then it scrolls back and forth normally. but when I shrink the arrange window with the mixer to a smaller size it gets faster as I shrink the screen.
I have a HP 30" monitor hooked up by dual DVI cable. 60hz refresh rate. A GTX-680 2g Video Card.
My friedn has a imac 27" i7. I have a mac pro 3.33ghz 6 core. His mixing board does not lag. also copiny plugins is slow on mine. his did not lag.
is this because my monitor is older and using dvi insted of hdmi or thinderbolt?

Logic & The New Mac Pros

I know it's early, but is there any news/issues on using the new Mac Pros w/ logic?
- what about using non-universal plugs - will they work too?
- any performance tests related to a G5?
- etc......???

The main problem is that non UB plugs won't work, but I think that most developers are coming to address this, and with arrival of the Mac Pro, their incentive will be even greater. I would love to see some benchmarks, but it seems to me that the only real ones will be with the elusive 7.2.2. I am really loving my MacBook - honestly, I had never expected this much performance from a laptop running Logic, it has really blown me away.
I'm certain that the Mac Pro will be one beast of a desktop, and also quiter that the G5s. Bare in mind though that they are Rev. A., and I would be hugely surprised if they have no problems.
Even still, these machines will really give HD Accel systems a run for their money, and I think we could be about to see a massive change in what people are using for their music production systems. I'm not saying that people will switch from PT systems, but with the reduced price of an MP, that kind of processing power will be available to more people. This kind of release has the potential to give us Mac users that ultimate power experience without forking out for Digi hardware, giving us flexibility on both software and also hardware.
One thing that I really hope will happen is that more and more people will begin to realise that, with more computer power, their dreams are the limit. I am honestly surprised at how few bands use Logic live. For me, it is my instrument. Certainly, one of these days it will probably crash, but I keep my system in good shape, and reckon I have minimised the risk by as much as I can. My MacBook offers me so much more power than my PB used to, and I haven't even started pushing it live. In recording situations, I push it very, very occasionally to the max, and continue to be amazed. All I need now to work out is how to have my sequencer running AND be able to live switch my instruments in the way I do.
To return to the topic, bring it on! One of these beasts is definitely in my sights, but personally I will wait until Rev. B. or until enough people have accepted to guinea pig the system.
Best, Fred
P.S. Counter to my argument, my MB is Rev. A.

Help Configuring my New Mac Pro

I just purchased a new Mac Pro (early 2009 Quad Core" 2.66 (2009/Nehalem), and a second (1 TB) internal hard drive. I would like to transfer my applications, files, and profile from my Macbook Pro (early 2008 Core 2 Duo" 2.5) to the Mac Pro. I also want to install with Boot Camp a copy of Windows XP Pro (SP3) on a separate hard drive. I want the XP drive to be the 640 GB hard drive that came with the Mac Pro, and the MacOS drive to be the added 1TB hard drive. I want the Windows drive to have 4 logical partitions ( C, D, E, and F) with the C, D, and E being NTFS (so they can exceed 32GB) and, F drive being FAT (for read/write compatibility with MacOS). I've been doing a fair amount of reading both on this forum and have a tentative plan to accomplish the setup. But, a lot of what I'm planning to do is new to me. So, before executing my plan, I wanted to get some feedback. Any thoughts or comments on the steps in my plan would be much appreciated. Here are my planned steps:
1. Turn on the new Mac Pro computer but don't transfer and applications or files - just transfer the profile. Then check to make sure that the computer is working properly.
2. Turn off computer and install 1 TB hard drive and RAM upgrade.
3. Turn on the computer and transfer applications and files from my Macbook Pro to the Mac Pro using Migration Assistant (located in the applications, utility folder). Connect the computers using Firewire 800 (9 pin to 9 pin cable). I currently don't have such a cable, but from what I have read the migration can be very, very slow if done using the ethernet network or a USB-2 cable. I've got about 200 GB on my Macbook Pro so I assume that the Firewire cable is the only sensible way to go.
4. Test the system to see that the applications are working and check that the data files have been transferred.
5. Download SuperDuper and use it to create a clone of the 640 GB drive on the new 1 TB drive. Make the 1 TB drive the boot drive by choosing it from System Preferences > Startup Disc
6. Check and make sure the bootup from the 1 TB drive works properly.
7. Check to make sure the EFI Boot ROM version on the Mac Pro is up to date. If it needs updating, download latest version from Apple support website and install.
8. Check Apple support for updates to Boot Camp Assistant. Once I have the latest version open Boot Camp Assistant (in the Utilities folder in the Applications folder). Create Boot Camp partition that is the entire 640 GB hard drive.
9. Insert the Windows XP CD and click Start Installation in Boot Camp Assistant. Select the Boot Camp partition for installation of Windows.
10. As I begin the Windows install, I'm expecting that I will be offered at the start of the setup process an opportunity to create the 4 separate logical partitions that I want on the 640 GB hard drive. Format the hard drive with the 4 partitions.
11. Select the partition where I want to put Windows Operating System and follow the Windows setup process to install Windows XP.
12. Once Windows is installed, eject the Windows disc and insert to Mac OS disc. Install the Boot Camp drivers for Windows.

NTFS is read only already. You don't need anything just to access, only if you plan to write files, and NTFS won't like HFS file names if they have special characters.
XP SP2 or later, and would have to be able to transfer to new hardware. What it lacks is good multicore and memory management.
Newegg and Amazon has single system builder versions that can save but can't be used on another system. OEM (Dell, HP, etc) versions or "restore discs" won't work and aren't supported.
I said you can get by without BCA. You don't have to believe me but it is a waste to have to say everything twice. Windows 7 is perfectly capable of doing any formatting and installing without it.
Installing Windows 7 on Mac Pro is easier and different. There is a forum devoted to Boot Camp and Installing Windows.
http://discussions.apple.com/category.jspa?categoryID=237

After Migration to new Mac Pro, intermittent slow downs, SROD's

I started with a my intel mac mini, Leopard OS was installed on an external Firewire drive, most applications were installed on another partition of that same drive. I bought a new mac pro 8 core, and an additional firewire external drive that I set up as my Time Machine drive on my old mac mini. I did a full backup of my old mac mini system and then attached the time machine drive and the other external hard drive to my new mac pro. I used the migration assistant to transfer files to my new mac pro. However, now there appears to be something occuring between my internal mac pro hard drive and the old external hard drive from my mac mini. When using some applications, Itunes, Logic Pro, Firefox, the ap will hang and appears to be trying to access files from the old external drive. I hope I'm being clear with what the issue is. I'm thinking duplicate files on this external drive and my internal drive are causing some problems? I need to know how to repair the issue, and preserve my data files?

bb240z wrote:
Thanks for your quick response. I know I've been somewhat confusing here. I'm running the latest Snow Leopard update on my mac pro now.
Then please update your profile, as it still shows the mini and Leopard.
And I'll ask a Host to move this to the Snow Leopard > Time Machine forum.
All the aps and data were migrated onto the internal HD in the mac pro, and the aps and files and directory structures, etc. are still also on the external drive that used to comprise the OS of my mac mini. I'm thinking that may be part of the issue, but I'm new to Mac and not certain of that or how to fix the issues.
Depending on how you did that, I'm not sure everything on those partitions got on to the new Mac's HD. Check that first, via the Finder.
Let's start with iTunes and/or iPhoto.
First see if you have the same stuff in both places. Use the Finder to see how large each is on the external HD, and compare that to the iTunes and iPhoto folders on your internal HD.
If they're not on your internal HD at all, use these instructions to move them:
Moving your iTunes Music folder
Moving your iPhoto library
If the versions on the external are newer than the ones on your internal, delete the ones on the internal and use those instructions to move from the external to the internal.
But don't delete the versions on the external just yet. Eject and disconnect it, and make sure everything's fine. It won't hurt to leave the data there for a while, especially as long as it's disconnected.
If the music or photos on your HD are the same, or newer, hold down the Option key while starting iTunes or iPhoto. That will give you a prompt where you can select which one you want to use.
Once you've selected the ones you want, eject and disconnect the external. Then use as many apps as you can, to see if everything works properly and all your data is found.
Without knowing what other apps you have, and how they work, I can't tell in advance whether any others will be looking for the external drive. If you get error messages, you'll have to deal with each app that seems lost.
I'd be inclined to keep the old external "on the shelf" for quite a while, just to be sure nothing got missed.
Have you started doing Time Machine backups of the new Mac yet? When you do, you'll get a prompt about whether to "re-use" the Mini's backups. See #B5 in the Time Machine - Troubleshooting *User Tip,* also at the top of this forum. You probably want to select "Re-use," especially if there's a considerable amount of space on your TM drive.

After Effects and the new Mac Pro

I recently got one of the new Mac Pros and it doesn't get along great with After Effects, particularly when it comes to ray-tracing. There is no Nvidia GPU option for the new machines, so ray-tracing defaults to CPU. But then, even with a simple solid, it gives you an out of memory error. I've seen postings saying this is fixed in 12.2 but I've got 12.2 and the newest CUDA driver installed and run the machine with all other apps closed, but no luck. Presumably I'll figure out how to get it running after a fashion eventually, but even then, even with the new machines' many fast cores etc, CPU ray-tracing on the new Mac Pro is not looking promising on the speed/usability front.
Element 3D is an option, but its reflections can't interact with the comp the E3D object is within, only with the environment map in the plug-in itself, so there are many cases where it's a poor substitute.
My question isn't really how to get ray-tracing to work with the new machines. That would be great, but my sense is the answer there is, it effectively can't.
My question is, given that motion graphics increasingly involve the complex interplay of light, reflection, transparency, and three dimensional objects, and that from here on out Mac Pros will no longer accommodate nvidia cards, and that many creative types will only work on Macs, how long will this state of affairs continue? How long can it continue? Are there any plans to make After Effects fully functional on the new Mac Pros? Ray-tracing has always been balky and wonky and prone to error messages and crashes, but despite all that it's also an indispensible part of After Effects.

A fun update, long after the fact:
So I've learned Cinema 4D in order to reacquire the capability After Effects once offered internally and have succeeded after a fashion. Let's look at the relative ease of the new method versus the old one using a real-world scene from my project: Adding a bus shelter over actors on a bench.
In ray-trace enabled After Effects of old, I could draw simple draw shapes in Illustrator, extrude them into objects, collect them under a null and position it in my scene. Particularly powerfully, I could bend 2D photograph layers into half-domes for a fun roof, and create planes of transparent glass of any thickness I chose with refraction levels that made for interesting visuals as actors moved behind it, and add reflectivity to any layer I chose -- including the dome roof, for instance, which would then pick up the reflections of any other objects in my scene. I could also put 2D layers in front of my bus shelter as easily as placing a layer closer to the camera than the makeshift model. Well, sometimes it didn't work as advertised; sometimes you also had to have the foreground layer above the background one in your comp even when both were 3D and that wasn't supposed to still apply, but at least it was After-Effectsy. The whole thing was After-Effectsy, which of course is good because presumably AE users know AE, but also it was similarly logical.
To achieve a similar end with C4D and Cineware, all you have to do is this: Build your bus shelter model in Cinema 4D. Wait, first learn Cinema 4D, a hugely complicated piece of software. Come back in 3 months, I'll wait. Hi again. I see you've built your bus shelter. In fairness, you were able to add textures and complicated curves you couldn't in After Effects. But then you always could, if you were willing to learn a hugely complicated piece of software. Anyway, let's get that model into after effects. Just drag that C4D project into your AE project and put it in the comp. Put other layers in front of it or behind it. Easy! Now just a few caveats. 1. Scale. There is no formula available anywhere for the relative scales of your two projects. So tweak that. Just go back and forth between the two software suites -- I hope your computer can have both up and running at the same time! -- until you get that right. 2. Cameras. You can import your AE camera into C4D and vice-versa as easy as pressing a button in Cineware. It shows up somewhere strange in C4D unless you use a workaround unless you are also camera tracking in AE in which case you can't. 3. Scale again: Your camera will match its moves in both suites now. But they are drastically different sizes. If you import your C4D camera into AE it becomes tiny tiny tiny, if the scale of commercial C4D models is to be considered at all standard. Just shrink your model down to say 1% and you should be good to go. And if you tweak your camera in AE or C4D, you have to junk your imported camera and re-do that step. 4. Reflectivity. Your C4D model will only reflect items in your C4D project, not the, um, scene it's going in. 5. Refraction. Transparent C4D items will indeed show your AE items behind them. But you can't add refraction. 6. I've saved the best for last. Say you want your actors in your bus shelter, meaning part of the model is in front of them and part behind them. You used to place them (shot on a greenscreen or roto'd) in the bus shelter model. Now you simply do this: Divide your bus shelter model into halves, the in-front half and the behind half. Put both under nulls. Give the front null a C4D "tag" called compositing. At least its name makes sense. Then go into the tag and enable a numerical "object buffer." You're almost done! Next simply go into "render options" in C4D and into "multi-pass" there and then enable object buffers again there, so intuitive! Make sure to enable the same numerical object buffer you enabled in your compositing tag. Good? Good! Now, all you have to do is place two copies of your C4D project heirarchically in your AE project. You're still almost done! Now all you have to do is go into "multi-pass" in your Cineware plug in in the instance of it that goes in front of the actors and specify your numerical object buffer again. Wait, one tiny thing: If your Cineware plug-in is still set on the default "Standard" setting that option will be grayed-out. Just switch it to the much slower-rendering C4D opions and you're good to go! And don't worry about two copies of your C4D project in your AE one meaning it will now take twice as long to render, because it will. But, as a bonus, you've probably learned a lot of ways to render C4D models really well when learning C4D because Adobe made you. So you can use those to make your AE comp really shine... or wait, could, but they're not supported. You can however render it in that flat ugly video early Pixar style, but life is full of trade offs, no? You end up rendering out the layer you need in C4D and comping it into AE exactly as effects artists have done ever since always. Which is to say AE gave up even trying to do 3D and sent you into the waiting arms of a more-capable competitor, their seeming specialty in the world of video. Maybe it's better this way. AE was only ever for comping. It briefly got a swole head. Now it's back in its comfort zone. The end

New mac pro with fiber attached san storage

We have a digital media department that uses After Effects to produce content for different types of media boards, digital signage, post production etc. They start with Red 4K files which get edited in AE and rendered to different video formats. They want to move away from Windows PC based editors with multi drive RAID local storage to the new MAC Pro with 8GB fiber attached to a shared SAN storage solution. First question, is this a wise move to run After Effects? Second question is, do you need to create multiple logical volumes on the SAN storage to accommodate where AE render location, cache, source, database, and general media content files are stored or can this all be stored on different folders in one large 50TB volume? Third question is, should six different editors be sharing the location where these files are stored?

Third question is, should six different editors be sharing the location where these files are stored?
No. Each user should have his own home directory. Not for performance resons, but simply because they'll end up overwriting each other's files. The rest - logical volumes don't matter on your end, but SAN systems still use internal stripe groups, so it would make sense to define volumes on those stripe sets simply in the interest of performance. Beyond that AE doesn't really care. It uses the operating system's file I/O stuff and 'NIX based systems don't differentiate between local volumes or otehr resources as long as they are mounted correctly in teh file system.
Mylenium

Installing L8 on a new Mac Pro = more than 2 simultaneous authorizations!?

I'm just a couple of days away from taking delivery of a new Mac Pro and will soon be undertaking the tedious process of updating and installing all of the applications and plug-ins currently taking up residence on the system drive of my Dual 2.7 G5 PowerMac.
My question is this. Since I presently have L8 installed on both the G5 and my MBP, and (as I understand it) Apple only allows for 2 simultaneous installations of Logic Studio/L8, what kind of challenges (if any) am I going to run into installing L8 on the new Mac Pro while it's still installed on the other 2 machines? My intent is to ultimately wipe the G5's HD clean once this has been done and it appears everything is working properly on the Mac Pro, but certainly not before it's been done.
Anyone have a definitive answer on this matter?

It's been several weeks since I installed L8 on both my MBP and PowerMac, but I seem to recall in both cases having to go through some kind of actual "registration" process before completing the install. I'm assuming there's something on Apple's end that associates the registration to a specific machine ID when it's done online. If that's the case, and it has to be done each time L8 is installed, I don't suppose it would be too difficult for Apple to figure out you're running it on more than 2 machines.
In any case, if you're of the opinion that it really doesn't matter, I guess I'll find out when I begin migrating everything over to the new MacPro within the next couple of days. Thanks again for your help.

Logic 7 on a new mac pro

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for