Video Editing Hardware Columns at Microsoft.com

[Jason Dunn]

If you haven't read <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0735618739/jasondunn-20">Faster Smarter Digital Video</a> yet, the book that I wrote, you may find the series of articles that I wrote quite interesting if you're into video editing. The articles are adapted from the book, and updated to be as current as possible (no mean feat!). Covering the topic of hardware, this series of six articles walk you through each major computer component, and how it impacts your video editing experience. If this topic interests you, take a look and tell me what you think.<br /><br />• <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/dunn/03august11_intro.asp">Using the Right Hardware for a Great Video Editing Experience</a><br />• <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/dunn/03august11_hd.asp">Storing Your Digital Video Masterpiece</a><br />• <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/dunn/03august11_cpu.asp">Computing Firepower: The CPU's Role in Video Editing</a><br />• <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/dunn/03august11_monitors.asp">Video Editing &amp; Your Monitor</a><br />• <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/dunn/03august11_ram.asp">Computer RAM: A Crucial Component in Video Editing</a><br />• <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/expertzone/columns/dunn/03august11_vc.asp">Video Cards and Digital Video Editing</a>

[edramsey]

Thanks for the articles. You mentioned Centrino laptops, but didn't comment on the speed differences with the pentium M chips. I am right now looking at laptops with 500MB RAM but with chips ranging from 1.3 to 1.7. I was wondering where on the price curve I needed to be for good performance.

[Alicatt]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/columns/dunn/images/figure2.gif
but here's what you can learn by looking at Figure 2:

There's only one physical hard drive inside this computer, and it's 120 GB in size.
This hard drive is divided into four partitions: 15 GB, 15 GB, 40 GB, and 40 GB. All the partitions are in the NTFS format.
Jason comparing your text and the info in figure 2 I get a slight discrepancy :?:
I'm interested in video editing but I don't use XP I'm using Windows 2000

Apart from that 'info' on the first page there is good info to help those starting out on video editing. Overall a very good article Jason.
:Fade-color Do not adjust your set :D

Regards
Alistair

[Jason Dunn]

Thanks for the articles. You mentioned Centrino laptops, but didn't comment on the speed differences with the pentium M chips. I am right now looking at laptops with 500MB RAM but with chips ranging from 1.3 to 1.7. I was wondering where on the price curve I needed to be for good performance.

That's because, at the time I updated these (2+ months ago), I didn't have a Pentium-M based laptop. :-) I've been qutie happy with the performance level of my 900 Mhz Pentium-M chip, but more speed is of course always better. If I had the option for those faster chips in my Fujitsu P5010D, I would have gone for the 1.6 Ghz - you most of the speed of the 1.7 Ghz, without the price premium.

[Jason Dunn]

Jason comparing your text and the info in figure 2 I get a slight discrepancy :?:

It would seem that the updated screen shot I sent in didn't get used. I'll see if I can get that fixed. :|

[djdj]

I haven't yet had a chance to read all of the articles, but what I read looks very good. Well done.

Two issues, though...

In your article about monitors, you mention one thing I don't agree with: You recommend LCD when purchasing monitors under 17". IF someone is doing any significant amount of video editing on a computer, I would have to say that CRT is a better way to go. Color on CRT is still better ("more accurate") than LCDs (try to discern a pale yellow from white on an LCD). Of course, if video editing is something someone only does occasionally, and desk space is something that is important, LCD all the way.

Along those same lines, if your final output for your video is going to be a television and you are editing using a MiniDV camera or are fortunate enough to have a high-quality analog capture card, your best bet is to hook that camera or card up to a real television (or NTSC monitor) and use that to preview your video so you can see what the video is REALLY going to look like. NTSC (used by televisions) and RGB (used by monitors) use different color spaces, so what looks good on your monitor might not look good on a television, and vice versa. In fact, many colors in the RGB space don't even have an NTSC equivalent (such as bright reds and yellows), and the signal levels of black and white on the two is completely different. So no matter how good your monitor is (CRT/LCD/plasma/whatever), what you see on screen is NOT what it is going to look like when that same video is played back on a TV. Captured video, when played back on a computer monitor, will appear dull and have low contrast. That same video, when played back on a television, could look bright, crisp, and colorful. So the only way to see what your video really looks like is to use a television or NTSC monitor while editing.

Just a couple of observations...

[Alicatt]

So the only way to see what your video really looks like is to use a television or NTSC monitor while editing.
Or a PAL TV/Monitor for this side of the pond, PAL colour is yet diffrent again from NTSC and Computer graphics.
There is an offset you can use to get the colours / brightness much closer to what you will see on the good old telly (can't remember offhand the offset myself)
Regards
Alistair

[donkthemagicllama]

Any thoughts on what would make the huge cash outlay for Premiere Pro worth it over using the 'free' movie maker?

What sort of features is Movie Maker lacking?

[Jason Dunn]

Any thoughts on what would make the huge cash outlay for Premiere Pro worth it over using the 'free' movie maker?


Movie Maker 2.0 is actually a fairly capable program now for most things, although I have to confess I don't use it all that often. Premier is a great program, but overkill for what most people do. Personally, I find Pinnacle Studio 8 (http://www.pinnaclesys.com/ProductPage_n.asp?Product_ID=577&Langue_ID=7) + muvee (http://www.muvee.com/?promo=jdunn) to handle most of my needs, but I don't try to do anything terribly complex with my videos. :-)

[Bob Anderson]

Jason: Are we any closer to "Digital Media Thoughts" coming online?

Your ability to educate the community on digital video is impressive ... plus the comments of others doing the same is nice too. Having a home dedicated to those issues would be wonderful, and would be a must see daily stop on my web education tour! Please launch that site ASAP.

[flux2k]

Coincidentally, this weekend I was playing around with Movie Maker 2 and was pretty impressed with it. The interface is almost a carbon copy of iMovie making it wonderfully easy to use. I'd give it a try before you run out and buy a software package - it really is quite capable.

[guinness]

THe only problem with Movie Maker 2 is that it's too simple and doesn't support the WMV 9 codecs, at least when using the provided PPC profiles; basically it's too inflexible. I would use WM Encoder 9, but that's the worst piece of software I've ever used from MS; crash, crash, crash. If there was a way to make your own profiles, WMM 2 would be decent.

[Jason Dunn]

IF someone is doing any significant amount of video editing on a computer, I would have to say that CRT is a better way to go. Color on CRT is still better ("more accurate") than LCDs (try to discern a pale yellow from white on an LCD).

In principal, I agree with you, but in practice, CRTs lose out. What you're saying about colour trueness is correct, but how many people have ever colour-calibrated their CRT monitors? You have to remember that the audience I wrote the book for is beginner through intermediate readers. If someone who actually knows how to calibrate a computer monitor picks up my book, they'll probably put it down because it's not at their level. :D

Ditto for the external TV monitor. I pondered including that in the book, but I ran into a wall trying to get it working with my nVidia card (it just wouldn't output to the TV, even after trying multiple cables and solutions). I also thought about the fact that I personally don't use an external TV monitor, and realize that the people who were interested in my book probably wouldn't either. ;-)

[Jason Dunn]

Jason: Are we any closer to "Digital Media Thoughts" coming online?

We're aiming for December 2003, but don't hold me to that. :wink:

[Jason Dunn]

I would use WM Encoder 9, but that's the worst piece of software I've ever used from MS; crash, crash, crash.

Wow, that's the exact opposite of my experience! I love WM9 Encoder - it's fast, has all the options I need for tweaking, and I haven't had it crash on me since the beta many months ago.

[donkthemagicllama]

My one experience editing video was with someone who used Premiere 6.5. While editing, we previewed all our work on a NTSC monitor connected to the DV camera, which was connected via firewire to the PC. It would send everything thru, rendered or not. We found it way better to preview on a 35" TV than in a window on a 19" monitor.

That's my opinion, but here's a question: Why would you need a separate card to do NTSC out to do that when you can just use your DV camera?

(or is this a feature only supported by Premiere and other expensive software?)

[donkthemagicllama]

I had the same experience with the Encoder Beta (i.e. crash crash crash), but the new non-beta release seems to be stable.

[Jason Dunn]

Why would you need a separate card to do NTSC out to do that when you can just use your DV camera?

I've never done that before, and I'm not even sure how. It sound like the camera was slaved to the software, which I've seen done for taking the video off in a low-res sample versus just sucking down the whole full-resolution video. The hassle there is having the camera plugged into the wall vs. running on batteries. But I've never heard of someone using a DV camera as a tunnel to a TV set with live previews from Premier. I'm not even sure how I'd set that up - but I'd like to know more if anyone else out there is doing it. Sounds cool!

[donkthemagicllama]

Well, I can't remember exactly offhand, but there was specific menu options for it. In the Playback settings menu there was an option like "Playback Video on DV Hardware" and "Playback Audio on DV Hardware". We'd just choose the video one, and connect the SVideo from the camera to the TV. When you 'scrub' (not sure if that's standard editing slang or Premiere slang), playback sections or pretty much anything else, it would show up on the TV thru the camera. Didn't need to setup anything on the camera itself. That's how we transferred it to SVHS as well to make our master tape to take for duplication; we hooked the camera to the VCR and played back through the DV camera. The quality was amazing, but then again, I didn't have anything to compare it to.

You could plug the camera into the wall, but we found that it seemed to go forever on batteries when you weren't using the LCD screens or even spinning tapes, so it's really a minor point.

[bbarker]

Jason, I haven't yet finished all the articles but what I have read so far is excellent, particularly for your intended audience. I'm looking forward to Digital Media Thoughts.

[djdj]

Wow, that's the exact opposite of my experience! I love WM9 Encoder - it's fast, has all the options I need for tweaking, and I haven't had it crash on me since the beta many months ago.

I've had a problem with it crashing, but it isn't WM9 Encoder itself... it is the driver for the capture device i was using at the time. Maybe that's the problem in his case. The encoder itself does seem to be pretty solid.

[djdj]

Ditto for the external TV monitor. I pondered including that in the book, but I ran into a wall trying to get it working with my nVidia card (it just wouldn't output to the TV, even after trying multiple cables and solutions). I also thought about the fact that I personally don't use an external TV monitor, and realize that the people who were interested in my book probably wouldn't either. ;-)

I was mostly referring to the folks using MiniDV/Digital 8 cameras (which is a lot these days). They work great for previewing video on a TV. I haven't ever tried it in Windows Movie Maker, but every other video editing package that I have used that supports DV lets you use your camera to preview the video. Just connect the camera to a firewire port, the camera output to your TV (just as you would if you were watching video you had just shot), fire up the software, and you're good to go. The video gets output via firewire when playing back previews, or scrubbing the timeline.

Using a TV/NTSC monitor is a MUCH better way to work. And anyone with a MiniDV camera can do it.

[djdj]

But I've never heard of someone using a DV camera as a tunnel to a TV set with live previews from Premier. I'm not even sure how I'd set that up - but I'd like to know more if anyone else out there is doing it. Sounds cool!

It's automatic in Premiere 6.0+. As long as your camera is connected it just works. You don't have to do anything.

Pinnacle Studio 6.0+ also does this.

I suspect many many other editing packages do as well. Maybe even Windows Movie Maker, but I haven't ever tried it to find out.

[Jason Dunn]

Pinnacle Studio 6.0+ also does this.

Cool - I'll have to try it next time. :way to go: