fcp.co logo transparent
fcp clapperboard
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
14 Nov 2020
Moving over to a new system, we couldn't take the old avatars - so please upload a new one!
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: About-to-be new user with a mighty big question!

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 05 Feb 2018 01:05 #93893

  • sergio.hochmann
  • sergio.hochmann's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 3
  • Thank you received: 0
Hello!

I'm a photographer and will start doing video work now and am wondering if my Mac will work well for editing.
I want to use:
HD video from Canon cameras
4K video from an iPhone 6s
HD, 2.7K and 4K video from the GoPro Hero 6 Black
HD video from the DJI Spark
Later on, 4K video from another drone I'll buy in a year or so

I'm looking to edit and render:
Short 10-second to 60-second videos for stock footage
Corporate videos which could go anywhere from 2 to 10-20 minutes
YouTube Channel blogs to be uploaded in 1080 which might go anywhere from 4 to 10 minutes
Timelapses using both video and photographs
Not a lot of motion graphics in the beginning but some later on probably buying templates

I do want to say that around the middle of this year I'll also be buying an iMac with the following specifications: 27-inch 5K screen, 3.4GHz quad-core 7th-generation Intel Core i5 processor, 16GB 2400MHz memory, 1TB Fusion Drive, Radeon Pro 570 with 4GB video memory. I will not be updating the hard drive to an SSD because it would be WAY to expensive here in Mexico. Will this computer do well with what I mentioned before as to my needs?

The specifications for my actual computer are:

MacBook Pro (Retina, 13-inch, Late 2013)
2.6 GHz Intel Core i5
8 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Intel Iris 1536 MB
500GB SSD
OS 10.12.6

Thing is, I'm going on a one-month work trip to Europe in April and want to be able to capture lots of video footage, too, and want to know if my actual MBP can do the job until I buy the other one.

Thank you for any and all help.

Sergio Mendoza Hochmann

P.S. To be clear, I'm posting this question in a couple of different forums in order to get as many answers as possible. Thank you!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 05 Feb 2018 16:11 #93901

  • JarrodMFay
  • JarrodMFay's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 171
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 34
Short answer - yes. Your current laptop will not play the 4K footage smoothly without using proxies or having playback reduce quality for smoothness. That is not a deal breaker but you should know that going in. If you start layering a lot of 4K on top of each other then you'll definitely want to explore a proxy workflow so you don't go crazy. It doesn't sound like that's your plan. Personally I would consider your current laptop barely fast enough (and with barely enough RAM) to do the kind of video post you've described. That's just me though. The 5K iMac will be substantially smoother to work with.
One big thing I would suggest is that you invest in a fast Thunderbolt drive (preferably RAID protected) that your footage can live on. That will make your life a lot better.
Welcome to the world of video and best of luck!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 00:00 #93909

  • Ben Balser
  • Ben Balser's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3823
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 534
RAID is not a form of "protection", it is a form of "speed". Get two T'bolt drives, one to work on, one to backup to.

And get 16 GB RAM if you can, you'll see a definite performance improvement.

As stated, you may need to use proxies for 4K media, but you can edit.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 01:45 #93917

  • smg669
  • smg669's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 192
  • Thank you received: 27

FCPX.guru wrote: RAID is not a form of "protection", it is a form of "speed".


You tend to speak in absolutes when the subject does not lend itself well to absolutes. (Few subjects do).

RAID can definitely be a form of "protection". It can provide redundancy, which will protect from certain forms of data loss. Is it a reasonable, standalone data protection solution? Of course not. But it can be an important part of a healthy data protection diet.

And RAID does not by definition increase speed. Certain forms of RAID can certainly increase speed, while others can either hinder speed – or have no effect at all on speed.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by smg669. Reason: corrected spelling

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 02:38 #93919

  • JarrodMFay
  • JarrodMFay's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 171
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 34
Very well said. And much less snarky than I might have replied. Yes, I was suggesting that Sergio get a RAID drive for the data redundancy. That's what I meant by RAID protected. If that was confusing then I apologize.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 04:09 #93922

  • Ben Balser
  • Ben Balser's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3823
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 534
As a retired IT engineer, I'm more than familiar with what RAID is and isn't, "by definition".

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Ben Balser.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 04:33 #93924

  • Karsten Schlüter
  • Karsten Schlüter's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 3687
  • Karma: 61
  • Thank you received: 665

FCPX.guru wrote: As a retired IT engineer, I'm more than familiar with what RAID is and isn't, "by definition".


so, Ben, why not explaining, in simple words, the differences conc. data-transfer and data-integrity of Raid 0, 1 and 5 …? ;)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 12:51 #93941

  • Ben Balser
  • Ben Balser's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3823
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 534
Why? That's not pertinent to the OP directly. Am I being baited here again?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 15:25 #93947

  • JarrodMFay
  • JarrodMFay's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 171
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 34
I agree absolutely that RAID drives (in most configurations) can be used to increase data read/write speeds. But saying that they can't be used for data protection is just wrong. Let's take RAID 1 for example. If you have 2 drives the data is "mirrored" on each. If one drive gets damaged then you still have viable data on the other. This is from one definition I found:
"Disk mirroring provides instantaneous failover for data required by mission-critical applications. If primary arrays are damaged, traffic is switched to secondary or mirrored backup arrays."
RAID 1 is not faster than a single drive so speed wouldn't be a good reason to use it.
Similarly, on RAID arrays with more drives, with RAID 5 array you can have one drive get damaged and your data is still good. RAID 6 allows for 2 drives to get damaged without loosing data.
That's one of the reasons our 12 drive server is set up as RAID 6.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 15:31 #93948

  • Andreas Kiel
  • Andreas Kiel's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1028
  • Karma: 32
  • Thank you received: 178

FCPX.guru wrote: Why? That's not pertinent to the OP directly. Am I being baited here again?

Why not?

A user suggested a 'protected RAID' - you said : RAID is not a form of "protection".

The name "RAID" (abbreviation for: Redundant Array of Independent Disks, originally Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks) somehow says that protection might be included.

You as an engineer might shed some light on this for the OP since the usage of a RAID was suggested.

My personal opinion: a level 5 (5+) is a good idea to have a speedy and pretty failure safe device.
This doesn't free you from making security backups.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 17:14 #93952

  • Karsten Schlüter
  • Karsten Schlüter's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 3687
  • Karma: 61
  • Thank you received: 665

FCPX.guru wrote: Why? That's not pertinent to the OP directly. Am I being baited here again?


c'mon, Ben, nobody's baiting you again... :S

You stated

FCPX.guru wrote:
RAID is not a form of "protection", it is a form of "speed".


ok, perhaps 'semantics' … using the word 'protection' maybe doesn't fit your engineers nomenclature, but I guess most understand what was meant: a mirroring Raid1 isn't target to speed but integrity … And we are allowed to comment your comment … don't we? ;)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 20:36 #93956

  • joema
  • joema's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1707
  • Karma: 27
  • Thank you received: 370
I think Ben in a terse way was simply trying to correct the frequent misconception that RAID "protects" from data loss. It appears that everyone here understands RAID isn't a replacement for backup, which is good, because:

According to one study, the top causes for data loss are:

Hardware failure: 21%
Software failure: 19%
Human error: 18%

Other studies list human error as the top cause: datahealthcheck.databarracks.com/2016/#title-page

When I worked for 10 years doing data recovery on IT relational databases, the top cause was software failure, usually in the RDBMS system. It didn't matter how many levels of hardware redundancy existed, if the RDBMS engine corrupts the data, it's equally damaged on all on-line redundant arrays. I believe FCPX uses the SQLite database, and while my experience with it has been good, no database software has perfect data integrity. This is especially so during transaction rollback scenarios or when an exception is thrown while in a rollback code path.

Similarly, after handling hundreds of IT data loss cases, I experienced that user error was also a top cause. If an admin accidentally overwrites a key file (say by erroneously loading an old backup), that data is lost no matter how redundant the disks are.

For my personal work I used RAID-5 for years but eventually switched to RAID-0 for the better performance and storage efficiency, periodically backed up to an identical offline RAID-0 array. There's no single optimal solution.

It's been years since I had a drive failure in a RAID system, although I keep all my drives relatively new. However I've had a few HFS+ corruption problems within the past few years. I discussed these with Lloyd at Mac Performance Guide; after examination he said they were known file system bugs which can infrequently happen under high stress.

It's important to understand that disk hardware failure is only one possible cause of data loss. The entire RAID chassis can fail, even though all drives are OK, or it can damage the data during the failure. The file system can corrupt data, as can the database layer above that . While RDBMS and file system software are generally very reliable, data corruption from bugs in those layers is not unknown.

Another issue is recovery time and how degraded performance is during that interval. With some RAID-5 systems, performance is so degraded during the lengthy rebuild phase you can barely work. You can be technically "up" but operationally 90% down for a day while it rebuilds. I've seen many cases where users would gladly accept several hours of data loss just to immediately regain 100% functionality and performance.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 21:56 #93960

  • smg669
  • smg669's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 192
  • Thank you received: 27

joema wrote: I think Ben in a terse way was simply trying to correct the frequent misconception that RAID "protects" from data loss. It appears that everyone here understands RAID isn't a replacement for backup, which is good, because:


But that was the problem I had with Ben's statement, and unfortunately with your statement as well. It's not a "misconception" that RAID protects from data loss. It certainly can. I'm living proof of it - I had a Peagsus R6 that was loaded with ticking-time-bomb, post-flood 3TB Seagate mechanisms. 4 out of the 6 mechanisms failed over the life of the RAID. And each and every time I was able to rebuild the RAID and save some data that would have been lost (had it been stored on an non-RAID single mechanism drive that failed similarly). Again, by definition, the RAID protected me from data loss.

I'm also living proof that RAID is not a "fail-safe" means of data protection or backup. I've twice had two mechanisms in RAID5 sets fail simultaneously, rendering the volume completely unrecoverable.

Now, in both of those instances I had other backup contingencies (unrelated the the RAID itself) in place that prevented a great deal of data loss. Incremental backups. Offsite backup storage. Cloud backups.

Obviously it's wrong to slap a RAID5 onto a system and do absolutely nothing else and assume you're adequately protected against all data loss. But it's also wrong to state the "RAID does not protect against data loss".

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by smg669. Reason: clarification

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 22:02 #93961

  • smg669
  • smg669's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 192
  • Thank you received: 27

Karsten Schlüter wrote: ok, perhaps 'semantics' … using the word 'protection' maybe doesn't fit your engineers nomenclature, but I guess most understand what was meant: a mirroring Raid1 isn't target to speed but integrity … And we are allowed to comment your comment … don't we? ;)


You're right, Karsten. It's an issue of semantics. I can install a deadbolt on my front door and correctly state that it "protects against break-in". That doesn't mean that a break-in is impossible. Taking different/further measures will protect me further. "Protection" is not a binary term – there are levels of protection.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 23:05 #93962

  • sergio.hochmann
  • sergio.hochmann's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 3
  • Thank you received: 0
Thank you very much for your insight, JarrodMFay and FCPX.guru. I will take all under advisement. I'll be buying a 27-inch 5K iMac with 8 gb RAM which I'll expand to 24 in the beginning using RAM that doesn't come from apple, so I can save a 150-200 dollars., and either a 512 gb SSD or a 2TB Fusion Drive using proxies and, of course, my trusty external drives as well as some new ones. I already saw a 2 TB Fusion Drive work on files with what I want to do and it seems to work pretty well with no hiccups or anything.

To the rest of the posters... well, what can I say. I'm glad you enjoy talking about RAID drives - which you are obviously fascinated by and savvy all-around, but it wasn't anywhere near what I wanted to hear. Too bad because I would've loved to have heard your take on my questions.

In any case, regards to all!

Sergio MH

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 23:48 #93963

  • joema
  • joema's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1707
  • Karma: 27
  • Thank you received: 370

joema wrote: I think Ben in a terse way was simply trying to correct the frequent misconception that RAID "protects" from data loss. It appears that everyone here understands RAID isn't a replacement for backup, which is good, because:

smg669 wrote: But that was the problem I had....with your statement as well. It's not a "misconception" that RAID protects from data loss. It certainly can...


I put "protects" in quotes to show I was speaking of that in the generic sense. Of course a redundant form of RAID can protect from some disk failures. But there's a difference between disk failure and data loss in the broader sense. There are various sources of data loss people often don't consider, and which RAID doesn't protect you from, some of which I listed above.

This is so commonly misunderstood that those of us with many decades of IT experience sometimes go out of our way to try and clear up that misunderstanding. We don't mean to imply nobody understands this but we've seen so many cases of pain and heartache from over-reliance on RAID (and under-reliance on backups) that we want to ensure people are educated about the reality.

One such example is the extremely slow sync or rebuild time some RAID systems exhibit. Here is data I graphed showing sync time when I tested three different Promise Pegasus R4 RAID-5 units. As you can see, when using the default 128K stripe size, the sync time was 3.4 days: joema.smugmug.com/Computers/Pegasus-R4-R...n-p2Nn4p/i-pdz6p2j/A

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 06 Feb 2018 23:53 #93964

  • Jason P
  • Jason P's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Boarder
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 56
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 4
To the OP... I would think your spec is fine, but I would definitely spring for the R580 8GB GPU if you can afford it, it will future proof the iMac for a bit longer. You can save money on RAM by only buying the bare 8gb from Apple as standard and then adding your own from Kingston, Crucial or whoever.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 07 Feb 2018 00:33 #93965

  • sergio.hochmann
  • sergio.hochmann's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 3
  • Thank you received: 0
Thank you very much, Jason!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 07 Feb 2018 01:18 #93966

  • VidGreg
  • VidGreg's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 974
  • Karma: 28
  • Thank you received: 196
Hi Sergio, Welcome to the forums!
First, if you plan on doing 4K work, I would suggest you get the i7 CPU not the i5 if you can. The additional power of the i7 will be greatly appreciated for heavy lifting and over the life time of the unit, will be worth it In My Humble Opinion (IMHO). Better performance and hyper threading.

As to the issue about RAIDs and do they provide "Data Security/Protection" I'm with Joema, but I really wish to emphasize the importance of Back Ups and that RAIDs are not Back Ups. So in your budgeting for equipment, add a couple of large external drives to serve as Back Ups. Back Ups are the Real Data security method.
Having a RAID 1/5/6/10 will not protect your data from Human error (deleting a file, etc…) which I think is #1 RAID failure and people can become complacent in thinking just because they have redundant data via RAIDs they are going to be OK.
Joema mentioned lots of good info and said if the device itself fails, you can lose all the data even if the drives themselves are still OK. This is true for hardware based RAID devices, but not Software based RAIDs. I tend to prefer Software RAIDs for this reason. If you have a hardware based RAID and the chips fail, the only way to recover the data is by having an exact duplicate hardware/firmware device with empty drive bays. Not many folks do this. Imagine you have a hardware based 5/8 bay device fail with no spare, now you have to hope that the manufacture has a replacement that contains the same chipset, the same firmware and can ship it to you in a reasonable timeframe. IMHO not a good situation and lots of downtime. Without this "redundancy" do you really have data protection? If a software based RAID device fails, as long as you can connect the drives, the data should be intact. Again, Back Up!

Given the speed of external ssd's via USB3.1 or ThunderBolt, how important are RAIDs in todays systems? Configure your system to your needs. Takes ~ 3/4 hdd in RAID 0 to equal the bandwidth/speed of a single ssd drive. Depending on how much room you need for data, and how many hdd drives you will be buying especially RAID 1/6/10, maybe a (or 2) 1TB ssd is all many of us need, along with some big Back Up drives, which you need anyway. So for myself, I no longer use RAIDs at all. Large 4K/8K footage projects will most likely require large RAIDs. This is where RAIDs come in. If we are really talking about that level of production, then maybe the OP really needs an iMacPro, not a 5K IMAC. Easy enough for me to spend his $$.

Finally, there is the issue of the new APFS file system and how it write on demand protects data and only writes changes. Only available currently for ssd/flash drives. If APFS is truly stable enough, then it should overcome some the issues with HFS+. Whole 'nother topic/discussion.
Well, what an amazing first post for the OP :P Hope we haven't scared you off Sergio.

Happy editing, Greg

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

About-to-be new user with a mighty big question! 07 Feb 2018 22:18 #94004

  • Ben Balser
  • Ben Balser's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3823
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 534
I'm a retired IT engineer, I've seen lots and lots and lots of RAIDs of all types fail and lose data totally, few due to multiple drive fails, as there's other things that fail on RAID boxes.. It is no reason to not get a backup drive. Just giving my two cents. Then on top of the nickel I wish I had for every RAID i've seen lose data...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Page:
  • 1