Some advise on buying a laptop for editing? A big investment for me...

[i_c_e]

Hi,
For me buying a new computer is a very big investment. I know that there are all kinds of simular posts but I want to make sure that I get what is going to be the best for and me I would really appreciate any feedback.
I just sold my old Desktop to go mobile.
These are the specs of what I just bought at Fry's. I can still return it with no fees or problems but I got to know soon.

Specs:
HP Pavillion Ent. Notebook
Vista Home Premium 64 bit SP1
Intel Centrino 2 Processor -is AMD better?
2.0GHZ
3 MB Cache
256mb Dedicated and 1928mb shared NVIDIA 9200 Graphics card
4GB RAM
320 HD

I Just want to run Vegas Pro 8. I know what the box says but what you need to run smooth and fast is whole other story. (if it can run on 1GB RAM why would you ever need 6-8GB? Duh!) I use MPEG2 Files and usually keep projects around 6-10 minutes.

Thank you very much,

Josh

[INFRATOM]

Laptop is not a good choice for video editing, unless you want to pay $4000 and carry around a 14 pounder weight plus an external drive and some other gadgets needed. You can put a computer together with $800 that no laptop can match. Some video encoding could take an hour or so on desktop and on that laptop will definitely take more so you need to be connected to a power outlet so mobility would be the length of the cord to the wall. These are just a few examples.

[edDV]

Why do they advise a laptop? I can't think of a single advantage except mobility.

For me a laptop is only useful if you also have a tower with lots of disk capacity.

I use a laptop+USB2 drive for hotel room transfer and pre-edit but a tower for home base project work.

[vid83]

I also am considering a laptop for editing (but most like will go with desktop).
I want to run Premiere Pro 1.5, which is a few years old. Will newer laptops be able to handle this?

[i_c_e]

Sorry I should have explained why I need a laptop.
My family and I are missionaries and leaving the country in two to three weeks. I am making a DVD for us to give out to people.
I want to take the laptop so I can make changes or finish it away from my house. I can't really take a tower and moniter with me on the plane. Every one at fry's, best buy even the sony rep I talked to told me I should be fine with this thing but obviously I am definately not convinced. I thought what I was doing would be relatively simple and easy. boy, was I wrong!
I won't run it on battery for video editing.

[INFRATOM]

Well I thought your question was in concept, if you have to travel and have limitation that's OK. For video dual core intels are better. AMD runs hot and uses more power. So to cut time it is best to work with mpeg . if your camera can record in mpeg2 all you need is mpeg editor like videoRedo and authoring software. Ulead products are easy to use. If it is just missionary gift windows movie maker does a good job too and very easy to use. I've taken motion video with my digital camera and made a movie with windows movie maker in a short time. My sons do it with webcam and put it on youtube they do it on their laptops too.

[vid83]

I also have a question about laptop editing.
Since Premiere Pro 1.5 is a few years old, wouldn't it work good in current laptops?

The specification for the laptop is:
Windows XP Home 32 bit
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor T6600 (2.2GHz)
3GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
256MB NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GE
320GB HDD

My old laptop that just crashed ran Premiere Pro fine with it's lower specs so I assume that newer laptops will run fine:
1GB RAM
Intel Pentium 4
40GB hard drive

Shouldn't Premiere Pro 1.5 run faster with current laptops?

[turk690]

Some laptops are powerful enough to actually edit video with regards to their processors, memory, chipset, audio and video. But the one fundamental flaw of a laptop will always be that they can only have one physical native hard drive. Serious non-linear video editing (NLE) requires at the very least TWO native physical hard drives: one containing the OS and programs, the other containing the captured files. I suppose one can plug in an external USB hard drive into a laptop and declare you now have two hard-drives, but that is NOT a native drive in the same way a SATA drive as controlled by the south bridge of the chipset is. USB is as fine as it goes but data transfer through it requires many levels of permissions s/w and h/w, obvious and otherwise, all conspiring to slow editing down or even hang it altogether. The next best thing would be FireWire, which has its own controller and is more efficient in file transfer compared with USB. But laptops only have one FireWire port, so if an external FireWire hard drive is connected, a real-time capture through a FireWire-equipped camcorder (such as HDV would be) is out of the question.
There indeed are laptops customized for NLE, where options are available for putting in an additional hard drive and all that. But the high price tags, for me, simply erases all advantages that increased mobility will bring.
The best compromise, IMHO, is using a micro PC case. Some of these are merely 4"x14"x15" or somewere along those sizes, and accept a micro-ATX size mainboard. Together with oh-so-cool Intel Core 2 Duo processors, overheating is a thing of the past, and the whole set-up can be as powerful as any of its bigger sized counterparts. It will be easy to lug the small case around without getting a hernia, addressing the mobility issue.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Too many purists here(!)

The laptop will be able to run Vegas. I use my Core 2 Duo Dell laptop with Vegas just fine.

Capture during the day. Edit in the evening. Render overnight. I can't imagine you'll be needing to do serious video effects if you are trying to show people the story of your mission. Mainly just simple cuts.

BUT - what is your video source? i.e., camcorder type? You mention MPEG-2 files - that could mean a mini DVD SD camcorder or an HDV camcorder. Quite different beasts as far as CPU resources go.

[turk690]

There was a point where I indeed attempted NLE with a Pentium laptop with Premiere Pro 1.5 and XP Pro. Beyond two video tracks, preloaded DV AVI, and simple cuts, the whole thing just glitched and froze all the time. The majority of my research pointed to that one essential NLE requirement: two physical native hard drives if anything fluid and smooth and serious NLE is to happen. I've followed that tenet since, haven't looked back, and can't emphasize it enough.
For those who think any recent laptop with its one requisite hard drive is enough (2.2GHz Core2Duo, 4GB RAM, separate nVidia graphics with 256MB, etc.) try capturing 24Mb/s AVCHD, composing an HD Premiere Pro 4 project, then fade between two clips and add some ersatz titles, etc. If the wretched laptop doesn't balk at anytime in the slightest way, lucky u.

[JohnnyMalaria]

For me, PPro 1.5 was the final straw with Premiere. I'd used it since the original 1.1 (not Pro!) and finally realized Adobe were never going to get it right. They'd had one last chance too many. I switched to Vegas. On each computer that I have tried both, Vegas has been a joy while PPro has been a glitchy, slow waste of my money.

[edDV]

For me, PPro 1.5 was the final straw with Premiere. I'd used it since the original 1.1 (not Pro!) and finally realized Adobe were never going to get it right. They'd had one last chance too many. I switched to Vegas. On each computer that I have tried both, Vegas has been a joy while PPro has been a glitchy, slow waste of my money.

I switched to Vegas at that time also. But later I had to buy PPro 2.0 anyway to resume a prior project. I prefer Vegas which has no stability issues.

[i_c_e]

Too many purists here(!)

The laptop will be able to run Vegas. I use my Core 2 Duo Dell laptop with Vegas just fine.

Capture during the day. Edit in the evening. Render overnight. I can't imagine you'll be needing to do serious video effects if you are trying to show people the story of your mission. Mainly just simple cuts.

BUT - what is your video source? i.e., camcorder type? You mention MPEG-2 files - that could mean a mini DVD SD camcorder or an HDV camcorder. Quite different beasts as far as CPU resources go.

Thank you, very helpful reply,

Actually I will be using some effects, color adjustment, lot's of clip spitting and edits as well as titles and multi frame shots. My video is to convey the gospel not our trips so all kinds things going on. I would love to post one of my video's on here somewhere if you wanted to take a look. (how? what format?
I have a Sony HDR-CX12 Camcorder (I know AVCHD is a beast) but I am recording in Non-HD regular format. or converting the AVCHD file to MPEG2 using the software that came with the computer (Sony Picture Motion Browser).
If I have to go with a laptop and don't want to spend more than a grand any final suggestions on what to get on the consumer market?

Thanks again,

Joshua

[edDV]

[quote="i_c_e"]

"If I have to go with a laptop and don't want to spend more than a grand"...

Joshua

Why would you have to go with a laptop?

What we are saying is a desktop tower would be half the cost and more productive. AVCHD is a worse case. Your choice is productivity vs. mobility.

[i_c_e]

Right, remember I said I am leaving for South America in three weeks.... Need to take it and can't really lug a Desktop through the airport...
I am not editing in AVCHD that's just the original format for some of the files. (The ones I am not having a lot of trouble with).

Josh

[i_c_e]

Can any just tell me why I shouldn't use a laptop. I know that I am pretty stupid to not have gotten it by now but.....
If Sony never uses more that 2 GB's of RAM and all the other stuff lines up what is my problem? I have an eSata external hard drive....
What am I missing out on specifically?

Thanks for putting up with me,

Josh

[guns1inger]

If I were going to buy a laptop for editing, I would probably look at a MacBook Pro (the aluminium ones, not the plastic crappy ones, hence the Pro bit). I would wipe the resource hog that is OS X and install XP SP2 and updates. I suspect it will be a longer lasting, more easily repairable in strange places piece of kit than a Pavillion. Either than or pay a premium and get one of the super rugged Lenovo's. Ugly, but you can drive a four wheel drive over it, pick it up and use it.

Laptops tend not to be as reliable as desktops because of the smaller form factor and the fact they get bumped and lugged in ways desktops do not. Make sure you can get decent support in far flung places (International Warranty is good) and that the kit is up to the trip.

[i_c_e]

Some very good advise, thank you,

too bad that both options include spending well over the $1k that I have.
oh, and I thought what made the Mac's so great was the OS? if you ditch that then what good is it?

Good Idea on the warranty,

thanx

Joshua

[edDV]

If you have decided to go laptop, make sure it has IEEE-1394 I/O (others will have MiniDV* even if you don't) and multiple USB2 ports for external drives. Look for a laptop with eSATA if possible. In hot climates this thing will overheat when encoding. Consider an external cooler.

Do a test project before you go so you have time to buy accessories.
You should take several large external drives. Don't forget to back up.

You should take a small MiniDV camcorder with analog pass through capability. You will need it to dub local material. Several South American countries are on PAL, PAL-N or PAL-M. This can be a complication for local capture.

What country are you going to?
What is your current camcorder?

[i_c_e]

Hey your really helpful,
Thanks mucho.
I am going to all of them actually.
I have a Sony HDR-CX12 I know that it is AVCHD which is mega pain but I won't be using HD. and I will convert the SD MPEG2 to avi.

Will a NTSC DVD Play in a PAL DVD player at all??

Thans again,

Josh

[Nelson37]

I compare the laptop to a folding bicycle. Better than nothing, but nowhere near as good as the full-size article.

In a laptop, you pay extra for small size, light weight, and long battery life. You get lower performance, shorter lifetime, non-standardized parts, much more difficult to repair, and much easier to either break or steal.

I would seriously consider getting a real PC and either lugging it through the airport, having it shipped directly to your destination, or possibly buying it there. Check out currency exchange rates and any import duties, some countries will levy a fairly stiff tax on electronics brought into the country, depending on the type of residency.

[guns1inger]

Most (the vast majority) of PAL players will play NTSC DVDs without a problem - certainly in Europe, Australia and many other areas. It does not appear to be quite so prevalent in some South American countries, where it is quasi PAL/NTSC variant.

You are also making your live very difficult going to AVCHD and a cheap laptop. Cheap laptops generally equate to lower CPU power. AVCHD needs as much CPU as you can throw at it - at least dual core, and that is just to get smooth playback. Encoding is another issue again.

If you work entirely in SD then it will be more manageable, but you will notice that encoding times are still not that great.

[edDV]

Hey your really helpful,
Thanks mucho.
I am going to all of them actually.
I have a Sony HDR-CX12 I know that it is AVCHD which is mega pain but I won't be using HD. and I will convert the SD MPEG2 to avi.

Will a NTSC DVD Play in a PAL DVD player at all??

Thans again,

Josh

Issue 1: Does the HDR-CX12 record from analog inputs? If not consider taking a MiniDV (also works for camera2 and dubbing to analog via IEEE-1394) or a USB2 or PC card capture device.

Issue 2: Local Standards. Most S. American countries use NTSC. Exceptions are

Brazil - PAL-M 525/60 (but most VCR play NTSC and the DVD disc there is the same as NTSC).

Argentina/Paraguay/Uruguay are PAL-N 625/50 with subcarrier at 3.58MHz. Local VCR and DVD players probably play NTSC but you can't be 100% sure.

British or French* current or former colonies - PAL 625/50 4.43MHz subcarrier. DVD players usually play an NTSC DVD.

From my experience in Brazil and Argentina you will find modern equipment in the cities but in smaller towns you need to be prepared to dub to VCR or work with PAL-M/PAL-N TV sets that won't take NTSC directly.


* The French broadcast in SECAM but most production is in PAL.

[i_c_e]

Okay that all really helps me make a good decision.
If I could throw one more Q out there...
Would you (any of you) choose 4GB's of Ram or A bit higher CPU and about 2-3GB's of Ram (like between 2.0GHZ to 2.1 0r 2.3)?
Thanks again everyone, some very good advise from every one.

Oh.. One more, What does the Cache have to do with anything???? Every one at the stores told me that the Cache (2-4mb) is very important for Video Editing, Are they right?

Gracias mucho mucho,

Josh

[guns1inger]

Cahe is the memory directly connected to the CPU, and yes, larger cache can help processing of larger datasets, like video.

If it came down to a choice between 2GB of ram and a faster CPU, versus 4GB ram (which won't be used unless you go 64 bit, and then you have a whole new set of problems) and a slower CPU, I would go for the CPU.

That said, if you are going to be running Vista, 3 GB might be the way to go.

[edDV]

ditto

save some money for a good wireless mic and capture device/backup camcorder.

[i_c_e]

That helps a lot thanks mucho,

One last question then I promise I will shut up (at least for now)...

Which is more imortant 3mb of cache (over 2mb) or another .10 to .30 GHZ (like 2.0 to 2.3GHZ )of CPU?

Thanks for putting up whit me stupid newbie Q's,

Josh

[edDV]

I get by with 2GB memory even for HD. The other machine has 4GB but I see little speed difference, just able to open more programs at once.

[JohnnyMalaria]

That helps a lot thanks mucho,

One last question then I promise I will shut up (at least for now)...

Which is more imortant 3mb of cache (over 2mb) or another .10 to .30 GHZ (like 2.0 to 2.3GHZ )of CPU?

Thanks for putting up whit me stupid newbie Q's,

Josh

Personally, I'd go for the extra CPU speed.

Cache is all well and good as long as the size of the structures that the application is using fit within the cache. e.g., if an entire HD frame needs to be decoded before anything can be done with it, the cache won't be able to hold it so the benefit diminishes. If, on the other hand, processing can be done on smaller chunks that can reside completely within the cache then it is helpful.

Many moons ago, I tested a cacheless and cached version of the same processor with some editing software and the cacheless one was about 5% faster. With apps such as a browser, email Excel etc, the cached version was faster.

With current dual core processors there are two ways the cached is implemented - either each core gets its own or they have to share. In the latter case, multithreaded programs (just about everything these days has some multithreading) each make heavy use of the cache. Shared cache multicore processors show a lower performance as a result. And having more apps running causes the cache to get used by many programs at once.

So it depends...

[i_c_e]

Man you guys know a lot of stuff about Video Editing and all,
thanks for being willing to pass it all on....

I think I now got enough (finally, right?) info to make a good decision.....

thanx agian and take care everyone,

josh