Posted: 11/29/2016 11:59:04 AM EDT
|
My boss wants me to start doing some video editing of some educational videos he is wanting to create. He is willing to invest in some software and equipment if needed to get the best results. Our company does primarily use Windows computers. Keep in mind I dont want anything to advanced or technical to use as I have to idea how to edit videos and will be learning by doing. We could also be creating some audio only recordings to create some type of podcast, if that changes the recommendation at all.
If PC, what do you recommend for software and equipment? If MAC, what do you recommend for software and equipment? Thanks for any help. |
|
I don't edit videos professionally, but I do capture and edit a lot of videos for home use so take my input with a grain of salt. For hardware, I started editing on a PC with a Pentium P4 single core CPU and a very low end GPU card - not a lot of fun. Currently my PC uses a core i7 processor, a SSD for OS, a 1TB 7200 rpm hard drive, and a good but lower end Nvidia GPU - my system works fairly well editing video for a low priced system (a better GPU card would be more desirable). I didn't purchase a high end video editing program but I have purchased three of the lower priced programs - Pinnacle Studio, Nero Video, and Cyberlink PowerDirector. I can't comment of the higher end software because I've never used it. If you have never edited video before, all of the editing programs required a learning curve of not only the program but also the idiosyncrasies of simply editing video. |
|
Quoted:
I don't edit videos professionally, but I do capture and edit a lot of videos for home use so take my input with a grain of salt. For hardware, I started editing on a PC with a Pentium P4 single core CPU and a very low end GPU card - not a lot of fun. Currently my PC uses a core i7 processor, a SSD for OS, a 1TB 7200 rpm hard drive, and a good but lower end Nvidia GPU - my system works fairly well editing video for a low priced system (a better GPU card would be more desirable). I didn't purchase a high end video editing program but I have purchased three of the lower priced programs - Pinnacle Studio, Nero Video, and Cyberlink PowerDirector. I can't comment of the higher end software because I've never used it. If you have never edited video before, all of the editing programs required a learning curve of not only the program but also the idiosyncrasies of simply editing video. Of the ones you purchased, which do you like best? I don't shoot a lot of video now, but have a black Friday camera coming that shoots 4k so that will probably change soon. |
|
Quoted: Of the ones you purchased, which do you like best? I don't shoot a lot of video now, but have a black Friday camera coming that shoots 4k so that will probably change soon. Quoted: Quoted: I don't edit videos professionally, but I do capture and edit a lot of videos for home use so take my input with a grain of salt. For hardware, I started editing on a PC with a Pentium P4 single core CPU and a very low end GPU card - not a lot of fun. Currently my PC uses a core i7 processor, a SSD for OS, a 1TB 7200 rpm hard drive, and a good but lower end Nvidia GPU - my system works fairly well editing video for a low priced system (a better GPU card would be more desirable). I didn't purchase a high end video editing program but I have purchased three of the lower priced programs - Pinnacle Studio, Nero Video, and Cyberlink PowerDirector. I can't comment of the higher end software because I've never used it. If you have never edited video before, all of the editing programs required a learning curve of not only the program but also the idiosyncrasies of simply editing video. Of the ones you purchased, which do you like best? I don't shoot a lot of video now, but have a black Friday camera coming that shoots 4k so that will probably change soon. Honestly, of these lessor expensive options, they all have advantages and disadvantages so I use them for whichever one can get the job done the fastest. I like the feature set of Cyberlink, but a lot of them aren't enabled without spending more money to unlock them so I use that program the least. I had been using Pinnacle Studio a lot because for me the UI is easier to understand but I don't think it is quite as powerful. The latest version Nero Video editor is currently the one I use most (the earlier versions were kind of weak). |
|
Quoted: My boss wants me to start doing some video editing of some educational videos he is wanting to create. He is willing to invest in some software and equipment if needed to get the best results. Our company does primarily use Windows computers. Keep in mind I dont want anything to advanced or technical to use as I have to idea how to edit videos and will be learning by doing. We could also be creating some audio only recordings to create some type of podcast, if that changes the recommendation at all. If PC, what do you recommend for software and equipment? If MAC, what do you recommend for software and equipment? Thanks for any help. "Educational videos" is a bit of a vague remit. I'd guess it's mostly delivery to camera with some basic compositing (ie adding in text or image overlays), probably some light animation (titles etc) for a bit of pizzaz. I'm also going to hazard a guess that you'll be outputting at 1080p. I'm also guessing that you're wearing a blue poloshirt and cream slacks, just because guessing things is fun! You'd be surprised at what you can do on a low-spec machine. Better machines are... well, better, obviously... but the saving will mostly be related to time rather than whether it can or can't do the job. Time is money, of course. Processor Something with multiple cores. Rendering is one of those (currently few) things that actually gets a benefit from multiple cores (I believe for most editors more cores = better than less cores + hyper-threading) so the i7 quad core is actually more useful in this context than the i5. Again, it comes back to the type and volume of work. I'd trade the i7 for an i5 to get more RAM if I had to, simply because the performance gains for my use would translate into "minutes of difference" rather than "hours of difference". Graphics card Always nice to have more, but not as important for straight forward editing. In my opinion, anyway. I also use Maya, ZBrush, Solidworks, etc, where the graphics card does become more important. Possible exception to this is DaVinci Resolve (which I'll mention more later) which I'm told absolutely loves to make the GPU its bitch, therefore prefers a more powerful video card. HOWEVER... do you know what is really frickin' useful? Multiple monitors. I use two and I'd love to move to three. This might influence your choice. I like to spread out when I work and hate switching between windows. RAM It's an odd thing, but RAM is really useful up until about 8GB for "normal" users and 16GB for heavy gamers/workstations. After that, the performance gains tail off for a lot of people. You could get by with 8GB but you'd be better with 16GB. If I had spare cash left over after buying other components I'd go for 32GB just to feel awesome, though the performance difference over 16GB might be questionable for my use. Hard drive space I capture in Raw 1920x1088 and it takes up roughly 4Gb per 10 minutes. Depending on how good your filmstar is at reading an autocue, you might be looking at 10+ minutes just to capture 1 minute of final footage. In fact, I currently have a whole pile of scripts for a Youtube channel that are unshot purely because I've run out of space  ... So, your spec could start from an i5 (maybe something like a 6500) with 8GB RAM, Nvidia 1050 or 1050Ti (I'm a bit out of touch with video cards, I'm guessing these are currently mid-range), and a few multi-TB harddrives. More processor and RAM would be lovely depending on budget. Software I'm a big fan of the Adobe Creative Cloud package. It gives you a good collection of useful tools. Premiere, AfterEffects, Illustrator, Audition, and Media Encoder are the ones I use the most when creating video content, with the occasional bit of Photoshop if I need to clean up images that I want to import. There are more parts of the package (Prelude for ingestion, Speedgrade for colour) that have a place in the workflow, but would overcomplicate my simpleton's workflow so I don't use them You get sucked into the whole "lease not buy" issue with the software, but you also get the most recent updated version. Also, lots and LOTS of online tutorial content available if you're teaching yourself as you go along.I've also recently recommended giving Da Vinci Resolve a try. It's a free version of a more comprehensive paid-for package but, from the reviews I've seen, appears to be pretty solid. If you end up going down this road, note my comments above about picking a better graphics card. The benefit is that it's free so there's nothing lost by trying it even with your current hardware. It's a liner editor to the process is broadly the same. Final Cut is Mac stuff. I try not to think about Mac stuff, as I'm not sure if they've invented a cure for syphilis of the id. Other things Audio on cameras is often... less than optimal. Pick up a separate mic (a discrete lav mic is a good option) and strongly consider a recording device. I've got a couple of Zoom H1's and ATR.. err... 3350's?... lav mics that completely outclass the camera mic. They can also be used to record Podcasts without needing to set up a fancy studio - I've sent a few people home with a H1/ATR lav mic and told them to open the doors of the wardrobe and speak towards their clothes. It's surprisingly effective. If someone is in front of a camera, seriously consider an autocue. If they're not used to memorising scripts or improvising as they go, a few minutes of delivery can easily turn into a frustrating hour or more of work. I would happily sell someone else's kidney for an autocue. And then there's all the fun of picking out your primary A/V equipment |
|
Quoted:
"Educational videos" is a bit of a vague remit. I'd guess it's mostly delivery to camera with some basic compositing (ie adding in text or image overlays), probably some light animation (titles etc) for a bit of pizzaz. I'm also going to hazard a guess that you'll be outputting at 1080p. I'm also guessing that you're wearing a blue poloshirt and cream slacks, just because guessing things is fun! Today I went with the red polo and I always wear jeans. You'd be surprised at what you can do on a low-spec machine. Better machines are... well, better, obviously... but the saving will mostly be related to time rather than whether it can or can't do the job. Time is money, of course. Processor Something with multiple cores. Rendering is one of those (currently few) things that actually gets a benefit from multiple cores (I believe for most editors more cores = better than less cores + hyper-threading) so the i7 quad core is actually more useful in this context than the i5. Again, it comes back to the type and volume of work. I'd trade the i7 for an i5 to get more RAM if I had to, simply because the performance gains for my use would translate into "minutes of difference" rather than "hours of difference". Graphics card Always nice to have more, but not as important for straight forward editing. In my opinion, anyway. I also use Maya, ZBrush, Solidworks, etc, where the graphics card does become more important. Possible exception to this is DaVinci Resolve (which I'll mention more later) which I'm told absolutely loves to make the GPU its bitch, therefore prefers a more powerful video card. HOWEVER... do you know what is really frickin' useful? Multiple monitors. I use two and I'd love to move to three. This might influence your choice. I like to spread out when I work and hate switching between windows. RAM It's an odd thing, but RAM is really useful up until about 8GB for "normal" users and 16GB for heavy gamers/workstations. After that, the performance gains tail off for a lot of people. You could get by with 8GB but you'd be better with 16GB. If I had spare cash left over after buying other components I'd go for 32GB just to feel awesome, though the performance difference over 16GB might be questionable for my use. Hard drive space I capture in Raw 1920x1088 and it takes up roughly 4Gb per 10 minutes. Depending on how good your filmstar is at reading an autocue, you might be looking at 10+ minutes just to capture 1 minute of final footage. In fact, I currently have a whole pile of scripts for a Youtube channel that are unshot purely because I've run out of space
... So, your spec could start from an i5 (maybe something like a 6500) with 8GB RAM, Nvidia 1050 or 1050Ti (I'm a bit out of touch with video cards, I'm guessing these are currently mid-range), and a few multi-TB harddrives. More processor and RAM would be lovely depending on budget. Software I'm a big fan of the Adobe Creative Cloud package. It gives you a good collection of useful tools. Premiere, AfterEffects, Illustrator, Audition, and Media Encoder are the ones I use the most when creating video content, with the occasional bit of Photoshop if I need to clean up images that I want to import. There are more parts of the package (Prelude for ingestion, Speedgrade for colour) that have a place in the workflow, but would overcomplicate my simpleton's workflow so I don't use them You get sucked into the whole "lease not buy" issue with the software, but you also get the most recent updated version. Also, lots and LOTS of online tutorial content available if you're teaching yourself as you go along.
I've also recently recommended giving Da Vinci Resolve a try. It's a free version of a more comprehensive paid-for package but, from the reviews I've seen, appears to be pretty solid. If you end up going down this road, note my comments above about picking a better graphics card. The benefit is that it's free so there's nothing lost by trying it even with your current hardware. It's a liner editor to the process is broadly the same. Final Cut is Mac stuff. I try not to think about Mac stuff, as I'm not sure if they've invented a cure for syphilis of the id. Other things Audio on cameras is often... less than optimal. Pick up a separate mic (a discrete lav mic is a good option) and strongly consider a recording device. I've got a couple of Zoom H1's and ATR.. err... 3350's?... lav mics that completely outclass the camera mic. They can also be used to record Podcasts without needing to set up a fancy studio - I've sent a few people home with a H1/ATR lav mic and told them to open the doors of the wardrobe and speak towards their clothes. It's surprisingly effective. If someone is in front of a camera, seriously consider an autocue. If they're not used to memorising scripts or improvising as they go, a few minutes of delivery can easily turn into a frustrating hour or more of work. I would happily sell someone else's kidney for an autocue. And then there's all the fun of picking out your primary A/V equipment
Quoted:
Quoted:
My boss wants me to start doing some video editing of some educational videos he is wanting to create. He is willing to invest in some software and equipment if needed to get the best results. Our company does primarily use Windows computers. Keep in mind I dont want anything to advanced or technical to use as I have to idea how to edit videos and will be learning by doing. We could also be creating some audio only recordings to create some type of podcast, if that changes the recommendation at all. If PC, what do you recommend for software and equipment? If MAC, what do you recommend for software and equipment? Thanks for any help. "Educational videos" is a bit of a vague remit. I'd guess it's mostly delivery to camera with some basic compositing (ie adding in text or image overlays), probably some light animation (titles etc) for a bit of pizzaz. I'm also going to hazard a guess that you'll be outputting at 1080p. I'm also guessing that you're wearing a blue poloshirt and cream slacks, just because guessing things is fun! Today I went with the red polo and I always wear jeans. You'd be surprised at what you can do on a low-spec machine. Better machines are... well, better, obviously... but the saving will mostly be related to time rather than whether it can or can't do the job. Time is money, of course. Processor Something with multiple cores. Rendering is one of those (currently few) things that actually gets a benefit from multiple cores (I believe for most editors more cores = better than less cores + hyper-threading) so the i7 quad core is actually more useful in this context than the i5. Again, it comes back to the type and volume of work. I'd trade the i7 for an i5 to get more RAM if I had to, simply because the performance gains for my use would translate into "minutes of difference" rather than "hours of difference". Graphics card Always nice to have more, but not as important for straight forward editing. In my opinion, anyway. I also use Maya, ZBrush, Solidworks, etc, where the graphics card does become more important. Possible exception to this is DaVinci Resolve (which I'll mention more later) which I'm told absolutely loves to make the GPU its bitch, therefore prefers a more powerful video card. HOWEVER... do you know what is really frickin' useful? Multiple monitors. I use two and I'd love to move to three. This might influence your choice. I like to spread out when I work and hate switching between windows. RAM It's an odd thing, but RAM is really useful up until about 8GB for "normal" users and 16GB for heavy gamers/workstations. After that, the performance gains tail off for a lot of people. You could get by with 8GB but you'd be better with 16GB. If I had spare cash left over after buying other components I'd go for 32GB just to feel awesome, though the performance difference over 16GB might be questionable for my use. Hard drive space I capture in Raw 1920x1088 and it takes up roughly 4Gb per 10 minutes. Depending on how good your filmstar is at reading an autocue, you might be looking at 10+ minutes just to capture 1 minute of final footage. In fact, I currently have a whole pile of scripts for a Youtube channel that are unshot purely because I've run out of space
... So, your spec could start from an i5 (maybe something like a 6500) with 8GB RAM, Nvidia 1050 or 1050Ti (I'm a bit out of touch with video cards, I'm guessing these are currently mid-range), and a few multi-TB harddrives. More processor and RAM would be lovely depending on budget. Software I'm a big fan of the Adobe Creative Cloud package. It gives you a good collection of useful tools. Premiere, AfterEffects, Illustrator, Audition, and Media Encoder are the ones I use the most when creating video content, with the occasional bit of Photoshop if I need to clean up images that I want to import. There are more parts of the package (Prelude for ingestion, Speedgrade for colour) that have a place in the workflow, but would overcomplicate my simpleton's workflow so I don't use them You get sucked into the whole "lease not buy" issue with the software, but you also get the most recent updated version. Also, lots and LOTS of online tutorial content available if you're teaching yourself as you go along.
I've also recently recommended giving Da Vinci Resolve a try. It's a free version of a more comprehensive paid-for package but, from the reviews I've seen, appears to be pretty solid. If you end up going down this road, note my comments above about picking a better graphics card. The benefit is that it's free so there's nothing lost by trying it even with your current hardware. It's a liner editor to the process is broadly the same. Final Cut is Mac stuff. I try not to think about Mac stuff, as I'm not sure if they've invented a cure for syphilis of the id. Other things Audio on cameras is often... less than optimal. Pick up a separate mic (a discrete lav mic is a good option) and strongly consider a recording device. I've got a couple of Zoom H1's and ATR.. err... 3350's?... lav mics that completely outclass the camera mic. They can also be used to record Podcasts without needing to set up a fancy studio - I've sent a few people home with a H1/ATR lav mic and told them to open the doors of the wardrobe and speak towards their clothes. It's surprisingly effective. If someone is in front of a camera, seriously consider an autocue. If they're not used to memorising scripts or improvising as they go, a few minutes of delivery can easily turn into a frustrating hour or more of work. I would happily sell someone else's kidney for an autocue. And then there's all the fun of picking out your primary A/V equipment
|
|
Quoted: i use an asus laptop with extra external hard drive space and the adobe cloud I'm currently using a HP packing an enormous 2Ghz AMD A10-4665M APU with Radeon onboard graphics and 8GB of RAM + a second monitor. If I can do it on mine, you should be fine with almost any recent machine. 3D modelling is an exercise in patience though, and it creaks mightily running Unreal Engine 4 + Visual Studio I think I need to start a GoFundMe to buy an awesome arsekicker of a computer and replace the greenscreen setup in the attic with a proper Arfcom News Desk  |