Is this good enough for video editing?

[baker]

Hello, I'm new to these forums but not to Macs. However, I haven't read anything new about Macs so I'm not too familiar with how their speed compares to a PC's anymore. I've had a PC for about 2 1/2 years now and I despise it so I'm returning to Apple. I was on their site customizing a PowerMac G5 and I wanted it to be able to handle any kind of video editing without any glitches. I had such things as a 1.6GHz G5 processor, 160GB Hard Drive, 1GB of RAM and an ATi Radeon 9600 Pro. Will all of those components be sufficient enough to run well if I were to capture and edit videos on this computer. Right now I'm stuck with a Hi-8 camcorder but I will borrow my school's DV camera's when I want to edit at home, I'll probably use those until I can afford the Canon XL-1S that I want.

I appreciate you're help with this, thank you!

 

[Osiris22x]

I'm doing video editing on my Powerbook 1.33 GHz G4 with 768 MB of RAM and it's working just dandy. The system you mention could handle video editing with NO problems whatsoever. If you're talking about iMovie, any Mac can handle it, that can handle OS X. I actually was able to edit a movie in iMovie on a 450 MHz system with only 256 MB of RAM. If you're talking about Final Cut Pro, you'll need a slightly better system, but again, ANY G5 can handle it.

 

[RobDreugan]

G4's can handle editing well. A G5 just makes it amazing.

i would probably recommend a dual G4 though over a single G5.

Course I'd recommend a dual G5

 

[MAC-simus]

go for dual CPUs, if you want to see what an unlimited RT feels like you should definetly try DP models G4 or G5.
I personaly would prefere dual G4 over single G5. most people would say they are basicly same, but when it comes video editing DP systems realy make difference. thats my opinion.
on the other hand apple stopped developing dual G4 systems (its still on 1.25GHz, when the portables went to 1.5GHz) and if you wait untill summer, we may see G5 line upgrade and the low end model may be at single 1.8 or 2 GHz at speed (curently 1.6), with the same prise. so I would wait. its been long time sinse last upgrade so there is something new coming soon, again thats my personal opinion too.
now you have to deside

 

[Osiris22x]

MAC-simus is absolutely right. A dual proc G4 should be faster than a single proc G5 at least in terms of video editing. And yeah, Apple is expected to announce the new G5 line up on June 28th at 10 AM. I wouldn't buy anything until then...

 

[Nightblade]

Well, I don't know much about the speed comparisons between the G5s and G4s and all that stuff, but what I do know is that Final Cut Pro High Definition definitely seems to be the best video-editing program existing, and if you want to do video editing it's best to get a Mac. Here are the system requirements for FCP HD: http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/specs.html


All I know is that if you're getting a Mac for video editing, use FCP instead of iMovie. From what I've heard, iMovie 4 really isn't that great, and a lot of people actually seem to feel that Windows Movie Maker 2 on WinXP is better.

Another thing to take into mind is the new video animation software, Motion. I really don't know too much about it, but as far as Apple Pro applications go, it's really not that expensive. However, its requirements are absolutely through the roof.

http://www.apple.com/motion/specs.html

And although this doesn't have to do with video-editing, but as long as we're in the subject of movies, I'd thought I would mention Shake 3.5. I think it's purpose is for actually creating movies, and from what Apple says, Shake was used to make Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King as well as other well-known movies. But don't expect to buy it for your home, as it costs $3000 (US), making it the most expensive piece of software from Apple. Only studios can really afford it, since few individual people would pay that much for a program. But who knows? Maybe you DO work in a studio. And if you run Linux, no prob, since Shake is also made for Linux. Unfortunately, it costs a couple grand more than the Mac version.