Info-Mac

Dear Array sync forum.

I am hoping that array sync will be a solution to a problem, thanks it looks like a great product.

I am running tests from a macbook pro with small files and it seems to be frame accurate on two displays.

I have two questions if you would be kind enough to advise regarding array sync requirements.


TASK; 2 x 20 minute, 1440 x 1080 (unusual codac) files into two projectors that will run on a loop all day, for an exhibition.

1. what is the optimum, best quality container for the video to keep in sync, look perfect and be CPU friendly; i.e. PRORES422, PRORESHQ, PRORES, ETC.

2. What is the minimum Mini mac requirement for this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Mini). I would like to buy a second hand minimac on ebay and pimp it on OWC (other world computing) to max the ram etc. So what is the minimum processor required. Would two older minimacs in sync be better. Obviously the older the cheaper, so hence the minimum requirements would be great.

3. My plan is to automate the process. I will have system preferences turn the mac on at 9am, automator open up Arraysync, wait for the movies to load for 30 seconds, then press play and loop. System preferences will also turn off the computer at 6pm and it should I hope run fine daily, without any need for someone to turn them on, etc.


Any advice would be appreciated.

Ross.

alspants wrote:1. what is the optimum, best quality container for the video to keep in sync, look perfect and be CPU friendly; i.e. PRORES422, PRORESHQ, PRORES, ETC.

QuickTime container, Apple Intermediate Codec is always my recommended codec. Performs the best in all my experience.

alspants wrote:2. What is the minimum Mini mac requirement for this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Mini). I would like to buy a second hand minimac on ebay and pimp it on OWC (other world computing) to max the ram etc. So what is the minimum processor required. Would two older minimacs in sync be better. Obviously the older the cheaper, so hence the minimum requirements would be great.

There is no "the minimum" but I would guess anything with a Core 2 Duo or higher will probably work fine. I can't make any guarantees, though, and some of those older Mac Minis can only drive one display I believe.

alspants wrote:3. My plan is to automate the process. I will have system preferences turn the mac on at 9am, automator open up Arraysync, wait for the movies to load for 30 seconds, then press play and loop. System preferences will also turn off the computer at 6pm and it should I hope run fine daily, without any need for someone to turn them on, etc.

This doesn't seem to be a question. The next update to ArraySync will have auto re-connect and auto-run feature, but we're waiting on the next major update to a development tool we use to create ArraySync. It's been delayed... a lot... however betas are finally coming out so hopefully its soon. Until then you'll have to try to use Automator or something similar to achieve this.

Hi Turboladdade,

Thats really helpful, thank you.

"There is no "the minimum" but I would guess anything with a Core 2 Duo or higher will probably work fine. I can't make any guarantees, though, and some of those older Mac Minis can only drive one display I believe."

Does anybody have any experience with Mini Mac's here. I believe that running h.264 files is very CPU intensive, so maybe Apple intermediate codec is easier on CPU? If anyone has some experience here with minimums it might be a good benchmark for bespoke display instals, as the mini mac is so small and space efficient.

Thanks all.

alspants wrote:Does anybody have any experience with Mini Mac's here.

I have run ArraySync on G4 Mac Minis, and it works fine, but it wasn't HD video.

alspants wrote:I believe that running h.264 files is very CPU intensive, so maybe Apple intermediate codec is easier on CPU?

Yes, absolutely. Just much bigger file size.

Thanks Dan.

Last question. I know for editing prores422 is better then Apple intermediate codec. For playback some users report more Noise on AIC then PRORES in zoom. With a projected up image this becomes important. Do you know if there is much quality difference in playback with the two containers?

Thanks,
R

I really can't say that I've ever noticed quality problems with Apple Intermediate Codec. You have to remember these are both editing codecs, not distribution codecs, so they should both be far higher quality than H.264 for example. If there is any difference, I doubt it will be discernible on large projectors many feet away from the viewers.

You can just try creating two videos to compare for yourself, but I find ProRes to run much less smoothly than the older Apple Intermediate Codec.