MP 7,1 For those complaining about the Mac Pro 7,1 price/performance....

[Adult80HD]

Not heard anything, i just can't see how they could bring anything to the table that could be considered professional unless it's a hardware probe and calibration software. And i see no reason why they would want to get into that space considering the competition already does it so well. So they'll probably have some user calibration program where there's a load of patches that you match using your eyes or something that will make prosumers who do not understand calibration think they're calibrating accurately but the pro community won't go near it. Time will tell i suppose.

If you use the pro, in the i1 display software go to 'advanced workflows' then choose rec709 preset, then set it to 100nits, 2.4 gamma, then use the large patch set. After calibration have a look at it versus apple's factory version. What do you see?

I'm out until later this week but I will do that. I actually ordered a new i1 Pro Plus tonight as well so that will be even better. I was going to wait until I saw what Apple came up with, but my color calibration workflow is built around XRite so, might as well.

My assumption is that Apple would offer something better than the color patch solution they have used for every other display. They could have just included that straight up as it's built in MacOS. Given how they've partnered with some other vendors I wouldn't be surprised if they did something similar with the ProDisplay, especially given that they're pitching it as a "Pro" solution. I'll guess we'll see, hopefully soon. My secret hope is that they somehow work with XRite.

 

[blackadde]

Professionals (in the video world, at least) tend to use LightSpace to handle calibration. It's such a specialized and technically-oriented piece of software that I would have a very hard time believing that Apple would dedicate any resources to compete. They would have to do an awful lot of work to build a piece of software that only works with one monitor.

It's quite expensive, but there's a free / lightweight version available here that may work with your X-Rite probe, although my understanding is that there may be issues using a retail vs OEM i1: https://www.lightillusion.com/lightspace_zro.html

I've also read that you can't save any hardware calibration or settings to the XDR, which may make the LightSpace route a non-starter anyways.

Personally I work mostly in print so LightSpace is overkill for my purposes. I just use DisplayCal/Argyll. At the end of the day I'm matching to a Pantone book anyways so the monitor isn't the final say for a lot of my color-critical output.

 

[Adult80HD]

Professionals (in the video world, at least) tend to use LightSpace to handle calibration. It's such a specialized and technically-oriented piece of software that I would have a very hard time believing that Apple would dedicate any resources to compete. They would have to do an awful lot of work to build a piece of software that only works with one monitor.

It's quite expensive, but there's a free / lightweight version available here that may work with your X-Rite probe, although my understanding is that there may be issues using a retail vs OEM i1: https://www.lightillusion.com/lightspace_zro.html

I've also read that you can't save any hardware calibration or settings to the XDR, which may make the LightSpace route a non-starter anyways.

Personally I work mostly in print so LightSpace is overkill for my purposes. I just use DisplayCal/Argyll. At the end of the day I'm matching to a Pantone book anyways so the monitor isn't the final say for a lot of my color-critical output.

Windows only, not just video world. I've always used Xrite, especially since they have a powerful set of tools I can use to calibrate my cameras, printers and displays for complete consistency. Most of the pro photographers I know use XRite as well.

The saving of settings to the XDR is what apparently is forthcoming: Apple says that both user-defined reference modes and calibration are "coming soon." It will be interesting to see what they are coming up with.

In my case I want camera to what I save to be as accurate as possible. Unfortunately after that it gets released to the wild world of whatever phone/tablet computer screen someone is going to look at it on. I have found that keeping my workflow as calibrated as possible means that the end-user variation is minimized, and that's the best I can hope for. From that perspective, the XRite system is perfectly fine, and since I don't need a true reference display, the ProDisplay is a nice option. The Asus ProArt is appealing, but I really prefer the high resolution of the retina displays now that I've been using it for 7+ years; a 4K display feels pixelated now.

 

[blackadde]

LightSpace is Windows only but 'professional monitors' (and here I'm really referring to Grade-1 reference displays, not wide-gamut AdobeRGB monitors like we use in print or photography - although some of those do this too) don't depend on the OS anyways, nor do they bother with ICC profiles. They save their settings directly in the monitor hardware making the display OS agnostic after calibration. You just swing a Windows laptop by or run it in a VM.

Thus, again, we run into the issue of 'Pro' being such a nebulous marketing buzzword across the entire creative industry. What works for one professional won't necessarily work for another.

To swing this back around to the topic of price/performance, the needs of desktop publishers and HDR video graders are so fundamentally different that it's almost impossible to build a single product that makes financial sense for both.

 

[Michael Scrip]

I am still puzzled by the concerns about updates. While the way Microsoft has implemented them wouldn't be my first choice I haven't had any issues with them earlier.

Example from last week: I recently updated my system to Windows 10 1909. Apparently there was an update for it one night because when I sat down at the system the next day I noticed this:

View attachment 889784​

A little yellow dot indicating an update was pending installation. When I clicked on it the following appeared:

View attachment 889785​

A dialog informing me that a restart was required. I could have scheduled the restart or restarted the system at that time. I chose the latter as I saw no reason to do so before I started my day. The restart took less than 60 seconds (this on an Ivy Bridge laptop with SATA HD). What I know wouldn't have happened is the system restarting during my work day as I have my active hours defined as 5:00 am until 10:00 pm so there was no concern about Windows spontaneously restarting my system during the middle of the day.

If I didn't feel like updating it I didn't have to. I can even pause the installation of updates for up to seven days if I was concerned about it interrupting work:

View attachment 889786​

I am really puzzled as to what the issue is with applying updates. It's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. IMO it's certainly not a reason to avoid using Windows.

Exactly.

I'll even search for Windows updates manually so I can install them on my schedule.

Because of that... I've never had my computer restart in the middle of a project (like many people complain about)

At most it'll take a minute or two to install updates and reboot. My computer is all SSD-based so it reboots fast anyway.

I've also never experienced a problem after an update... either a minor update or major version upgrade.

So maybe we're just luckier than most Windows users.

There are examples where things simply break... but doesn't that happen on all platforms?

I've used Windows for 29 years... and I can count on one hand the number of times I've had some sort of major problem.

Those are pretty good odds.

I could always fix it.

You're right... it sounds silly to swear off Windows because you might have a problem. And what happens if you have a problem on MacOS? Are you gonna switch to Linux?

And what happens if you have some problem on Linux?

No platform is perfect.

 

[Blair Paulsen]

I've been on Mac for 34 years and have had a couple issues along the way, most of which I was able to fix myself. My issues with the Windows boxes at one of my worksites blowing up workflows after updates is an ad hoc data point - so it's hardly definitive. Perhaps the takeaway is that either platform can perform well for experienced users.
I realize that one could take the money "saved" by building out a Windows workstation vs a decent spec 7,1 MacPro and use it to create fast networking and storage access. In my world, where portability is crucial and many collaborators wouldn't have access to the 40g network it's not particularly functional. (File size makes IP access painful, so not a realistic alternative)
Am I a corner case? Not in the space I work in. Is high resolution content creation just a niche? I don't know the statistics, but it sure seems like a sector Apple thinks is worth addressing.
Bottom line - there are users like me who can reap enough productivity benefits from the 7,1 MacPro to negate initial hardware savings. Not claiming that's universal.
[automerge]1579722860[/automerge]
For proper, final color work anything short of a calibrated grade 1 monitor is sketchy at best. That said, there are lots of situations where one-light (primaries only, also called first-light) color grading with reasonable accuracy is needed. Typically, one would use a GUI monitor and a calibratable display like EIZO, Flanders, Sony, etc to judge color. Works a treat.
My hope was that the XDR might be able to fill both roles so I'd only have to schlep one monitor around. That is perhaps an actual corner case...

 

[defjam]

I've been on Mac for 34 years and have had a couple issues along the way, most of which I was able to fix myself. My issues with the Windows boxes at one of my worksites blowing up workflows after updates is an ad hoc data point - so it's hardly definitive. Perhaps the takeaway is that either platform can perform well for experienced users.

While I am an experienced users with a lot of experience working with computers of all types I can honestly say that I don't ever do anything to maintain my systems. I turn them on (or rather wake them from sleep) and use them. I have a couple of Windows systems which see almost daily use: This laptop I am typing this on as well as a desktop system. I don't do anything to these systems. I just use them.

This is not to say Windows updates have never ever caused issues. However I think it's a vastly overblown problem. Maybe I haven't had issue because the systems I use are name brand (Dell laptop, HP Z-series desktop) and don't have any unique hardware / software installed.

 

[Kedbear]

Professionals (in the video world, at least) tend to use LightSpace to handle calibration. It's such a specialized and technically-oriented piece of software that I would have a very hard time believing that Apple would dedicate any resources to compete. They would have to do an awful lot of work to build a piece of software that only works with one monitor.

It's quite expensive, but there's a free / lightweight version available here that may work with your X-Rite probe, although my understanding is that there may be issues using a retail vs OEM i1: https://www.lightillusion.com/lightspace_zro.html

I've also read that you can't save any hardware calibration or settings to the XDR, which may make the LightSpace route a non-starter anyways.

Personally I work mostly in print so LightSpace is overkill for my purposes. I just use DisplayCal/Argyll. At the end of the day I'm matching to a Pantone book anyways so the monitor isn't the final say for a lot of my color-critical output.

The designer of LightSpace, Steve Shaw posted this on liftgammagain regarding the XDR for professional colour accuracy / grading.

“How will you 'sell' your HDR grading, when the end distributors will not accept it when your work is performed on displays they wont accredit...?
The simple fact is the Apple display is not fit for purpose, based on the sales pitch they chose to use.
And in reality, it is not fit for any grading purpose - SDR included.

Similar price displays have not made such sales claims, so cannot be deemed unfit for purpose.
They may, or may not, be suitable for HDR, depending on response from the distributors accreditation, but that has yet to be defined.

However, the Apple fails, due to the variable contrast issue.
https://www.dolby.com/us/en/technol...Best_Practices_facility_certificationV1.4.pdf
(Note: there is no 'list' of certified displays - just a set of specifications a display must reach.)

As yet, there are no specifications for 'blooming' that I have seen...
I suspect they will be added sometime in the future, as more cheap HDR displays hit the market.
(So be careful what HDR displays you invest in... if you don't need an HDR display, don't purchase one!)”

 

[Adult80HD]

For proper, final color work anything short of a calibrated grade 1 monitor is sketchy at best. That said, there are lots of situations where one-light (primaries only, also called first-light) color grading with reasonable accuracy is needed. Typically, one would use a GUI monitor and a calibratable display like EIZO, Flanders, Sony, etc to judge color. Works a treat.
My hope was that the XDR might be able to fill both roles so I'd only have to schlep one monitor around. That is perhaps an actual corner case...

I think this is exactly the target market Apple was aiming for with the ProDisplay. One simply has to put their typical marketing hyperbole aside. Once you can load an icc profile into the display it will be more useful though; right now you have to rely on the factory reference profiles which may or may not be as accurate as one would like. I have an X-Rite i1 Display Pro Plus which can handle up to 2000 nits of brightness, but I don't think it will work correctly yet as the backlight on the new ProDisplay seems like it might be different than the choices built into the X-Rite software. I need to contact X-Rite to see.

 

[Kedbear]

I think this is exactly the target market Apple was aiming for with the ProDisplay. One simply has to put their typical marketing hyperbole aside. Once you can load an icc profile into the display it will be more useful though; right now you have to rely on the factory reference profiles which may or may not be as accurate as one would like. I have an X-Rite i1 Display Pro Plus which can handle up to 2000 nits of brightness, but I don't think it will work correctly yet as the backlight on the new ProDisplay seems like it might be different than the choices built into the X-Rite software. I need to contact X-Rite to see.

An x-rite will certainly help a lot. But In all honesty if you just want a colour accurate monitor you can get an Eizo for cheap that can be calibrated with a 3D Lut. In the film world a £2-3k LCD Flanders scientific monitor calibrated with a 3D lut (they also offer a service where they do this for free for you however many time’s you like) will be far better than an XDR for professional colour work. The idea Apple would suggest you could professionally grade on a monitor that can’t be calibrated even with an ICC profile is ridiculous. However I haven’t see any of their advertising so I wasn’t aware they had marketed the XDR this way. I’m sure as a GUI it’s an amazing monitor and very satisfying however.

 

[Blair Paulsen]

Hoping Sony, Flanders, Dolby, Canon, etc bring some compelling new pro displays to NAB.
Last year, many of the more interesting monitors were unreleased "demos", or just spec sheets.
Due to cost alone, panels like the Sony X-310 or Dolby 4220 are virtually impossible to ROI in any use case other than mid-high end grading suites.
I understand there's a reason they cost so much - but - they should be able to leverage the tech they've developed for the state of the art products and offer detuned versions that could sell in droves to the legions of media makers who will spend $2-6K on a "best in class" solution. ATM, that's arguably FSI.