- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2022 5:20 am
- Real Name: Adam Barnett
Hi folks, total video amateur here. I've spent the pandemic developing a real-time graphics app as an art project, and I'm trying to figure out how I might capture the output. On my M1 Max MacBook Pro, the app runs at 2160p60, but I can't seem to get any decent software captures from the same computer producing the graphics. (Apple's ReplayKit framework is 1080p and stalls intermittently, and telling the app to write each frame with AVAssetWriter drops me to 9 fps). So it looks like I need an external capture option, about which I know nothing.
I've been looking at the Ultrastudio 4K Mini, and the Hyperdeck Studio 4K Pro, as I'd really like to capture the output in 2160p60. The US has some advantages: it's cheaper, and it has analog audio inputs. I can live with bouncing the audio through the HDMI output of my computer if I had to, so that's not a deal-breaker, but the analog ins would be preferable. I'm sure there are other considerations that I'm missing, and I'd love any suggestions about other factors I should take into account. I think the hardware H.265 encoding of the HD might have some value for me, but I expect that I'll be doing some editing together of the captured footage with some camera recordings, so possibly not - it's just something I'll have to experiment with as I go, I think.
But the one thing that's immediately not clear to me after reading the manuals for each, is what the processor demands are like if I'm trying to capture 4K video with the same computer that's generating the graphics, via the ultrastudio. There's a lot of emphasis on disk speed, which I understand, but what's not clear to me is ... if I'm straining this computer's GPU with the ray marcher, would writing the output of the ultrastudio place much additional strain? Or is it really mostly a disk operation? Is the US doing the encoding internally in real-time (albeit not the H.265 capabilities of the HD), and my computer is effectively just a hard drive host when using Blackmagic Media Express? If it's going to strain the CPU or GPU, I may need to go with the Hyperdeck and bite the bullet on increased cost.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have to share on this. I know dealing with amateurs is occasionally rather irksome.
I've been looking at the Ultrastudio 4K Mini, and the Hyperdeck Studio 4K Pro, as I'd really like to capture the output in 2160p60. The US has some advantages: it's cheaper, and it has analog audio inputs. I can live with bouncing the audio through the HDMI output of my computer if I had to, so that's not a deal-breaker, but the analog ins would be preferable. I'm sure there are other considerations that I'm missing, and I'd love any suggestions about other factors I should take into account. I think the hardware H.265 encoding of the HD might have some value for me, but I expect that I'll be doing some editing together of the captured footage with some camera recordings, so possibly not - it's just something I'll have to experiment with as I go, I think.
But the one thing that's immediately not clear to me after reading the manuals for each, is what the processor demands are like if I'm trying to capture 4K video with the same computer that's generating the graphics, via the ultrastudio. There's a lot of emphasis on disk speed, which I understand, but what's not clear to me is ... if I'm straining this computer's GPU with the ray marcher, would writing the output of the ultrastudio place much additional strain? Or is it really mostly a disk operation? Is the US doing the encoding internally in real-time (albeit not the H.265 capabilities of the HD), and my computer is effectively just a hard drive host when using Blackmagic Media Express? If it's going to strain the CPU or GPU, I may need to go with the Hyperdeck and bite the bullet on increased cost.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts you have to share on this. I know dealing with amateurs is occasionally rather irksome.