Depends on the situation. Many people with laptops have home setups with keyboards and displays. Swapping between the Mac Mini and the laptop would be easy. A KVM switch, if desired, would be even easier.

Most people aren't on the road when doing a task like importing video, so a desktop setup would be acceptable.

IMO, iLife is so easy to use and also so well integrated to where importing, editing and burning are tasks that lead from one to the next. The fact that you don't have to refer to a manual to figure out how to use it is also a plus.

Sure, it'd be an extra box dedicated to the task, but considering how much HD space is taken up while editing a movie that's not such a bad thing.

It's, what, about $100 more than what Premiere or other applications would cost, but for many the ease of use would make up for that. Also, with this solution, you're getting some HD space, which has some value that defrays the overall expense.

It's not going to work for everyone, but for those who have a display/keyboard/mouse they're already hooking into and who are looking for a solution for use on a desktop, it's a perfectly reasonable option.

This is how I see it:
MS blows the pants off of Apple in the following areas: spreadsheets, collaborative document solutions, word processing, intra-company communication.
Apple just as equally blows the pants off of what's out there for Windows-based machines in photo library management, video editing, DVD creation, music library management, and home music composition and editing (essentially anything related to media).

I think the differential is so significant for Apple and media management that it is worth paying an extra $100-$200 (25-33%) to go with Apple.

I agree that if the user doesn't already have a setup as described above with a keyboard, display and mouse available, and if the user will need to work with their media while away from a desk, then this option probably isn't for them.

btw... (IRT Braindrain) About DVD burners... Apple was actually one of the first companies to offer a combo CD/DVD read/write drive (called the Superdrive). Apple was slow to get on the optical drive wagon way back, but they had caught up by the time DVD burning was around. Also, Apple was an early player in the video editing scene, and some have said no one else has managed to catch up with iLife since.

True once, but definitely not true anymore. With respect to video editing, there are far more choices (and, more importantly, far more capable choices) available for Windows than for Mac and, generally, at lower cost. The OP doesn't want to edit -- he just wants to trim some DVDs and burn them on to new DVDs. For entry-level editing, it makes no sense at all to buy a Mac system when there are programs like Premiere Elements that are far more capable than what is offered on Mac. Premiere Pro isn't available on Mac and I don't think Sony Vegas is either. Avid is comparable to Premiere Pro and Vegas but it is also available for Windows.

And one point about "easy to use" in the context of video. Most people who want to try video editing on their computer (beyond simple cuts as described by the OP) are doing it because they want to do something creative. This requires software that has capability and flexibility. Something that is too "easy to use" is going to be restrictive and not provide either the features or control of something like Elements, not to mention a full-featured program like Premiere Pro or Vegas.

If you're already a Mac user, there's certainly no reason to abandon Mac for a PC if you want to start editing video. However, it makes no sense at all to abandon a PC system and buy a Mac to do this (or, for that matter, to do graphics work).

Thanks again to all who have written.

I want to ask that this thread not go deeper into the MAC vs. PC religious wars! :D

I have been PC based since 1985 and will not likely change simply because of the investment that I have in software - current software.

PTravel, it may be more complicated than you want to write about, but when you distinguish simple "trimming" from editing, what do you mean? Would cutting a section of a video and pasting it elsewhere also be a simple function? What do you think of as advanced ... or as something the Adobe PE won't be up to?

I'm not suggesting abandoning PC for Mac. I'm suggesting incorporating it, as a second machine to be used for video editing. This can be done for $300. That's more expensive, but for the ease of use and having a dedicated system (and HD) for editing videos it might be a solution for some.

Your post doesn't sound like someone who has used iLife and specifically iMovie. The thing about iLife apps is that they are easy to use and include lots of effects enabling the user to be creative. For a novice user I wouldn't say it's restrictive at all. What can be restrictive for novices are applications which have steep learning curves that make it difficult to use all of the creative features available.

I look at these posts as not just answering the OP's question but also questions of people who end up searching the forum later. This might not be a solution for the OP, but it is an option that's out there that has big advantages for some.

It's not so much a question of advanced vs. simple, as it is editing vs. cutting. Trimming and switching around sections is cutting and can be accomplished with Womble or VideoReDo. Adding transitions, titles, effects, corrections, etc. is what I think of as "editing." It sounds like you just need to do cutting, for which either of the two programs I mentioned should probably suffice.

The problem with mpeg (which is the encoding format used for DVD) is that it uses temporal compression -- in addition to compressing the data within a single frame, subsequent (and sometimes prior) frames are compressed by comparison to a reference frame; only the data that changes from frame to frame is stored. This allows for very efficient compression, but it makes it difficult to do frame-accurate cuts because, unless the cut takes place on a reference frame, the intervening frames have to be uncompressed and a new reference frame created. It gets even more complicated if you want to add transitions and effects, as the intervening frames must be uncompressed, the transition or effect rendered, then the new material recompressed and subsequent frames adjusted. It is for this reason that mpeg is not really a suitable medium for anything more than simple cuts-only editing (from what I understand, Womble and VideoReDo can do frame-accurate cuts). Unfortunately, the new non-professional HD formats (HDV for prosumer and AVCHD for consumer) also use temporal compression (HDV uses mpeg2, AVCHD uses mpeg4). Right now, no editing software supports AVCHD. A number of consumer and prosumer editors can handle HDV, but it takes an awful lot of computing horsepower to do it.

I don't know whether Premiere Elements will handle mpeg2 (it may). If it does, I'd expect it to be rather clunky on anything other an extremely powerful machine, e.g. dual-process with a couple of gig of RAM. I edit in Premiere Pro. The version I have requires a plug-in to handle mpeg2. On my 3.1 GHz P4 1-gig/RAM machine, editing mpeg2 is rather painful, though I've had to do it on occasion. If you're just doing this on a casual basis and Elements can handle mpeg2, it may be good enough.

"Authoring" is the process of taking DVD-compliant mpeg2 video and breaking it up into 1 gig vob files, creating the various indices and maps that DVD video requires, adding menus and buttons, etc. Whether or not you need a standalone authoring program is a function of how elaborate you want your DVDs to be. Editors that can also author,and simple DVD burning programs, can usually add chapter points and simple menus. If you want custom menus and buttons, moving backgrounds, etc., you'll need a more capable authoring program.

There is absolutely no way that a $300 computer can support video editing at the same level as even an average desktop PC. To produce a DVD, video must be transcoded (unless it was recorded as DVD-compliant mpeg, something only low-quality consumer DVD camcorders do). The quality of the transcode determines the quality of the video on the DVD. On my 3.1 GHz P4 machine, transcoding two hours of standard definition video to the highest quality level, which gets me just under commercial DVD quality, can take as much as 24 hours for two-pass, variable bit rate, high precision, high-motion search mpeg2. Your $300 Mac will either takes weeks to do the same thing, or simply will be unable to produce video remotely approaching the quality of what I can do.

I've seen the Mac software, though I haven't used it (I don't use consumer software for video editing). I'm quite certain you have a different definition of "creative" than I do. I don't mean applying preset transitions, 2D titles, cheesy effects like "sepia tone," and the other gimmicks which are found in many entry-level consumer packages for both Mac and PC. I'm talking about control. I mean being able to match color from scene to scene, being able to adjust color channels, gamma, pedestal and gain, being able to composite, animate, pan and scan (the so-called "Ken Burns" effect), etc. Someone who already has a good Mac system can get Avid, which is a pro-level editing package and provides this kind of control. However, he's going to have to spend a lot more than $300 on a computer and the software will cost between $1,000 and $2,000. Any decent desktop PC can do exactly the same thing with Premiere Pro or Sony Vegas for about 1/3 the total cost of the hardware and software.

Premiere Elements runs on any PC, and quite well. It costs well under $100 and will do far more than iMovie. I've nothing against Macs, but it is ridiculous to recommend to someone interested in video editing, whether basic or advanced, to abandon perfectly good computer hardware to switch to another system. Mac offers no advantage over PC.

A quick, two minute search revealed this listing for a Mac Mini with keyboard, display and mouse, for $400. The processor it comes with is a 1.66 GHz Core Duo. According to Intel's processor comparison table this is comparable to what you've got. The Core Duo processors are newer than the Pentium 4s. 1.66 GHz Core Duo has had several generations follow since, but it's still a good processor and sufficient for simple video editing.

First, the OP (and most who had a similar question) don't care about that level of control.

Second, iMovie was the first video editing application to include the Ken Burns Effect several years ago, in one of the early versions of iMovie. I was there when Steve announced it.

They'd probably get Final Cut Pro instead of Avid. Most people who edit video on Macs tend to use FCP before Avid. If they wanted something in between FCP and iMovie they'd get Final Cut Express.

Premiere Elements is a perfectly acceptable solution. I'm just offering up another option. A number of the reviews I've read from novice users say that Premiere Elements was not easy to learn. I've never read a review of iMovie describing it as difficult to learn. Also, personally, I don't like doing video editing on my primary machine. I have a 180 GB HD on my lappy that's always full, so if I want to do any work on movies I have to bother with an external HD. That's not always convenient. Having a second system with all the gear in place that doesn't have to bog down my primary system would have some serious benefits. For these reasons, and the others mentioned earlier, this may be something some users would like to consider.

I know it's not an option for you, but you also have historically had a strong bias against anything Apple. For others it may work (just like iPods work for 99% of the posters on the threads where you railed about how you didn't like them).

And Elements is under a $100. Again, why would anyone spend $400 to do approximately (but not quite) what they could do for under $100. If you want to compare with what I've got you need to get software comparable to Premiere Pro ($699). Final Cut Pro, which is a comparable editor, is $1,399, exactly twice as much.

That's right. And for what he wants to do Womble or VideoReDo (both under $100) will do just fine on the computer that he has now.

Again, there's a difference between the "Ken Burns effect" and the kind of control available in a program like Premiere Pro, which gives control over the x,y and z axis, allows for camera placement, etc. iMovie doesn't allow for correction of gamma, pedestal and gain, advanced compositing, advanced keying, etc. iMovie is an entry-level consumer program and comparing it to a program like Premiere Pro (or Final Cut Pro) is just ridiculous.

Right. Avid is even more expensive. FCP is twice as much as Premiere Pro.

An option that costs four times as much and offers no advantage whatsoever.

I have no idea what reviews you've read and, frankly, I couldn't care less what they say. Premiere Elements offers more control than iMovie, so there's more to learn about. It's not hard to learn -- for that matter, Premiere Pro isn't hard to learn. Neither program is designed to be used by idiots, however.

Well, that's nice. I like to edit on my primary machine. As I said, it's a 3 GHz P4 machine with a terabyte of storage split between 5 drives.

What users should consider is that it's never a good idea to store video data on the same drive as editing software and OS or on the same drive used as a scratch drive for rendering. There are sound performance reasons for that unrelated to what you may or may not consider convenient. There is a practical reason for having at least three drives, unrelated to any personal preference. I have five computers on my system. My primary machine, which I use for video editing, also has Photoshop and other related programs on it which I use for editing.

That's absolute crap. I've never had anything against Apple. If the OP already had a Mac, it would make sense to investigate programs that could do what he wants on the hardware that he has. You seem to regard the Mac as the something handed down by the almighty and the solution to everything. It's not. It's just a computer and, when it comes to video editing, it offers absolutely no advantage over a PC, and some notable disadvantages, including cost, fewer software options, fewer hardware options, etc.

You're clearly confusing me with someone else. I have an iPod and I like it very much. I've never railed against them or, for that matter, said anything other than I think they're great. Sounds like you'v got a serious case of Mac paranoia to me.

Edited to add:

I took a look at your "$400" listing. It's by a private seller on Craig's list and doesn't include a monitor. It has only 512 MHz of RAM. It has a Core Duo CPU, not a Core 2 Duo, and is not remotely comparable to my P4 machine, and certainly not one running at 3.1 GHz. If you like Apple and editing on your Mac, fine, but let's stick to facts, okay?

PTravel, a question for you since you seem to know far more than I do about video editing, etc.

What program do you use to encode? I use ProCoder. I take cams of my vacations in std def video (miniDV, of course) and capturing/encoding these into the highest quality (DVD) vids is far more important than speed.

I had tried CCE/TMPG but found that it wasn't as good as ProCoder (in my experiments, anyways).

Just curious.

I do the same thing as you -- I shoot SD video when we travel, and my primary goal is to create a good record of our travels so that, years from now, we can relive the experience. I've been using tmpgenc for transcoding for years -- maybe as many as ten (of course, I upgrade as new versions come out). tmpgenc gives enormous control over the transcode process, but it does need to be tweaked. This site: http://dvd-hq.info/Compression.html gives some good tips for tweaking tmpgenc. Two key tweaks are setting precision to 10-bit (most consumer transcoders, including tmpgenc, default to 9), and using the maximum depth motion search. tmpgenc is pretty robust software and can transcode in the background while you're doing other things (you can also set the priority that the OS gives it). The only downside is that it's slow. My projects typically wind up with between 15 and 22 gigabytes of DV-codec-encoded AVI. The larger projects can easily take a full day to transcode (it was even worse on my older computers -- my 1.4 GHz AMD machine used to take several days. I'm not familiar with ProCoder. I've heard that Ligos makes a good transcoder that is also faster. However, it's also considerably more expensive. As it usually takes me a month or two for me to put together a project, a day to transcode just isn't that big a deal; I let tmpgenc run overnight while I prepare the menus, disk label and DVD covers. By the time tmpgenc is finished, I've authored the rest of the DVD, so it's just a question of importing the separate audio and video streams (tmpgenc supports Dolby AC3 -- I haven't tried any 5.1 projects yet, and I'm not sure whether it supports them, though it does a very nice job of encoding stereo Dolby AC3) and then letting Adobe Encore do its thing. tmpgenc does a noticeably better job than Encore's (and Premiere Pro's) transcoder, which is by MainConcept. I suspect the MainConcept transcoder is balanced to deliver reasonable quality in a comparatively short time, but I think it's worth the extra transcode time to produce the best video that I can.

What camera do you use? And why didn't you express interest in the travel video competition thread? ;)

Thanks. I've used Mainconcept before and, while decent, does not produce superior results. I'll give your tweaks for TMPG a try.

I've got a Panasonic GS320. Staying away from HD Video until consumer 1080p ones come out.

Travel video competition thread? Didn't know there was one.

Here are links to a few good sites for tutorials of the various software programs used to do many video related tasks. They also may help in determining what is needed to do certain tasks.

http://www.videohelp.com/guides/
http://www.doom9.org/
http://www.dvdhelp.us/html/tutorials.html