Hard Drive configuration ? for Video Capture
John
I have a dell Precision 490, I think it is. I just got a few months
ago the Blackmagic Intensity Pro Capture card. I am currently trying
to capture from a VCR in Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 about 1.5 hours of
video. The computer has (2) 500 GB 7,200 RPM SATA drives in a Raid 0
configuration. My problem is that Premiere Pro seems to capture the
Video but when I hit ESC to stop recording Premiere will not save the
file. No dialog box comes up. Other than that I get no other error
messages. I have tried a one minute or so test file and that works
Ok. I am tring to capture in the Uncompressed 8 Bit Blackmagic
Format. The drives are about 60% full.
I hear a lot about that one should use one drive for the OS and one
for Video. How can I configure this setup using RAID? Can I use the
RAID controller as the Second drive and a non RAID drive as the OS
drive? I can not find much information on this setup.
Thanks in advance for your help,
John
Richard Crowley
> I have a dell Precision 490, I think it is. I just got a few months
> ago the Blackmagic Intensity Pro Capture card. I am currently trying
> to capture from a VCR in Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 about 1.5 hours of
> video.
"video"? HDV perhaps?
> The computer has (2) 500 GB 7,200 RPM SATA drives in a Raid 0
> configuration. My problem is that Premiere Pro seems to capture the
> Video but when I hit ESC to stop recording Premiere will not save the
> file. No dialog box comes up. Other than that I get no other error
> messages. I have tried a one minute or so test file and that works
> Ok. I am tring to capture in the Uncompressed 8 Bit Blackmagic
> Format.
So how long will it run and capture a file? You seem to
have tried 1 minute, and 90 minutes, but any inbetween?
Have you tried any other HDV capture software?
Perhaps: http://strony.aster.pl/paviko/hdvsplit.htm
> The drives are about 60% full.
"drives"? You said you have a RAID0 array which is ONE
logical drive.
Why is it 60% full? When was the last time you de-fragged
it? I wouldn't attempt to start a 90 minute video project in
such a cluttered environment.
> I hear a lot about that one should use one drive for the
> OS and one for Video.
There seems to be no debate about that. It is never a
good idea to share a drive (whether a single physical
spindle, or two logical drives on a single spindle, or a
virtual RAID array) between video files and the boot/
system drive.
You didn't say why you have RAID in the first place,
or why you continue to want it?
> Can I use the RAID controller as the Second drive and a
> non RAID drive as the OS drive? I can not find much
> information on this setup.
If it were me and I wanted to continue using the two 500GB
disks in a RAID 0 array, I would get another small (200-
300 GB) drive and use the new drive as the boot/system
drive (C:) and then use the RAID array as the data drive.
Of course, I would first have to convince myself that a
RAID array was necessary in the first place. Most people
seem to have RAID because it seems cool and Dell (or
whomever) will configure it for you. If you were doing
some high-bitrate format, maybe RAID might become
necessary. But DV and HDV run at only 25MB/s,
which is just idling along for most modern hard drives
used in desktop systems.
My personal preference is to buy raw drives at my local
shop (whatever has the most GB/$ at the moment) and
then use a USB2 cable to attach it to my computer. Then
I can just set the drive on the shelf when I am done with
the project (or it gets full, etc.) and buy another one when
I need it. Hard drives get cheaper every time you go back
to buy another one.
Bob Noble
People should stay away from Raid, unless they are a real computer wizard.
The problem is when the array goes bad it's a bitch to trouble shoot when
you have no experience with Raid in the first place.
It's much easier to mess with one drive than multiple drives.
And expansion with single drives is endless.
Good post Richard.
--
Bob Noble
http://www.sonic.net/bnoble
"Richard Crowley" <rcro...@xp7rt.net> wrote in message
news:cLGdnddYZe0-iAvV...@posted.pcez...
> "John" wrote ...
>
>> The computer has (2) 500 GB 7,200 RPM SATA drives in a Raid 0
>> configuration. My problem is that Premiere Pro seems to capture the
>> Video but when I hit ESC to stop recording Premiere will not save the
>> file. No dialog box comes up. Other than that I get no other error
>> messages. I have tried a one minute or so test file and that works
>> Ok. I am tring to capture in the Uncompressed 8 Bit Blackmagic
>> Format.
>
> have tried 1 minute, and 90 minutes, but any inbetween?
>
> Have you tried any other HDV capture software?
> Perhaps: http://strony.aster.pl/paviko/hdvsplit.htm
>
>> The drives are about 60% full.
>
John
First I found out what was wrong. The bigger the file, longer
recording time, the longer it took before the Save As dialog box was
appearing. So I thought it was not working. If I hit ESC or stop and
waited long enough it eventually worked.
My RAID drives are 60% full because I have not removed all my
finished projects to my External backup drive. I know a little about
RAID configuration since I have my MCSE in Windows 2000. The research
I did when I purchased this computer said that if I wanted to do HD I
needed a really fast Hard Drive. True, right now I am only doing NTSC
quality converting from an analog VHS-C camera. RAID 0 will give me
more speed almost twice as fast as non RAID. That is why I am using
RAID. RAID is usually used for fault tolerence so if one drive goes
out the others keep running and you don't lose any data. RAID 0 is
setup for speed only no fault tolerance. What I did not know is that I
can use a non-RAID drive in conjunction with a RAID setup. So, I am
going to get a new Hard Drive 500Gb (because the price is only $79US)
and configure my computer for the OS on the non-RAID drive and
dedicate the RAID drives to Video only by putting all my program files
and photos on my non RAID drive. I use external USB drives for project
backups. I started out using a Sony notebook and Premiere Pro 2.0 plus
an external drive. I had a big learning curve at that time. tt worked
surprisingly well for the setup. Not great but good enough at that
time. Even with a Dual core 3Ghz Xeon CPU I still have times where the
timeline will not play unless I prerender it do to the special efects
I am using. If you have any suggestion on tweeks to help this issue
let me know. My graphics is the FX Quatro 3500. Way over kill I know.
The main problem I was and am having is that in the final DVD I get
glitches. It is the type of glitches like if there are finger prints
on the disc. I still don't know exactly why this is happening. I first
thought my computer was two slow while creating the DVD/encoding the
files. CPU and or HD speed. My computer is definently way fast enough
so this should not be a problem. But that is why I thought I needed to
have this fast of a computer. What do you guys think.I would greatly
appreciate it if I could figure out the answer. I am thinking now
that it is just in the manufacturing of the discs. This is my best
guess. Some times I can get a copy to come out perfect or almost
perfect and other times not. This is really frustrating to me. I am
using TDK DVDs with the inkjet lable on them. I do not get any write
error during the process.
Then I thought this may be do to the capture process because I was
captuing some data and playing it back in the timeline and I did see
the same glitches as described above.
One other thing how would you configure the scratch disk setting?
Would you configure the scratch disc to use the OS drive?
Since I am reinstalling the OS I am thinking of getting Win 64bit. The
main reason is that I have 4GB RAM and the 32bit Win will only use
3GB. From time to time in Premiere Pro I get out of Memory errors and
I am only doing Standard Def NTSC video. I do like to run Premiere and
Photoshop CS3 Extended at the same time.
Thanks,
John
On Aug 3, 1:31 pm, "Richard Crowley" <rcrow...@xp7rt.net> wrote:
> "John" wrote ...
>
> > I have a dell Precision 490, I think it is. I just got a few months
> > ago the Blackmagic Intensity Pro Capture card. I am currently trying
> > to capture from a VCR in Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 about 1.5 hours of
> > video.
>
> "video"? HDV perhaps?
>
> > The computer has (2) 500 GB 7,200 RPM SATA drives in a Raid 0
> >configuration. My problem is that Premiere Pro seems to capture the
> > Video but when I hit ESC to stop recording Premiere will not save the
> > file. No dialog box comes up. Other than that I get no other error
> > messages. I have tried a one minute or so test file and that works
> > Ok. I am tring to capture in the Uncompressed 8 Bit Blackmagic
> > Format.
>
> So how long will it run and capture a file? You seem to
> have tried 1 minute, and 90 minutes, but any inbetween?
>
> Have you tried any other HDV capture software?
> Perhaps:http://strony.aster.pl/paviko/hdvsplit.htm
>
> > The drives are about 60% full.
>
> "drives"? You said you have a RAID0 array which is ONE
> logicaldrive.
>
> Why is it 60% full? When was the last time you de-fragged
> it? I wouldn't attempt to start a 90 minute video project in
> such a cluttered environment.
>
> > I hear a lot about that one should use onedrivefor the
> > OS and one for Video.
>
> There seems to be no debate about that. It is never a
> good idea to share adrive(whether a single physical
> spindle, or two logical drives on a single spindle, or a
> virtual RAID array) between video files and the boot/
> systemdrive.
>
> You didn't say why you have RAID in the first place,
> or why you continue to want it?
>
> > Can I use the RAID controller as the Seconddriveand a
> > non RAIDdriveas the OSdrive? I can not find much
> > information on this setup.
>
> If it were me and I wanted to continue using the two 500GB
> disks in a RAID 0 array, I would get another small (200-
> 300 GB)driveand use the newdriveas the boot/systemdrive(C:) and then use the RAID array as the datadrive.
>
> Of course, I would first have to convince myself that a
> RAID array was necessary in the first place. Most people
> seem to have RAID because it seems cool and Dell (or
> whomever) will configure it for you. If you were doing
> some high-bitrate format, maybe RAID might become
> necessary. But DV and HDV run at only 25MB/s,
> which is just idling along for most modernharddrives
> used in desktop systems.
>
> My personal preference is to buy raw drives at my local
> shop (whatever has the most GB/$ at the moment) and
> then use a USB2 cable to attach it to my computer. Then
> I can just set thedriveon the shelf when I am done with
> the project (or it gets full, etc.) and buy another one when
> I need it. Harddrives get cheaper every time you go back
> to buy another one.
Richard Crowley
> First I found out what was wrong. The bigger the file, longer
> recording time, the longer it took before the Save As dialog box was
> appearing. So I thought it was not working. If I hit ESC or stop and
> waited long enough it eventually worked.
Isn't it nice that it doesn't even tell you "please wait while I
save this file" or something? At least they could say "preparing
for download" or something. (It is an inside joke, see the thread
about "Simple video editing software" :-)
>... The research
> I did when I purchased this computer said that if I wanted to do HD I
> needed a really fast Hard Drive.
Maybe, but IMHO, RAID is more trouble than it's worth unless you
have a *really good reason* to use it. I would only switch to RAID
after I proved that I couldn't do the job with conventional drives.
> True, right now I am only doing NTSC
> quality converting from an analog VHS-C camera. RAID 0 will give me
> more speed almost twice as fast as non RAID. That is why I am using
> RAID. RAID is usually used for fault tolerence so if one drive goes
> out the others keep running and you don't lose any data. RAID 0 is
> setup for speed only no fault tolerance.
Right. I suspect that many people who are running RAID (which
Dell set up for them) think they have some sort of fault-tollerance
which they don't have.
> What I did not know is that I
> can use a non-RAID drive in conjunction with a RAID setup.
When it comes down to it, the OS just sees the RAID array as
a single logical disc. It doesn't know or care what other physical
or logical drives are doing.
> So, I am
> going to get a new Hard Drive 500Gb (because the price is only $79US)
> and configure my computer for the OS on the non-RAID drive and
> dedicate the RAID drives to Video only by putting all my program files
> and photos on my non RAID drive.
Yes that is the logical approach, IMHO.
> I use external USB drives for project backups.
Yes, external drives make convenient backups. But don't be
fooled into thinking that they are *archive* storage media.
See the discussion of this in the "Need some advice" thread.
> I started out using a Sony notebook and Premiere Pro 2.0 plus
> an external drive. I had a big learning curve at that time. tt worked
> surprisingly well for the setup. Not great but good enough at that
> time. Even with a Dual core 3Ghz Xeon CPU I still have times where the
> timeline will not play unless I prerender it do to the special efects
> I am using. If you have any suggestion on tweeks to help this issue
> let me know. My graphics is the FX Quatro 3500. Way over kill I know.
AFAIK, unless the video card is specifically used by the video
software for some kind of processing (hardware accelleration,
etc.) then it makes no difference whether you spend $500 on
a video card, or use the one built into the motherboard.
> The main problem I was and am having is that in the final DVD I get
> glitches. It is the type of glitches like if there are finger prints
> on the disc. I still don't know exactly why this is happening.
Do you get glitches when you play the "virtual DVD" from
a the files on a hard drive? (vs. playing a field-burned optical
disc on a DVD player).
That symptom sounds more like burining flaky disks than
anything wrong with the editing and encoding process.
> I first
> thought my computer was two slow while creating the DVD/encoding the
> files. CPU and or HD speed. My computer is definently way fast enough
> so this should not be a problem.
But years ago it was taking all night to encode MPEG video
into the format you write to a DVD, etc. The speed of the
rendering process has NO affect on the quality of the product.
It only affects how long it takes to get there.
> But that is why I thought I needed to
> have this fast of a computer. What do you guys think.I would greatly
> appreciate it if I could figure out the answer. I am thinking now
> that it is just in the manufacturing of the discs. This is my best
> guess. Some times I can get a copy to come out perfect or almost
> perfect and other times not. This is really frustrating to me.
Yes, that is my first guess. That you are making flaky disks.
There could be any number of causes of this.
> I am using TDK DVDs
TDK is a marketing label. They make *some* of their own discs,
but they buy others from various manufacturers, (not all of them
with the best reputation) and slap the "TDK" name on them.
I use *exclusively* Taiyo-Yuden blank discs (both video and
audio). They have the best reputation of any disk maker, and
they make their own discs, they never OEM them from others.
OEMed brands (like "TDK") are a gamble. You never know
from one purchase to the next exactly what you are getting.
Because T-Y has such a good reputation, there are also people
out there counterfeiting T-Y disks. So be sure to buy them from
a reputable vendor. I buy mine exclusively from
www.supermediastore.com They have some info (and photos)
online to show how to distinguish between genuine T-Y discs
and counterfeits.
> with the inkjet lable on them.
If you mean that you are writing directly to the surface of the
DVDR disc, then that is good. If you mean that you are using
inkjet-printed stick-on labels, then that is bad, and possibly
the cause of your symptoms. It is virtually impossible to get
a stick-on lable so well centered that it will survive DVD
rotational speeds.
> I do not get any write error during the process.
That is nice, but unless that means that your (unidentified)
software is actually reading the disk back and verifying all
the data, then it doesn't mean much.
> Then I thought this may be do to the capture process because I was
> captuing some data and playing it back in the timeline and I did see
> the same glitches as described above.
If you have made even ONE disk that plays back properly, then
you have confirmed that the capture and editing and encoding
and disk authoring processes are working properly.
> One other thing how would you configure the scratch disk setting?
> Would you configure the scratch disc to use the OS drive?
NO! The scratch drive needs to be a separate drive. You
don't want ANY of your media (audio, video) files competing
with the operating system.
> Since I am reinstalling the OS I am thinking of getting Win 64bit. The
> main reason is that I have 4GB RAM and the 32bit Win will only use
> 3GB. From time to time in Premiere Pro I get out of Memory errors and
> I am only doing Standard Def NTSC video. I do like to run Premiere and
> Photoshop CS3 Extended at the same time.
Confirm that your hardware and applications can take
advantage of Win64. Else you're wasting your money and
time (at best).
John
> "John" wrote ...
>
> > First I found out what was wrong. The bigger the file, longer
> > recording time, the longer it took before the Save As dialog box was
> > appearing. So I thought it was not working. If I hit ESC or stop and
> > waited long enough it eventually worked.
>
> Isn't it nice that it doesn't even tell you "please wait while I
> save this file" or something? At least they could say "preparing
> for download" or something. (It is an inside joke, see the thread
> about "Simple video editing software" :-)
Ya, it might be a newbe thing but I always liked programs that showed
at least a process bar or something. At least then you were fairly
sure that the PC or program hadn't locked up.
>
> >... The research
> > I did when I purchased this computer said that if I wanted to do HD I
> > needed a really fastHardDrive.
>
> Maybe, but IMHO, RAID is more trouble than it's worth unless you
> have a *really good reason* to use it. I would only switch to RAID
> after I proved that I couldn't do the job with conventional drives.
>
> > True, right now I am only doing NTSC
> > quality converting from an analog VHS-C camera. RAID 0 will give me
> > more speed almost twice as fast as non RAID. That is why I am using
> > RAID. RAID is usually used for fault tolerence so if onedrivegoes
> > out the others keep running and you don't lose any data. RAID 0 is
> > setup for speed only no fault tolerance.
>
> Right. I suspect that many people who are running RAID (which
> Dell set up for them) think they have some sort of fault-tollerance
> which they don't have.
>
> > What I did not know is that I
> > can use a non-RAIDdrivein conjunction with a RAID setup.
>
> When it comes down to it, the OS just sees the RAID array as
> a single logical disc. It doesn't know or care what other physical
> or logical drives are doing.
>
> > So, I am
> > going to get a newHardDrive500Gb (because the price is only $79US)
> > and configure my computer for the OS on the non-RAIDdriveand
> > dedicate the RAID drives to Video only by putting all my program files
> > and photos on my non RAIDdrive.
>
> Yes that is the logical approach, IMHO.
>
> > I use external USB drives for project backups.
>
> Yes, external drives make convenient backups. But don't be
> fooled into thinking that they are *archive* storage media.
> See the discussion of this in the "Need some advice" thread.
Oh, I thought I could use a HD for perminent backup storage and make a
master DVD as well. If you don't use a HD for your backup of project
files what do you use?
>
> > I started out using a Sony notebook and Premiere Pro 2.0 plus
> > an externaldrive. I had a big learning curve at that time. tt worked
> > surprisingly well for the setup. Not great but good enough at that
> > time. Even with a Dual core 3Ghz Xeon CPU I still have times where the
> > timeline will not play unless I prerender it do to the special efects
> > I am using. If you have any suggestion on tweeks to help this issue
> > let me know. My graphics is the FX Quatro 3500. Way over kill I know.
>
> AFAIK, unless the video card is specifically used by the video
> software for some kind of processing (hardware accelleration,
> etc.) then it makes no difference whether you spend $500 on
> a video card, or use the one built into the motherboard.
>
> > The main problem I was and am having is that in the final DVD I get
> > glitches. It is the type of glitches like if there are finger prints
> > on the disc. I still don't know exactly why this is happening.
>
> Do you get glitches when you play the "virtual DVD" from
> a the files on aharddrive? (vs. playing a field-burned optical
> disc on a DVD player).
>
I may have done that once and no I had no problems. Except that I
recently captured something and as I said I did see the glitches when
I played the video back at real time in the timeline of Premiere.
> That symptom sounds more like burining flaky disks than
> anything wrong with the editing and encoding process.
>
> > I first
> > thought my computer was two slow while creating the DVD/encoding the
> > files. CPU and or HD speed. My computer is definently way fast enough
> > so this should not be a problem.
>
> But years ago it was taking all night to encode MPEG video
> into the format you write to a DVD, etc. The speed of the
> rendering process has NO affect on the quality of the product.
> It only affects how long it takes to get there.
>
Even the speed of the HDs?
> > But that is why I thought I needed to
> > have this fast of a computer. What do you guys think.I would greatly
> > appreciate it if I could figure out the answer. I am thinking now
> > that it is just in the manufacturing of the discs. This is my best
> > guess. Some times I can get a copy to come out perfect or almost
> > perfect and other times not. This is really frustrating to me.
>
> Yes, that is my first guess. That you are making flaky disks.
> There could be any number of causes of this.
>
> > I am using TDK DVDs
>
> TDK is a marketing label. They make *some* of their own discs,
> but they buy others from various manufacturers, (not all of them
> with the best reputation) and slap the "TDK" name on them.
>
> I use *exclusively* Taiyo-Yuden blank discs (both video and
> audio). They have the best reputation of any disk maker, and
> they make their own discs, they never OEM them from others.
> OEMed brands (like "TDK") are a gamble. You never know
> from one purchase to the next exactly what you are getting.
>
So, about how many Discs have you made with the T-Ys and have you had
any of the glitches I have? Also, how do fingerprints, dust, scratches
affect the discs? I mean does this effect the discs any more than
store bought/pressed DVDs? As I said the TDKs seem to me to be pretty
sensitive to this stuff? This is my non scientific study.
> Because T-Y has such a good reputation, there are also people
> out there counterfeiting T-Y disks. So be sure to buy them from
> a reputable vendor. I buy mine exclusively fromwww.supermediastore.com They have some info (and photos)
> online to show how to distinguish between genuine T-Y discs
> and counterfeits.
>
> > with the inkjet lable on them.
>
> If you mean that you are writing directly to the surface of the
> DVDR disc, then that is good. If you mean that you are using
> inkjet-printed stick-on labels, then that is bad, and possibly
> the cause of your symptoms. It is virtually impossible to get
> a stick-on lable so well centered that it will survive DVD
> rotational speeds.
>
I have an Epson 960 Photo printer that prints directly on the Disc.
I tried using a lable just once. I found it way to hard to line up
properly.
The DISCs on the Epson come out really professional.
> > I do not get any write error during the process.
>
> That is nice, but unless that means that your (unidentified)
> software is actually reading the disk back and verifying all
> the data, then it doesn't mean much.
>
I tried verifying the disks for awhile but I never got any errors so I
think it is a waist of time. I just run the disc in my DVD player to
verify that bit is OK. Even after a good verify process I still got
the glitches described.
> > Then I thought this may be do to the capture process because I was
> > captuing some data and playing it back in the timeline and I did see
> > the same glitches as described above.
>
> If you have made even ONE disk that plays back properly, then
> you have confirmed that the capture and editing and encoding
> and disk authoring processes are working properly.
>
> > One other thing how would you configure the scratch disk setting?
> > Would you configure the scratch disc to use the OSdrive?
>
> NO! The scratchdriveneeds to be a separatedrive. You
> don't want ANY of your media (audio, video) files competing
> with the operating system.
What exactly do you mean? My PC can use a maximum of 3 HDs. So if I
use one for the OS and the other 2 for RAID which drive has the
scratch disk?
>
> > Since I am reinstalling the OS I am thinking of getting Win 64bit. The
> > main reason is that I have 4GB RAM and the 32bit Win will only use
> > 3GB. From time to time in Premiere Pro I get out of Memory errors and
> > I am only doing Standard Def NTSC video. I do like to run Premiere and
> > Photoshop CS3 Extended at the same time.
>
> Confirm that your hardware and applications can take
> advantage of Win64. Else you're wasting your money and
> time (at best).
Yes, none of the programs are 64Bit. And it looks like adobe is not
going to make a 64bit version of premiere pro any time soon. I would
be using win64 strickly so the software can access the full 4GB of
RAM. I have not looked into whether Premiere can actually read more
than 3GB RAM being a 32bit App.
Ken Maltby
"John" <joh...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:6da176e1-ce2b-4be2...@p31g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Interesting setup, and I'm not a Dell fan. I do think highly of
the Intensity Pro, though. So the hardware looks good.
The most important consideration for the use of hard drives
in video work, including capturing video; is to have several
drives, each on their own channel. Then, it is very important
that you are using a workflow that has the software processing
inputs from one hard drive and outputting to another drive.
While you don't need Raptors, you should use fast stable
drives, your two 7,200 rpm SATA should be just great.
Forget the RAID 0, it will provide no benefit to the process
at all.
I am not a fan of Adobe products in general or Premier
in particular, but I would find it odd if the proper method
of ending a capture was to "hit ESC".
Given the nature of audio/video processing it can be a
very good idea to use separate programs/utilities to do
each major step. The intermediate files created can be
both a form of backup for the project at hand and come
in handy for other efforts. For instance a separate
capture file can be later used with a different program
if you have a problem, or just don't like the results from
Premier. In your current situation Premier Pro and the
Intensity card were designed to work together right
from the start. I would still have Premier create a file
at capture before loading it into my project's timeline.
Once you break up that RAID into at least a Capture
drive and a System drive, the Premier experts should
be able to set you straight on the capture procedure.
Luck;
Ken
Richard Crowley
> Oh, I thought I could use a HD for perminent backup storage and make a
> master DVD as well. If you don't use a HD for your backup of project
> files what do you use?
I just answered that question extensively in the rec.video.production
newsgroup in a thread with the subject line: "Re: What is the best
back-up regime for a major Vegas project based on a BIG store
of raw video?"
> I may have done that once and no I had no problems. Except that I
> recently captured something and as I said I did see the glitches when
> I played the video back at real time in the timeline of Premiere.
That rather confirms that the speed of your computer is NOT a problem.
>> But years ago it was taking all night to encode MPEG video
>> into the format you write to a DVD, etc. The speed of the
>> rendering process has NO affect on the quality of the product.
>> It only affects how long it takes to get there.
>>
> Even the speed of the HDs?
Yes, even the speed of the HDs. If any part of the computer is
slower than real-time, it just takes longer to process. The only
time speed is important is when you're trying to do something in
*real-time*. (Capturing from analog video, or playing back from
the timeline, etc.)
> So, about how many Discs have you made with the T-Ys
I'm likely over 1000 discs by now. I buy them in spindles of 100.
I burn them at 4x (or slower) using LiteOn or Sony drives.
(It is reputed that LiteOn OEMs the drives with Sony's brand
name on them.) Pioneer and Plextor are two other well-
respected drive brands.
> and have you had any of the glitches I have?
No. I have never had a return from a customer since I've been
using T-Y.
> Also, how do fingerprints, dust, scratches affect the discs?
> I mean does this effect the discs any more than store bought/
> pressed DVDs?
Surface defects (including all those you listed) likely have some-
what MORE effect on field-burned discs vs. store-bought,
moulded ones, IMHO. Since the contrast is lower, it takes
less of a defect to cause the data to drop below the threshold
of reliable recovery.
> As I said the TDKs seem to me to be pretty sensitive to this
> stuff? This is my non scientific study.
It could be because they are already so low contrast that it
doesn't take much to distrupt reading the ones and zeroes.
> I have an Epson 960 Photo printer that prints directly on the Disc.
> I tried using a lable just once. I found it way to hard to line up
> properly.
> The DISCs on the Epson come out really professional.
Yes, I've been using an Epson R300 for several years, but I
just switched to a Dymo DiscPainter because it is faster and
more reliable.
> I tried verifying the disks for awhile but I never got any errors so I
> think it is a waist of time. I just run the disc in my DVD player to
> verify that bit is OK. Even after a good verify process I still got
> the glitches described.
Then that is more evidence that the discs read OK in a computer,
but not as good in a DVD player. Annother clear symptom of
marginal contrast, IME.
>> NO! The scratch drive needs to be a separate drive. You
>> don't want ANY of your media (audio, video) files competing
>> with the operating system.
>
> What exactly do you mean? My PC can use a maximum of 3 HDs. So if I
> use one for the OS and the other 2 for RAID which drive has the
> scratch disk?
Sounds like annother exellent and compelling reason to dump RAID.
Why do you think your computer is limited to 3 HD?
> Yes, none of the programs are 64Bit. And it looks like adobe is not
> going to make a 64bit version of premiere pro any time soon. I would
> be using win64 strickly so the software can access the full 4GB of
> RAM. I have not looked into whether Premiere can actually read more
> than 3GB RAM being a 32bit App.
Doesn't sound worth the hassle to me. You'd get much better
results from things like having separate boot/system disc, data
disc, and scratch disc.
Richard Crowley
> The most important consideration for the use of hard drives
> in video work, including capturing video; is to have several
> drives, each on their own channel. Then, it is very important
> that you are using a workflow that has the software processing
> inputs from one hard drive and outputting to another drive.
YES. Listen to the man! IME, this is MUCH more effective
than any RAID arrangement.
> I am not a fan of Adobe products in general or Premier
> in particular, but I would find it odd if the proper method
> of ending a capture was to "hit ESC".
Alas, that is actually how they do it. For better or for worse.
CLicker
> On Aug 6, 6:37 pm, "Richard Crowley" <rcrow...@xp7rt.net>
> wrote:
>> "John" wrote ...
>>
>>> First I found out what was wrong. The bigger the file,
>>> longer
>>> recording time, the longer it took before the Save As dialog
>>> box was
>>> appearing. So I thought it was not working. If I hit ESC or
>>> stop and
>>> waited long enough it eventually worked.
>>
>> Isn't it nice that it doesn't even tell you "please wait
>> while I
>> save this file" or something? At least they could say
>> "preparing
>> for download" or something. (It is an inside joke, see the
>> thread
>> about "Simple video editing software" :-)
>
> Ya, it might be a newbe thing but I always liked programs that
> showed
> at least a process bar or something. At least then you were
> fairly
> sure that the PC or program hadn't locked up.
This is becoming rampant among first generation, third world
"programmers."
I've a Motorola DCT3416 HD-DVR here. It is often slow to
respond to an input from the remote without any visual feedback
indicating the delay (although there is an audible from the
Logitech 880). It's typical of my impatient style to then press
the key again, and sometimes several agains. Well, the box also
enqueues keystrokes so there's no telling what it's likely to do
as it catches up with the queue.
Once you (I) become gun-shy, you (I) then sit there staring at
the unresponsive menu item only to discover - it really didn't
see the click this time.
Once upon a time, menu systems would wait until the item was
displayed before accepting keystrokes - this required flushing
the keystroke buffer, in the event any unintended keys were
pressed. This very positive affirmation was replaced by the
"hourglass," and now has been replaced by WGAS - who gives a
s**t;-)
John
> "John" wrote ...
>
> > Oh, I thought I could use a HD for perminent backup storage and make a
> > master DVD as well. If you don't use a HD for your backup of project
> > files what do you use?
>
> I just answered that question extensively in the rec.video.production
> newsgroup in a thread with the subject line: "Re: What is the best
> back-up regime for a major Vegas project based on a BIG store
> of raw video?"
>
Tapes I could just backup the project files not the actual data AVI
files. For now I like to keep the AVI files, at least the part that is
actually used in each project on a HD. HDs are cheep at least large
HDs. I know that keeping multiple projects on one drive runs into the
problem of a HD crash. But I don't have backup drive online.
> > I may have done that once and no I had no problems. Except that I
> > recently captured something and as I said I did see the glitches when
> > I played the video back at real time in the timeline of Premiere.
>
> That rather confirms that the speed of your computer is NOT a problem.
>
> >> But years ago it was taking all night to encode MPEG video
> >> into the format you write to a DVD, etc. The speed of the
> >> rendering process has NO affect on the quality of the product.
> >> It only affects how long it takes to get there.
>
> > Even the speed of the HDs?
>
> Yes, even the speed of the HDs. If any part of the computer is
> slower than real-time, it just takes longer to process. The only
> time speed is important is when you're trying to do something in
> *real-time*. (Capturing from analog video, or playing back from
> the timeline, etc.)
>
> > So, about how many Discs have you made with the T-Ys
>
> I'm likely over 1000 discs by now. I buy them in spindles of 100.
>
> I burn them at 4x (or slower) using LiteOn or Sony drives.
> (It is reputed that LiteOn OEMs the drives with Sony's brand
> name on them.) Pioneer and Plextor are two other well-
> respecteddrivebrands.
I am curious why a 16x drive will only allow us to write reliably at
4x? I was coping, today, a few DVDs using Roxio Sonic and it was
coping at only 1-2x.
>
> > and have you had any of the glitches I have?
>
> No. I have never had a return from a customer since I've been
> using T-Y.
>
> > Also, how do fingerprints, dust, scratches affect the discs?
> > I mean does this effect the discs any more than store bought/
> > pressed DVDs?
>
> Surface defects (including all those you listed) likely have some-
> what MORE effect on field-burned discs vs. store-bought,
> moulded ones, IMHO. Since the contrast is lower, it takes
> less of a defect to cause the data to drop below the threshold
> of reliable recovery.
>
> > As I said the TDKs seem to me to be pretty sensitive to this
> > stuff? This is my non scientific study.
>
> It could be because they are already so low contrast that it
> doesn't take much to distrupt reading the ones and zeroes.
>
> > I have an Epson 960 Photo printer that prints directly on the Disc.
> > I tried using a lable just once. I found it way tohardto line up
> > properly.
> > The DISCs on the Epson come out really professional.
>
> Yes, I've been using an Epson R300 for several years, but I
> just switched to a Dymo DiscPainter because it is faster and
> more reliable.
>
> > I tried verifying the disks for awhile but I never got any errors so I
> > think it is a waist of time. I just run the disc in my DVD player to
> > verify that bit is OK. Even after a good verify process I still got
> > the glitches described.
>
> Then that is more evidence that the discs read OK in a computer,
> but not as good in a DVD player. Annother clear symptom of
> marginal contrast, IME.
>
> >> NO! The scratchdriveneeds to be a separatedrive. You
> >> don't want ANY of your media (audio, video) files competing
> >> with the operating system.
>
> > What exactly do you mean? My PC can use a maximum of 3 HDs. So if I
> > use one for the OS and the other 2 for RAID whichdrivehas the
> > scratch disk?
>
> Sounds like annother exellent and compelling reason to dump RAID.
> Why do you think your computer is limited to 3 HD?
I know for sure that the case only has room for 3 drives.
That is what the Manual says and the Dell tech support which was
looking at my exact system when we was chatting, said that I might be
able to use at least a 4th internal HD if I remove the CD writer drive
and use that bay for the hard drive. He was not sure whether the BIOS
would limit the computer to three drives. Unless you have information
to the contrary?
I hear you but if I am still bent on keeping RAID I assume I can use
another USB drive, if not a 4th internal drive for the scratch disk?
The Manual states that this computer is limited to 1.5T of hard drive
space.
>
> > Yes, none of the programs are 64Bit. And it looks like adobe is not
> > going to make a 64bit version of premiere pro any time soon. I would
> > be using win64 strickly so the software can access the full 4GB of
> > RAM. I have not looked into whether Premiere can actually read more
> > than 3GB RAM being a 32bit App.
Thanks for all the help.
So, As I said some times I get out of memory errors, My projects have
a lot of different Sequences. I hate when this happens. All these
things I am talking about just slow down and extend the time to finish
the project. I really have to solve these problems so I can
consentrate on my work instead of spending all this time figuring out
system errors/glitches and waisting 3 hours importing video that I
have to redo. As an example. I used to use an extenal Canopus Box for
analog capture and I had nothing but problems withe Premiere pro 2.0.
In short I had to plug and unplug the unit before it would sync up and
it would capture for awhile and then drop out. So I dumped it and got
the Intensity Pro card.
>
> Doesn't sound worth the hassle to me. You'd get much better
> results from things like having separate boot/system disc, data
> disc, and scratch disc.
So, what kind of work do you do if I may ask?
Gene E. Bloch
> John wrote:
>> On Aug 6, 6:37 pm, "Richard Crowley" <rcrow...@xp7rt.net> wrote:
>>> "John" wrote ...
[...]
>> Ya, it might be a newbe thing but I always liked programs that showed
>> at least a process bar or something. At least then you were fairly
>> sure that the PC or program hadn't locked up.
>
> This is becoming rampant among first generation, third world "programmers."
>
> I've a Motorola DCT3416 HD-DVR here. It is often slow to respond to an input
> from the remote without any visual feedback indicating the delay (although
> there is an audible from the Logitech 880). It's typical of my impatient
> style to then press the key again, and sometimes several agains. Well, the
> box also enqueues keystrokes so there's no telling what it's likely to do as
> it catches up with the queue.
It could've been worse. My Motorola STB (back when I had Comcast Cable)
did as above, except that the box then locked up tight instead of
playing the queue of remote commands.
So much for catching up with real time...Whatever I hadn't seen was
lost, including whatever was broadcast while I power-cycled the box.
[...]
--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) letters617blochg3251
(replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom")
CLicker
Oh yes, yours is worse:-(
So far, mine has simply been shock and awe;-)
Richard Crowley
> I am curious why a 16x drive will only allow us to write reliably
> at 4x?
"16x" is the maximum speed that the drive will write. It is NOT
the speed at which it writes most reliably (with the greatest disc
contrast, etc.) Note further that the most reliable way of writing
is a combination of the drive, the discs, and the writing speed.
And to answer a possible question, NO, I don't see any evidence
that the speed of the computer or the kind of software you are using
has any effect on the reliability (contrast) of the discs you burn.
> I was coping, today, a few DVDs using Roxio Sonic and it was
> coping at only 1-2x.
Sometimes the burning softare, in cooperation with the DVDR
drive figures out for itself the most reliable burning speed.
I personally use ImgBurn free software (and DVD decrypter before
ImgBurn) for all my CDR and DVDR burning. I let it choose the
optimal burning speed which usually turns out to be 3x ~ 4x.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImgBurn
http://www.imgburn.com/
> I know for sure that the case only has room for 3 drives.
If that were MY situation, I would use the three drive bays for:
1) boot ("C:") drive
2) optical (DVDR) drive
3) scratch hard drive (single drive no RAID intrigue)
Then I would use external drives for the actual video data.
Either external USB2, Firewire, or eSATA
(Again, no RAID nonesense).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esata#External_SATA
> hear you but if I am still bent on keeping RAID I assume I can use
> another USB drive, if not a 4th internal drive for the scratch disk?
Yes, external data drives would seem ideal for your case, IMO.
> The Manual states that this computer is limited to 1.5T of hard
> drive space.
Dunno why? I've never heard of such a thing.
> So, As I said some times I get out of memory errors, My projects have
> a lot of different Sequences. I hate when this happens.
Sounds like your computer hardware is flaky.
> As an example. I used to use an extenal Canopus Box for
> analog capture and I had nothing but problems withe Premiere pro 2.0.
> In short I had to plug and unplug the unit before it would sync up and
> it would capture for awhile and then drop out. So I dumped it and got
> the Intensity Pro card.
In my memory, you are the first person to post such a complaint
about a Canopus ADVC box. They are so basicly simple and
reliable, that I rather suspect your computer vs. the Canopus box.
> So, what kind of work do you do if I may ask?
I do video NLE with Adobe Premiere on several systems.
I also do multi-track audio NLE with Adobe Audition, also
on several different systems.
John
> "John" wrote ...
>
> > I am curious why a 16x drive will only allow us to write reliably
> > at 4x?
>
> "16x" is the maximum speed that the drive will write. It is NOT
> the speed at which it writes most reliably (with the greatest disc
> contrast, etc.) Note further that the most reliable way of writing
> is a combination of the drive, the discs, and the writing speed.
>
> And to answer a possible question, NO, I don't see any evidence
> that the speed of the computer or the kind of software you are using
> has any effect on the reliability (contrast) of the discs you burn.
>
> > I was coping, today, a few DVDs using Roxio Sonic and it was
> > coping at only 1-2x.
>
> Sometimes the burning softare, in cooperation with the DVDR
> drive figures out for itself the most reliable burning speed.
>
> I personally use ImgBurn free software (and DVD decrypter before
> ImgBurn) for all my CDR and DVDR burning. I let it choose the
>
> > I know for sure that the case only has room for 3 drives.
>
> If that were MY situation, I would use the three drive bays for:
> 1) boot ("C:") drive
> 2) optical (DVDR) drive
> 3) scratch hard drive (single drive no RAID intrigue)
>
> Then I would use external drives for the actual video data.
> Either external USB2, Firewire, or eSATA
>
> > hear you but if I am still bent on keeping RAID I assume I can use
> > another USB drive, if not a 4th internal drive for the scratch disk?
>
> Yes, external data drives would seem ideal for your case, IMO.
>
> > The Manual states that this computer is limited to 1.5T of hard
> > drive space.
>
> Dunno why? I've never heard of such a thing.
>
> > So, As I said some times I get out of memory errors, My projects have
> > a lot of different Sequences. I hate when this happens.
>
> Sounds like your computer hardware is flaky.
>
> > As an example. I used to use an extenal Canopus Box for
> > analog capture and I had nothing but problems withe Premiere pro 2.0.
my projects, etc to a backup drive. I just got two new HDs. To clear
one minor thing up I actually have room for 3 HDs and 2 optical
drives. My power supply is a 750w. That might be the limiting factor
or the BIOS. I will have to do the math. I got an external case so I
can always us that for the 4th HD. BTW: the external case is really
nice. It is an Antec model MX-1. It is really quiet. It has a blower
fan and I can connect it using either the USB or SATA connection. Also
the case will allow you to connect it as an additional RAID drive if
one so choses.
I have been reading on the Adobe forum and a lot of people are getting
the low memory error message. Some of the responses suggest corrupt
files. Another person had incorrect RAM types.