Comments for High Definition for PC http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog Evolving Media Post Production Workflows in Light of Advancing Computer Technology Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:16:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 Comment on Managing Footage in Tapeless Workflows by Post Production Update #1 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/03/28/managing-footage/comment-page-1/#comment-112 Post Production Update #1 Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:16:11 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=72#comment-112 [...] a batch file and rename all the DSLR clips.  I use a method outlined here. (Please don’t forget to make multiple backups of your files.  I keep all the original files [...] [...] a batch file and rename all the DSLR clips.  I use a method outlined here. (Please don’t forget to make multiple backups of your files.  I keep all the original files [...]

]]> Comment on USB3 and Post-Production by McCarthyTech http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/11/28/usb3-and-post-production/comment-page-1/#comment-105 McCarthyTech Wed, 22 Dec 2010 17:55:46 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=198#comment-105 1500Megabits is only 150Megabytes, so much slower than USB3's potential maximum. The next generations of SATA at 300 and 600 Megabytes a second are comparable to USB3 bandwidth. 1500Megabits is only 150Megabytes, so much slower than USB3′s potential maximum. The next generations of SATA at 300 and 600 Megabytes a second are comparable to USB3 bandwidth.

]]> Comment on USB3 and Post-Production by paladin http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/11/28/usb3-and-post-production/comment-page-1/#comment-104 paladin Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:08:19 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=198#comment-104 What about a sata connection. They're reaching ~1500mb/s What about a sata connection. They’re reaching ~1500mb/s

]]> Comment on Shared SAN Storage Solutions by McCarthyTech http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/12/11/shared-san-storage-solutions/comment-page-1/#comment-103 McCarthyTech Tue, 21 Dec 2010 23:57:17 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=221#comment-103 Bandito uses both, with active projects on the SAN, and our longer term archive on NAS connected volumes. You need at least two systems for SAN to be viable, but usually more. For two systems, 10Gb ethernet with a crossover cable would allow you to network them for a a couple hundred dollars. Scaling past two systems, a SAN will offer the optimum performance. It costs a couple thousand dollars to add an additional client system to a SAN, once the base infrastructure of switches and arrays are in place, but the more systems that you connect, the lower the total cost per system is. The initial cost of the array is averaged across more systems. Now matter how you measure it, SANs are expensive. Bandito uses both, with active projects on the SAN, and our longer term archive on NAS connected volumes. You need at least two systems for SAN to be viable, but usually more. For two systems, 10Gb ethernet with a crossover cable would allow you to network them for a a couple hundred dollars. Scaling past two systems, a SAN will offer the optimum performance. It costs a couple thousand dollars to add an additional client system to a SAN, once the base infrastructure of switches and arrays are in place, but the more systems that you connect, the lower the total cost per system is. The initial cost of the array is averaged across more systems. Now matter how you measure it, SANs are expensive.

]]> Comment on USB3 and Post-Production by McCarthyTech http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/11/28/usb3-and-post-production/comment-page-1/#comment-102 McCarthyTech Tue, 21 Dec 2010 23:50:17 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=198#comment-102 HDMI is a one way interface with little error correction, usually for one device. USB is a two way interface that can be shared with many devices, daisy chained and run long distances. USB has a flow control mechanism that is constantly checking to ensure that the data transmitted is accurate, whereas HDMI ignores this, because if it is missing data, it is too late, and the user just sees a glitch in playback. HDMI is a one way interface with little error correction, usually for one device. USB is a two way interface that can be shared with many devices, daisy chained and run long distances. USB has a flow control mechanism that is constantly checking to ensure that the data transmitted is accurate, whereas HDMI ignores this, because if it is missing data, it is too late, and the user just sees a glitch in playback.

]]> Comment on USB3 and Post-Production by paladin http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/11/28/usb3-and-post-production/comment-page-1/#comment-101 paladin Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:49:40 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=198#comment-101 Out of curiosity, but why does USB 3.0 only hit 500 MB/s when HDMI for example can hit 10 GB/s? Am I off here? And if we can create this HDMI cable, why not move to that standard for faster speeds and more versatility? Is it because HDMI is created with A/V only in mind, or can regular data move through there? I suppose the main question is this: we have faster cables... why use USB and not these others? -(max) Out of curiosity, but why does USB 3.0 only hit 500 MB/s when HDMI for example can hit 10 GB/s? Am I off here? And if we can create this HDMI cable, why not move to that standard for faster speeds and more versatility? Is it because HDMI is created with A/V only in mind, or can regular data move through there?

I suppose the main question is this: we have faster cables… why use USB and not these others? -(max)

]]> Comment on Shared SAN Storage Solutions by paladin http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/12/11/shared-san-storage-solutions/comment-page-1/#comment-100 paladin Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:40:27 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=221#comment-100 In terms of NAS vs. SAN, what does Bandito use (if any) and what should they use? How many workstations should be present when looking at SAN? -(ms) In terms of NAS vs. SAN, what does Bandito use (if any) and what should they use? How many workstations should be present when looking at SAN? -(ms)

]]> Comment on Managing Footage in Tapeless Workflows by Media Management « Welcome to EYAN’s world! http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/03/28/managing-footage/comment-page-1/#comment-87 Media Management « Welcome to EYAN’s world! Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:20:38 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=72#comment-87 [...] ___ And here’s another good read: Managing Footage in Tapeless Workflows. [...] [...] ___ And here’s another good read: Managing Footage in Tapeless Workflows. [...]

]]> Comment on Adobe Creative Suite 5 Video Apps by McCarthyTech http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/06/02/adobe-cs5-video-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-85 McCarthyTech Tue, 09 Nov 2010 18:22:36 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=96#comment-85 I don't understand what you are looking for. 422 isn't a codec, it is more like a colorspace or compression setting. Are you looking for ProRes422 or Cineform422, or MPEG422 or smething else. If you are using the trial, the MPEG encoder is not included, so that will limit your workflow options. I don’t understand what you are looking for. 422 isn’t a codec, it is more like a colorspace or compression setting. Are you looking for ProRes422 or Cineform422, or MPEG422 or smething else. If you are using the trial, the MPEG encoder is not included, so that will limit your workflow options.

]]> Comment on Adobe Creative Suite 5 Video Apps by Steve http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/2010/06/02/adobe-cs5-video-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-84 Steve Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:08:44 +0000 http://www.hd4pc.com/techblog/?p=96#comment-84 We're running a trial version of Premier and don't see the option of the 422 codec for export. Is this a feature lacking in the trial, or are we missing a settings box somewhere? We’re running a trial version of Premier and don’t see the option of the 422 codec for export. Is this a feature lacking in the trial, or are we missing a settings box somewhere?

]]>