Avid Media Composer and sharing media on a SAN

[Erik Freid]

Hi David,

The world of Avid is not that easy unfortunately. It will not work on a SAN sharing media unless you use Unity or one of the products you note above, Avid’s naming conventions are basically the same and sequential so two systems connected to the SAN would overwrite the other, not knowing which system is correct. and while you can read one to many, only one had permission to write to avoid corrupt media. There are better people than I on the who can explain the minutiae and nuts and bolts to SAN management.

I would add two other systems to the above, Facilis terrablock a SAN hardware/software solution and commandsoft fibrejet, a SAN management software, works on almost any SAN

Erik

Erik Freid | MediaSilo, Inc
207 South Street | Third Floor | Boston, MA 02111
t. 617.423.6200, m. 617.306.8632, f. 617.507.8577
http://www.mediaSilo.com erik@mediasilo.com

[Matt Geier]

Hiya David and Erik,

Here’s an article from Walter Biscardi. – It’s a nice post he did on the 7th that discusses (in part) some of this

https://library.creativecow.net/biscardi_walter/Avid-Media-Composer-6/1

Not sure if you are having the need to work on the same project at the same time as someone else. A lot of folks can break one project into smaller projects and each work on their own piece.

You may find some insight there.

Good luck!

[Steve Modica]

You can use Avid Media Access to point at a given NAS volume and it “just works”. There’s no special action required. (and you get the added bonus of not transcoding and re-ingesting everything into Avid)

Steve

Steve Modica
CTO, Small Tree Communications

[James Mckenna]

Hi All,

The problem with AMA linking is that Avid strongly suggests transcoding. The AMA workflow is fine for basic assembly, but it’s likely you won’t be happy long-term with the performance of an AMA timeline, regardless of the storage system.

Avid uses a database file in a media directory that is owned by a single workstation. When multiple workstations write to the same drive, additional media directories have to be created so that the databases are unique for each workstation. This can be achieved to some level by tricks and virtualizations on the server side, but it’s best to let the Media Composer do the creation, which it will do when the media directory lives on a Unity/Isis. This is the same for the bin locking/project sharing feature.

Facilis offers the native media and project sharing that normally only exists when using Avid SAN solutions. We do this through an emulation mode that presents our Shared File System volumes as if they are native Avid storage. It works, it’s cross-platform Mac and Windows, and it’s been shipping since 2009.

Jim

[Shane Rodbourn]

David,
I think you’ll find the Creative Cow forums are an excellent source of information on SAN and NAS solutions for the Media & Entertainment market. There are a number of options out there.

The TerraBlock is a turn-key shared storage solution which is cross platform (Mac, Windows, Linux), Ethernet and/or Fibre Channel, Virtual Volumes, Interoperable with third party NLE’s, Asset Management, and workflow tools, Pro Tools file-level support, no per-seat license fees, and Avid Media Composer, Apple Final Cut Pro, and Adobe Premier Pro Project sharing capability.

Working with Avid Media Composer, the TerraBlock not only allows you to share your media files easily, but also supports native project sharing. There’s no separate abstraction layer. In an Avid environment, many artists utilize Project and bin sharing to speed up the workflow and add efficiency. The TerraBlock allows you to share bins and projects across multiple clients. When you place your bins and projects on TerraBlock Volumes, several users can work on the same project at the same time. Avid editors have a locking mechanism to help you keep track of who is currently working in a bin. This allows one user to write to a bin and multiple users can read the files in that bin. This ensures that changes aren’t inadvertently overwritten to the bin.

Some of the key benefits of Facilis TerraBlock include Performance, Interoperability, Collaboration, Stability, and overall Value. Feel free to contact us if you need more information.

Regards,
Shane

Shane Rodbourn
SVP/General Manager
Facilis Technology
577 Main Street, Suite 120
Hudson, MA 01749
978-562-7022 x 111
https://www.facilis.com
https://www.facebook.com/facilistechnology
https://www.twitter.com/facilis

Tweets by Facilis

[Bob Zelin]

Hi David –
everyone is being so nice and professional here. Well, of course, I will not be so nice and professional.

I know exactly what is going on here David – you want a cheap solution. You say “it’s just a network – what’s the big deal” – well, it’s not just a network, and unless you buy AVID ISIS 5000, EditShare or Facilis Terrablock, you will either have to deal with workarounds, or you CANT HAVE SHARED STORAGE ! YOU AIN’T BUILDING THIS YOURSELF DAVID ! Do you understand me ?

Alternate solutions that work are using VOLUME BASED solutions – this means that you setup seperate partitions (or drive volumes) and only one guy can write to a volume at one time. This process works, and is successfully sold by Studio Network Solutions (SANmp) and Command Soft (Fibre Jet). Facilis until relatively recently, also used to only do Volume Based solutions for AVID, but relatively recently (a few years ago) they got file based working as well as EditShare. Other companies, like Small Tree and Maxx Digital are close to a working solution as well.

SO, why does this happen ? Because AVID writes a .msm and a .mdb file whenever you launch Media Composer, and if you are on one common volume or partition with two or more systems, the second (or third) Media Composer will overwrite the first guys .msm and .mdb file, and you will see MEDIA OFFLINE on your AVID on your edit 1 system. AVID (and others) get around this by using a METADATA SERVER to manage all of these files for each client. And companies that do VOLUME based solutions only allow ONE EDITOR to write to one volume or partition, so no one erases the .msm and .mdb file, because only one guy can WRITE to that volume. That’s why it’s called VOLUME BASED.

SO, why does AVID do this, and why doesn’t AVID change this ? Because NO ONE WOULD BUY AVID ISIS OR UNITY if they made it easy, and would just buy cheap (or cheaper solutions). And brilliant companies like EditShare and Facilis have already figured out the successful solution for a file based workflow, and others (like me) are still struggling (but close) to a cheapo solution that works. And of course you can get a Volume based system right now from Studio Network Solutions and others.

but one thing for sure David – you ain’t building this yourself to show your boss what a big hero you are.

Want shared storage for AVID Media Composer ? SPEND MONEY.

Bob Zelin

[David Parker]

Hi Mr. Zelin, I was hoping you’d drop by and give your very valuable input. (This is a new account, but I have been lurking around the cow for quite a while, and plenty long enough to appreciate the help you have to offer around here, and your unique style 🙂 )

Yeah, like I said in my original post, I am not familiar with the Avid MC workflow, and like anyone I want to hold on to my tried and true way of working, which with FCP is each editor has their own project, but all link to the same media. Steve mentions that with AMA that is posable, but as James brings up, that seems to be a not exactly recommended path.

You bring up an interesting point about volume level locking, and I would like to to explore that further: I have a been a little nervous about file level locking, and the need for a meta data controller as is, even if we stay on FCP (or switch to Premiere). It seems to me from the reading I have done that file level locking tends to be a bit more unstable then volume level.

The way we work now is generally with one station for ingest and a few edit stations, so I think volume level locking would be fine for us? The ingest can have write, and everyone else reads.

So in a Avid MC workflow on volume level locking, the ingest creates “bins” of new material, and the edits can all read those same bins? Can the ingest update those bins and the edit stations do some sort of refresh to see the new stuff? How can the edit stations pass back and forth the projects or timelines (in fcp terminology)? Like if we are working on a long form doc, and have two edits working on separate parts of the film, how do they eventually come together?

What would you recommend? Volume level or file level? If money was no object, it would probably be an editshare? I have no problem with spending real money on getting a solid solution, but like anyone, I am looking for the best value I can, meaning the most storage space for my money. But of course lots of storage that goes down all the time, or corrupts, or forces my editors to waste time in workflow is no good to me.

[Bob Zelin]

IF money was no object you would simply buy an AVID ISIS 5000 and stop this way of thinking. AVID is a file based system (and Unity from AVID – now called ISIS 7000) has always been this way. AVID ISIS 5000 and 7000 is the basis for what everyone else wants to be.

Facilis Terrablock outperforms the AVID ISIS 7000 system (and 5000), and is a teriffic product for AVID systems.

There is NO answer unless you say “I have X amount of money to spend for a shared storage enviornment”. There is a young lady on the Arrays and RAIDs’ forum who wants to build shared storage system for $2000 – $3000. It’s not going to happen. You need to say “I HAVE THIS MUCH MONEY FOR THIS PROJECT” and then you can determine what you can, and cannot afford to buy. Stop thinking about the features that you need, and think about what you can afford to buy. Your ultimate decision will be completely based on this, because if cost was no object, you would buy an AVID ISIS system and be done with it.

An entry level AVID ISIS 5000 for 16 TB is $33,000.

Bob Zelin

[David Parker]

Ahh, well I am sure giving you a number first is what you prefer as an integrator, but for me actually what I am looking at is features first, price second.

The problem is, like everyone else in post, I are not sure what happens after FCP7, but I am not ready to commit to Avid. However I do need a SAN now, (on FCP7) and so I am looking for the solution that works now, and will work with either Premier or Avid later. The reason I am looking at features first, is, I don’t need full blown project sharing, I just need all stations accessing the same media. I am looking for the simplest way to do that (under the KISS principle, as well as for value). Yes I could get an ISIS 5000, and I am perfectly willing to do that, but I suspect it is overkill for what I want, and therefore fails on the value metric.

I am just looking for a little help figuring out how Avid works on the SAN, and particularly, what short of full blown project sharing exists. It seems there is a step in there that is volume level sharing, I just need a bit more info on the workflow there . . .

[Dustin Parsons]

[David Parker] “The problem is, like everyone else in post, I are not sure what happens after FCP7, but I am not ready to commit to Avid. However I do need a SAN now, (on FCP7) and so I am looking for the solution that works now, and will work with either Premier or Avid later. The reason I am looking at features first, is, I don’t need full blown project sharing, I just need all stations accessing the same media. I am looking for the simplest way to do that (under the KISS principle, as well as for value). Yes I could get an ISIS 5000, and I am perfectly willing to do that, but I suspect it is overkill for what I want, and therefore fails on the value metric.”

I’m in the exact same position – FCP7 user that doesn’t need project sharing, just access to media files – but I’m looking into transition to Avid so I could potentially need a system that Avid can work with too.

[James McKenna] “The problem with AMA linking is that Avid strongly suggests transcoding. The AMA workflow is fine for basic assembly, but it’s likely you won’t be happy long-term with the performance of an AMA timeline, regardless of the storage system.”

What if I only worked with DVCPRO HD and Apple ProRes files after they had been transcoded/ingested from P2 cards? Or are you saying AMA just doesn’t work well at all despite the codec? I feel like if AMA worked well with DVCPRO HD files then I’d be fine setting up any kind of SAN, but I’m probably wrong about this… right?