HD files through the internet…

[Zane Barker]

WOW thats a big order.

First off ANY video 45 min in length that is in a editing format (not in a highly compressed delivery format) is going to be a LARGE file for the internet. For example 1 hour of HDV video is about 13 GB. So depending on the internet connection the people downloading them have it could easily take ALL day.

Second, not all editing systems will play with the same types of video files. For example When capturing video in HDV in FCP it can only be played on a computer that has FCP on it.

One other thing to consider is having the people do offline edits for you. in doing this you should have them using the EXACT same version of editing system you are. you post low quality videos, they download them edit the video and then send you the project file. You then reconnect the project with the full quality clips and export the finished product.

If all the clips where small that would be one thing, but with HD clips that are 45 min long, uploading and downloading clips wold just take way to long.

There are no “technical solutions” to your “artistic problems”.
Don’t let technology get in the way of your creativity!

[David Bogie]

[Ken Niblock] “The powers that be are stressing me to find a solution!! HELP! “

They’re completely nuts.
You can use proprietary codec hardware on both ends but this will add tremendously to the cost. I think it is the only way this can be done. Try VideoBrick then start googling around from there, searching for whatever they call their toys, “internet HD appliances” or some such.

This is not viable. If your people are thinking “You know, like Netflix or AppleTV,” those systems are still what I’d call experimental and the movies only go to 740 (at 24) not 1080 and not at 60p and they are highly compressed. Cheaper to overnight clones of the drives or dubs of the camera tapes.

But, aside form calling your boss names, I want to wish you good luck and to ask that you come back and let us know how wrong we were and how you handled the task.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[Ken Niblock]

Yeah, this is a tough one! The 45 minutes videos would be very rare indeed… most of our stuff falls in the 15 minutes or less category.

We provide material from TV show for News stories all over the world. Show like Entertainment Tonight Access Hollywood and so on. We provide content and that is it.

With the onset of HD programing and the coming HD broadcasting we are trying to find a solution now that we can test. Sending is always a possibility, but it is incredibly expensive and not green… and we have to be green as possible!

So that covers a few of the restrictions. Currently we try to provide content in three formats that can be used by these media outlets.

Any thoughts beyond this?

[Dylan Reeve]

Ignoring the file size issue, and focusing on the quality and ease of use…

If I were doing this and posting three video formats for each file I would do:
1) ProRes422
2) DNxHD 115/145
3) H264

1 and 2 should work fairly easily for FCP and Avid editors, number three is a tricky one I guess. H264 is space-efficient, but not resource efficient, it is hard to decode, and not many editors support it natively. But it is fairly common and shouldn’t be that hard to deal with.

Although the best approach might be simply to ask your potential userbase what they’d prefer.

[Todd Reid]

“Sending is always a possibility, but it is incredibly expensive and not green… and we have to be green as possible!”

Having several computers/servers tied up downloading 45 minutes of HD footage over the internet, is far from green. I guess it might be slightly greener than shipping, but I wouldn’t think by much.
For shorter clips you could always set up a FTP site or use something like xprove.

Codecs will be tricky unless you get some specs from the people you are sending to.
To keep the quality means large file sizes. DNx may be a good choice for AVID. QT for FCP.

One thought is “carbon footprint offsetting” with something like a Terrapass. This would add more expense, but if green is your goal, it may help ease the minds of “the powers that be”.

Good luck, this is a huge challenge, and I am interested to hear people’s suggestions.
Please keep us informed as to your progress.

[Ken Niblock]

Is there a real issue with using H264 content in a edited program? Will Avid see this? I know FCP will, so that is not an issue… well maybe beyond quality.

Side note: Since we are sending this content all over the United States and other parts of the world to hundreds of editors, there is virtually no way meet the needs and wants of each editor – though they would like that – that is the reason for three file formats that are as close to universal as possible.

[Max Frank]

Google Aspera – it’s super-high-speed online access that may be of help to you.

It’s rather pricey, but it is a viable solution.

https://www.asperasoft.com/technology/index.html

W

[Ken Niblock]

This is very interesting! Thanks for sending this along.
Ken

[Dylan Reeve]

Avid will import anything that Quicktime can read generally. But there is transcode time involved.

[Dan Asselin]

I recently had to send a 10gb file over the internet to an end user.
Our transfer kept getting cut off so we split the file into 10 pieces then re-assembled them on the other end. There is lots of free software on the internet that does a great job on this. Still a lot of time but a lot less in the way of problems.

By the way my friend sends files much larger than this through a contact who has access to a T1 connection. I don’t really know if this has any real bearing on your situation because you are sending to so many individuals but I thought I might mention it. Good Luck