Alex Gerulaitis
Forum Replies Created
-
[Emanuel Ach] “I usually end up with 1-2 full harddrives of DV lectures to edit. I would like to put those 2 hardrives on a server and edit them with FCP using a local network. And at this point ideally would be that 2 or more editors would be able to work on the same files at the same time. Is it possible?”
Certainly not impossible – and I’d follow Bob Zelin’s advice in terms of watching for throughput bottlenecks.
Well configured GigE LANs can have an aggregate throughput of 50-60 MB/s – enough for several DV25 streams. Poorly configured – a small fraction of that. Try running a throughput test from your edit station to a server – time a transfer of a large file. If it transfers at over 20MB/s, there is a fighting chance you can do it.
Alex
DV411 -
[Eric Jurgenson] “There was finally a big button that gives everything a film look. … Later in the dream I drove off a cliff.”
Nice!
-
[Paul Jay] “Thunderbolt MacPro Clusters.. Yeah , that’s gonna happen:P”
Pretty sure it won’t work for more than two devices, i.e. you could potentially “network” two MacPros or MBPs over TB but not three unless someone comes up with a way to implement networking over TB.
I could be totally, completely wrong. 🙂
Alex
DV411 -
Promise, AJA, LaCie are already onto it – not sure how long before they actually ship something. It is a great piece of technology.
PCIe (and Express34/54) adapters for installation into existing laptops and desktops will arrive soon too.
Searching for “thunderbolt” in Apple store yields nothing but Promise rolled out a press release with their new Thunderbolt (shall we call it TB?) connectivity, to ship in Q2.
Alex
DV411 -
I am a complete noob with flash videos but since nobody responded yet, I thought I’d try:
Flash files AFAIK may not necessarily be videos but vector-based drawings, animations, etc., i.e. not videos; possibly Pr and AME are having trouble with that. Have you tried converting the file to something else (mpeg) via Flash Pro, or as a test, uploading the file to YouTube to see if it understands it?
Alex
DV411 -
-
[Jason Johnson] “I was told by a friend that Youtube doesn’t like a lot of intense water. My edit has a lot of that..Anything I can do?”
It’s probably due to nearly any codec not liking lots of details with fast motion – which is hard to compress efficiently, and YouTube, in the interest of saving bandwidth and space, may lean towards higher compression (and artifacts) rather than quality. Even YouTube 4K videos have artifacts at peak bitrates of about 55Mbit/s.
You could try to “clean” your video by reducing (filtering out) luma and chroma noise which may affect the end result.
You could also try raising the ceiling on your target bitrate to, say, 15Mbs and seeing if that helps.
By all means, do not upload the entire clip – make a 5-10 second sample containing the most affected footage that gets the most artifacts, and try different things with that, uploading it as “private”.
Also, do take a hard look at the videos that you say are squeaky clean and smooth – do they have as much detail and motion as yours? Try contacting the uploaders of those videos and ask them what their secrets are, i.e. encoding settings.
Another thing to try is to upload to other services such as Vimeo – which or may not allow higher bitrates in videos.
Alex
DV411 -
The artifacts you are seeing – are they in the encoded video before you upload it to YT, or only on YT once it’s uploaded?
Alex
DV411 -
[Hannah Radcliff] “Here is the clip: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1344358/Spectrum%20Short%20Clip2.mov“
Plays and scrubs very smoothly on my Windows CS5 system using an AVC-Intra 1080i50 preset.
Alex
DV411