[Dave Gage]

[Jeremy Garchow] “It is nearly 60 years of footage from various sources from Film to VHS, HD, to SD and below, that is now all ProRes…

…For a 3 minute piece. I am editor, here me roar, (while I cry).”

Jeremy,

I guessing you’re a bit busy now, but would you mind at some point sharing some of your technical details?

* Are you setting it all up in a 720p timeline?
* Using any special filters or plugins on the old footage?
* Using any 3rd party software to up-res the old footage?
* How many Events/Projects?

Thanks,
Dave

[Dave Gage]

[Clayton Brown] “I notice now that all his posts are gone”

I’ve been following this thread and I see all his posts just fine. Did you try a different web browser?

Dave

[Dave Gage]

[Craig Alan] “Gonna do a search.”

Cool, let us know what you find out. By the way for the record, I’m still on 10.6.8 and FCPX 10.0.4. I really doubt the file structure has changed since it’s debut, but I have no idea. You might consider contacting the DW Tech Support at Alsoft. The senior engineers there are awfully helpful and knowledgeable.

Thanks,
Dave

[Dave Gage]

Brett,

This may have nothing to do with your issue, but have you tried running DiskWarrior on the Sparse Bundle? I don’t use them, but I seem to remember hearing that DiskWarrior should work find on Sparse Bundles as well as standard drives.

Early on with FCPX, I major issues with external drives used solely for use as FCPX drives getting corrupted to the point where I had to wipe them clean and start over. I then began to use DW regularly and have not had a problem since. As I said about a year and a half ago, it “appeared” that FCPX was hosing my external RAIDs, which might have translated into the drive directory structures becoming a mess. All is fine now.

Dave

[Dave Gage]

[Craig Alan] ” However, maybe as the drive gets full or the projects get larger that changes?”

Craig,

When I was deciding how to go forward with an editing drive and backing up, I did numerous speed tests and found that regardless of whether the drive was internal or connected by FW800 or eSATA, a 3/4 filled drive benchmarked slower than a near empty one. (I used QuickBench 4.0, Large file test (2-10 MB), 5 cycle run, with the “Allow Cache Effects” box checked and 5ms set for the Read and Write Delays).
—

Here’s some of my scores from a prior post:

Here’s some new benchmarks that don’t have anything to do with the Hybrid drive, but were brought up earlier in this thread.

1TB 2-Drive RAID 1 becomes a 2TB 2-Drive RAID 0:

eSATA OWC Elite-AL Pro 2-Drive RAID 1 3/4 full (Quick Bench “Large file Test” from SpeedTools Utilities 12-24-12)
[With the “Allow Cache Effects” checked (5ms)- eSATA: Write- 97 MB/s, Read- 99 MB/s.].

eSATA OWC Elite-AL Pro 2-Drive RAID 1 EMPTY (Quick Bench “Large file Test” from SpeedTools Utilities 12-27-12):
[With the “Allow Cache Effects” checked (5ms)- eSATA: Write- 96 MB/s, Read- 155 MB/s.]
—

eSATA OWC Elite-AL Pro 2-Drive RAID 0 EMPTY (Quick Bench “Large file Test” from SpeedTools Utilities 12-27-12):
[With the “Allow Cache Effects” checked (5ms)- eSATA: Write- 96 MB/s, Read- 155 MB/s.]

eSATA OWC Elite-AL Pro 2-Drive RAID 0 1/4 FULL (Quick Bench “Large file Test” from SpeedTools Utilities 12-27-12):
[With the “Allow Cache Effects” checked (5ms)- eSATA: Write- 97 MB/s, Read- 156 MB/s]
—

Not sure if I learned anything here except that “maybe” full drives don’t Read as fast as empty ones, RAID 1 and RAID 0 do benchmark about the same (of course one has redundancy and the other gives you twice the space), and/or the Speed Utilities QuickBench 4.0 comes up with different numbers on different days.

Dave

[Dave Gage]

[John Davidson] “Just the Midi FX alone are tripping me out.”

Yep, very cool. The “Arpeggiator” seems well thought out and useful for modern programming. I’m also really impressed with the “Drummer”. Boy, digital drums have really come a long way since the first 80’s drum machines.

According to Charlie’s experience, I guess the XML to/from FCPX needs some work, but it still seems like a really good .0 release.

Dave

[Dave Gage]

John,

Based on your post, I went on over to Youtube and searched on Logic X and iPad and found this-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbGLphvh0L4

It truly is a new world. I’ll stick with Logic 9 for a while longer, but this video really makes me want the new Logic X and finally pick up an iPad.

I’m also really impressed with the new Flex Pitch. If it’s anywhere near what Melodyne can do (although if I understand correctly, Logic will only work with a singe voice mono track unlike Melodyne), what a great deal for $200.

Thanks,
Dave

[Dave Gage]

[Jack Niedenthal] “I up-converted our entire 80 minute feature length production (shot in 720/24p) to 1920×1080 by doing the following:

duplicate your project but define the resolution as 1920×1080 (as opposed to having it set by the first clip of the project) and do not duplicate by copying over rendered files. This will cause your project to be re-rendered at 1920×1080 in FCPX. I then exported the file using Apple ProRes 422 HQ.

I then took this file and had it transferred to HDCAM. The film showed at the Hawaii International FIlm Festival and at the Los Angeles Asian Pacific Film Festival in theaters, and while there was a bit of resolution loss, it looked fine to me (of course, it was mu child, why wouldn’t it). I continue to search for better methods. You can download Davinci Resolve Lite for free, that can also do this, but I noticed no difference and indeed thought FCPX did a slightly better job.”

Thanks Jack. I had recently asked the question as to whether or not Resolve did a better job than FCPX for up-converting and you seem to have the answer-
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/21864#22016

Good to know.

Dave

[Dave Gage]

[Dave Gage] ”
Along those lines… if you took the 720p Pro Res export from FCPX and then brought it back into FCPX and put it in a 1080p project and then exported it, would it be much worse than doing basically the same thing in Resolve? Is Resolve that much better than FCPX for up-res?”

Well, Jack just answered my question here:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/22011#22015

“I up-converted our entire 80 minute feature length production (shot in 720/24p) to 1920×1080 by doing the following:

duplicate your project but define the resolution as 1920×1080 (as opposed to having it set by the first clip of the project) and do not duplicate by copying over rendered files. This will cause your project to be re-rendered at 1920×1080 in FCPX. I then exported the file using Apple ProRes 422 HQ.

I then took this file and had it transferred to HDCAM. The film showed at the Hawaii International FIlm Festival and at the Los Angeles Asian Pacific Film Festival in theaters, and while there was a bit of resolution loss, it looked fine to me (of course, it was mu child, why wouldn’t it). I continue to search for better methods. You can download Davinci Resolve Lite for free, that can also do this, but I noticed no difference and indeed thought FCPX did a slightly better job.”

Has anyone else done this test before and had similar or dis-similar conclusions?

Thanks,
Dave

[Dave Gage]

[Julian Bowman] “Auto cross fade, on/off.”

And then there’s this…
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/344/18364

Dave