[Jeff Pulera]

Your client is off base here, not going to get an EXACT bit rate all the time, it fluctuates a little. They are also asking for some weird frame sizes…

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

50i is 25fps, the 50 = fields

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

There are 2 filters you can use that each take a VERY long time to render…and you are using BOTH of them, and on an older computer. Nice specs when it was new, not so much 6 years later. Plus also doing Keying and Color Correction as well.

Using either DeNoiser or UnSharpMask can take 18-24+ hours EACH per hour of video on an older machine, in my experience. Sometimes when effects are combined, it actually takes much longer to render them all at once than it would to do them in separate passes.

What I often do with DeNoiser it run that FIRST (overnight export) to create a new intermediate file (ProRes for instance). Then use that new, clean, denoised file to edit with and add more effects to. One reason is that with DeNoiser added, one cannot even scrub or play for any kind of decent preview as it bogs down so bad. So I do that before even beginning to edit.

I can’t speak for AE, but here’s what I have done in the past with Premiere projects. I might completely edit a long-form video like a wedding ceremony, then decide I really should’ve used DeNoiser (but maybe didn’t want to delay starting the edit, so had skipped it).

I can run DeNoiser on the raw footage clip, exporting as “filename_DN.mov” and then in Premiere use REPLACE and all my prior edits remain intact, but original media is replaced with the CLEAN footage.

Another way aside from using “replace” is to rename the original clip, and give new DeNoised file the name of original clip, then when you re-open Premiere it doesn’t know the difference and just references the new clip thinking it’s the old clip. Of course, clip duration must match exactly, as it will if you process and export original clip without altering.

So that’s why I might try, if estimated render time is like 3 days or something. DeNoise first, then start adding other effects. UnSharp is actually more render-intensive than DeNoiser, it’s bad!

Thanks

Jeff

[Jeff Pulera]

Are you using MultiCam in Premiere, which then would have to “play” all the clips at once to preview them?

If you are really only doing 1-2 layers of video at a time with graphics and sound, that is nothing. The 25mbps of the AVCHD is the same as DV video which has been around over 20 years, very light. When you said you were converting to QuickTime, I thought maybe ProRes or DNxHD or something which could possibly balloon the files up 5-10x larger than originals.

Honestly, a fast single SATA drive with USB 3.0 ought to show no lag at all in that scenario, and a two-drive RAID 0 would be plenty fast. So I don’t know why you’d see lagging unless there is some other factor at play.

Think about it this way – a video clip at 25mbps converts to about 3MB/s and a single fast drive might be 180-240MB/s so you can see that drive speed should not be the issue here.

Effects play big role of course – if you have a video denoiser such as Neat or RedGiant applied, that will bog down on any system. Lumetri Color can be kind of heavy as well. Warp Stabilizer is very bad. Any effects used?

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

That’s helpful information. So when you say 10 layers, they’re not all showing at once right? I’m assuming you have 10 sources, then “switch” between them as needed? If that’s the case, really only “playing” one stream of video at a time then and the demands are far less than playing all 10 at once.

So you converted the small AVCHD files to .mov files then? What is the bit rate on those – that could be the issue if even a 2-drive RAID 0 via Thunderbolt was choking. Maybe they are uncompressed files??

Please download Media Info app and see what your video clips are made of – if you can post the results in Tree View mode that is helpful. Download app here – https://mediaarea.net/en/MediaInfo

But you are right, you definitely don’t want the single hard drive for what you are doing, minimum of RAID or SSD suggested. Single drives are okay for photos, music, light video editing.

Thunderbolt alone does not make a drive fast – the hard drive itself is the limiting factor since a single HDD can only push 180-240MB/s usually depending on the drive used inside.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

You mention 10 layers of video, but not the format – for instance AVCHD files are going to use far less bandwidth than ProRes files. HD or 4K? And so on. What are you working with there?

What interface/cable did you use to connect the Sony RAID?

The Apple Thunderbolt adapter should work fine to adapt current Thunderbolt 3 drives to your Thunderbolt 2 computer. However, be wary of the advertising that claims drives as “Compatible with Thunderbolt 3” as the interface on such drives may actually be USB-C. Yes, USB-C drives will work with a Thunderbolt 3 port on computer, but since the drive is not Thunderbolt 3 then a Thunderbolt adapter will NOT work (with USB-C). Must truly be a TB3 interface on the drive or adapter is of no use. Lacking a TB3 port on computer, USB-C drives can be connected to a USB 3.0 port on computer.

Any kind of high-capacity SSD will cost much more per GB than a HDD RAID array, but the SSD can deliver the insane speeds especially as a RAID. G-Tech has their new G-Drive PRO SSD with Thunderbolt 3 and that could use the Thunderbolt adapter.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

You will want to use a high-quality intermediate codec with minimal compression to “master” your projects. Something like ProRes or DNxHD or Cineform fit the fill, with Intra-frame compression and 4:2:2 color. This will give you a very nice master file to archive the finished video, and then from that file, you can encode to other formats for delivery.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

Basically, a 16:9 video is a 16:9 video regardless of which device you view it on. Computers/tablets/phones should show the entire frame, unlike some TVs that may (or may not) lose a bit of screen edge under the bezel. So like Todd said, for non-broadcast, not that big an issue.

As a matter of aesthetics, you don’t want titles/logos right up tight to the edge, just doesn’t look good, but perhaps use the outer green frame as the guide for that and call it good! Safe area was a MUCH larger concern years ago with the old 4:3 SD NTSC videos, where edge cropping (overscan) varied wildly from one TV to the next, so you had to leave a lot of room around the edges to be safe, not so much these days.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

I think if you just hold down the CTRL key first (on PC, don’t know Mac) then you can drag the clip how you want. Make sure Snap is enabled (looks like magnet)

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

[Jeff Pulera]

The idea of 3x10TB drives may work, but is far from ideal. Not sure how you and director would keep files “synced” between two systems. And even for one editor, you will have media spread across multiple drives.

The most important issue I see is that the data is not protected – if any drive has a failure, you lose all data on that drive. Individual drives will have limited performance depending on what kind of footage you are working with. Also note that when drives get like 80% or more full, performance can take a real hit so you don’t want to fill those 10TB drives too full.

Although budget is always a concern, some type of desktop RAID would be a better solution. RAID 5 is a popular choice for video editing, typically using 4 or more drives in one housing. The capacity of 1 drive is lost towards redundancy, so for instance a 32TB (4x8TB) drive in RAID 5 mode would be like having a 24TB drive. If any single drive fails, replace the failed drive and all data rebuilds! The only catch is that is 2 drives fail at same time, all is lost, but odds are against that happening.

Besides redundancy, a RAID unit is also going to be much faster than any single drive, since multiple drives are ganged together to multiply the data transfer rates.

From the sound of it, 24TB is not going to be large enough for your project. The G-Tech G-Speed Shuttle Thunderbolt 3 with 48TB (4x12TB) would accommodate your needs. Of course, one can choose RAID 0 for maximum capacity and speed, but with NO protection – any single drive fails and you lose it all, so not recommending that path.

The LaCie 6Big Thunderbolt 3 48TB (6x8TB) is another option and would be like a 40TB drive in RAID 5.

These solutions are not inexpensive, but then consider what re-shoots or lost edit time are worth.

Thanks

Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers