[Litzwire]

I will certainly look into that. I’ll report if I have any success….at least for the sake of future troubleshooters. Thanks a bunch!

[Litzwire]

Thanks a bunch for the help! I have thought that one of the reasons could be heat on the RAID card, as it’s set right next to an 8800 GTS video card, and I mean RIGHT next. The array is, of course, set up RAID 5, but I do like your suggestion #5, and I will try that. The reason I haven’t done much in the way of #3 and #4 is simply because of my own time. I’ve got lots of editing to do lately, so I was looking for a fairly fast solution, or at least a logical reason for the same 4 drives going offline, before I scrap the whole thing and get new storage. Once I do that, I really have to go back to square one on my whole system setup, as dual-eSATA is now antiquated, and so are my only-2-year-old computer components. Shew….remember when BetaSP was a standard for like 15 years? And now there are no standards past 1 year.

Thanks!
Hop

[Litzwire]

Hmmm. I suppose it wasn’t suggested at the time by my reseller that there was something more expensive and better for my application than two $5000 8-bay enclosures running on the suggested interface option of the time, and a $300+ raid controller card running in a $12,000 computer system, connected to a $4000 video interface connected to $60,000 worth of VTR and display equipment, playing out material acquired with my $120,000 worth of camera gear. I don’t think an unwillingness to spend money is my problem, my friend….I’d like to get what I have working, not matter how cheap one finds its separate components to be, so I can get some of that info back, and money is certainly not the issue. However, it doesn’t make sense to spend money on something that may not be the problem until it is believed to be a problem, which is the only reason I brought up expense. So, leaving all that pointless conjecture behind to follow up what I find to be a purposeless post, the logical options to me are to buy the same controller card and/or four new SATA drives and rebuild for each one. If I cannot personally solve the issue, believe me, I will happily pay for someone to come in here and solve it themselves. If it doesn’t get solved, it’s not the end of the world – much of the data is backed up to yet another $4000 worth of back-up storage. After I get my problem solved, I will eagerly look into the better and more expensive options for fast storage….I await your constructive suggestions on that.

[Litzwire]

The first thing I did was fabricate the neutrodyne coil and interestingly enough it helped me go back in time one month and I was able to freely use the array with no problem. But the Faraday shield burnt up after a few hours, forcing me to whirl back to the present day, where the array still didn’t work. I have actually considered that there is a problem with a single drive and the RAID controller is confused into thinking it’s all 4 in that division. I believe I will just have to buy the new controller to troubleshoot that possibility, because after that the expense gets greater and greater, and if it isn’t the controller, I will have to spend money anyway. I just wondered if there is a way the controller is seeing those 4 drives a certain way no matter how the cables are arranged. That would satisfy my most recent instinct, which is to buy a new, not exactly cheap RAID card.

Thanks for weighing in!
Hop

[Litzwire]

Yes – apparently for me it was a video card thing. The tools would disappear if placed on the left screen. I moved them to the right and all was well. This also was the case when opening the Metadata dialog and a couple of other things. If you ever run across a dialog that doesn’t appear to have any info, move it to your other screen; sometimes you’ll have to resize the dialog too to make the info show up.

[Litzwire]

Perhaps it’s a Matrox thing. I use an Axio LE. I don’t remember it happening at all in CS3, but it conforms clips pretty much anytime I open up existing projects. I do have two different external eSata RAID arrays. Maybe it conforms the clips that are not on the same drive as the project file, but I’m not sure about that. I’d really like to sit down with a Premiere programmer and have them really explain their cache file situation and conforming, as it never seems to jibe with the settings I make in the preferences. Where the pek files go, for instance, and why they recreate every time (seems like once per project would do), doesn’t match the settings I create. This isn’t a show-stopper for me, but if anyone has the mind to, make a video explaining how, when, and why pek file and cache files do what they do and what settings guarantee the most efficient management of them.

[Litzwire]

I do that occasionally, but that’s not really the issue. In CS3, either the program itself or the way I had it set up avoided the conforming process entirely. I just don’t like this conforming thing, personally. In CS3, a project just opened and you went to work – now EVERY project, and not just on my system, spends a good deal of time conforming before you can get to work. Luckily I don’t have clients over my shoulder when I open up a project, but if I did, that would stink. They need to come up with a different way.

[Litzwire]

I cannot do that in mine – no matter how I drag the sides of the window, a very very small portion of the menu stays in the upper right corner. I can click on “Mobile SWF” on that’s it. Sucks.

[Litzwire]

Awesome – I thank Chris for the quick response, and Kevin for the comprehensive response! I had it a bit wrong before your notes, Kevin. I’m happenin’ now! Appreciate it, guys!

Hop

[Litzwire]

Thanks a bunch, Chris. Should the comp be set for 29.97 (the desired output) or 23.976? Let me make sure I’m getting your settings straight:
Interpret Footage: Conform to 23.976
Comp Setting: 1920/1080 29.97
Render Settings: Field Render-Lower Field 3:2 Pulldown-WWSSW

Thanks