[Mark Raudonis]

This raid is one of the older units. They now come with at least 400gig per drive. There’s nothing wrong with the older one, just know that you’re NOT buying the most recent technology. Ask about home many hours it has been in operation. After about two years of constant use you can plan on starting to replace a drive here and there. Does this come with any spare parts? Apple sells a “spares kit” with spare drives, fans, controllers, etc. You’re going to need some of this eventually.

If the price is right, go for it… but be aware of what you’re buying. IF possible try to observe this raid WORKING before you pay for it.

Good luck.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Let me offer a contrarian view on subclipping.

I know some editors love subclipping. Personally, I don’t use it. Here’s why. On a documentary, you must constantly be looking for material to build a scene, support an interview, or make a transition.
Often times you “don’t know what you’re looking for” until you see it.
Therefore, the very act of subclipping will limit your “scope” and force you to “read” clips rather than view them. I find it much more helpful to simply scan from head to tail an entire tape while searching for a particular shot. An old school equivelent would be the time spent fast forwarding and rewinding a film reel while searching for a shot.

To answer the original question, I would use the comments column to give a very general description of what’s on the tape and then scan the files looking for your shots. Technically, if your system is up to specs large files should NOT be a problem.

There’s as many ways to work as there are editors. This is just my opinion.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Cameras are Sony DSR-PD-170. We’ve used both a Mac G5 (with an additional firewire card) and a Windows box. We’re currently hooked up to the windows box (I forget the exact specs ’cause I’m not in the office right now). We prefer the MAC, but we’re using the windows because some of our delivery specs require WMV, and it’s a more direct route using that box.

It’s a pretty slick set up consider the cost of this compared to a Sony Anycaster. No issues so far. I’m not sure which version we’re on, we’ve been up a running for at least six months now.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

kevin,

Consider this a learning opportunity. You’ve just learned why if you ever want to “recapture” media, “log and capture” is the way to go.

Sorry.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

If you’re NOT using a card and are instead using a firewire based output (AJA io for example),
you will NEVER get the NTSC monitor to match your computer screens. Pick one. You can get the audio to match the ntsc monitor or you can get it to match the computer, but you can’t do both. Reason? The firewire introduces a delay.

Workarounds: Use an internal card like the AJA Kona or Blackmagic. The faster speed of the internal bus allows the card to output video in sync with the computer.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Jeff is correct.

One of the biggest problems for Avid2FCP editors is this notion of the “project” being sacred. FCP is NOT project centric. It could care less about a “project”.

When we digitize media to our SAN, we don’t even keep the project that created that media. We organize the SAN in a logical manner where EVERYONE can search and find media. An extra benefit of this Quicktime based media is that you don’t even need FCP to watch it. In fact, you don’t even need a mac. Some of our story department “taps in” to our SAN via gig e on their Windows machines and they can view cuts, original footage etc.

If you’re familiar with Avid’s “Interplay” you’ll know that users of that system are now suddenly awakening to the notion that “project based media” can be very restricting.

A “shared storage” workflow can be set up quite easily with FCP, but you’ll have to “think different”.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Mr. Spot,

What you want to investigate is called “X-SAN”. There’s plenty of info about it on the apple site. In Avid terms, think of it this way: X-SAN = Unity. FCP Server = Interplay (sort of)

Know that FCP handles media organization and project info MUCH, MUCH differently than Avid does. So, when your true “purple” buddies tell you, “FCP can’t share a project”, tell them “It DON’T MATTER”. With FCP and X-SAN, the entire SAN is essentially the project. Media is accessible WITHOUT a project attached to it.

For more questions there also is an X-SAN forum on this site.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Andy,

I can confirm… yes.

Both JL Cooper and Tangent have had control surfaces working with FCP and (Then) Final Touch for over a year now.

Any DaVinci artist will tell you that much of the oerational speed they have comes from the ability to manipulate multiple parameters simultaneously. You can ONLY do that with a control surface.

Most people seem to prefer the quality of the Tangent panels, but the JL Coopers are cheaper. If you’re SERIOUS about COLOR, then I would plan on buying a control surface to go along with it.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

There is NO free lunch here.

You either accept the degraded quality and smaller frame size in favor of lower bandwidth and storage or you don’t. That’s why most people DON’T bother with off-line anymore.

If it’s too much of a “pain”, don’t use it. Pony up for enough storage so this isn’t an issue for you.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Off-line RT is your answer. We use it day in and day out for ALL of our editing. We do the classic “Off-line” to “On line” workflow. If you choose to go down this route, be sure to be extremely careful about reel numbers and naming conventions since you will have to find and redigitize everything when it comes time to do a final output.

Good luck.

Mark