[Mark Raudonis]

[Bob Root] “from what I’ve researched it seems like firewire is simpler and lossless.”

maybe, but less accurate and prone to “slipping frames” compared to the RS-422 control on your BM card. We’ve done this both ways and regardless, you should NOT assume that it’s going to be 100% frame accurate. If you’re going in FULL RESOLUTION, then you’ll have to adjust your multiclips to compensate. If you’re doing the classic “off-line to on-line workflow”, then you’ll have bigger problems. Always compare the off-line to the on-line shot by shot for frame accuracy and adjust accordingly. Therefore, when you uprez, use 10 frame handles to give you the room to adjust as necessary.

Frankly, unless your cameras are hardwired or using a “Lokit Box”, you’re going to experience timecode drift anyway. I’m not trying to be cynical, just realistic.

So… my advice is: use the BM card, NOT firewire. Speak with your production folks and ask them what their plan is for maintaining “sync timecode”. If they say “we’re going to “jam sync” at the begining of the shoot”, ask to be paid by the hour… with overtime! You’ll get rich off of their stupidity!

Good luck.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

[Sean ONeil] “it’s a dog compared to what else is out there. “
That’s a bit harsh!

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

so, what’s your question?

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

As Craig points out, you’re using the wrong tool for the job. The PDW is just a “blu ray” drive on steroids. It has very little smarts beyond that. On the other hand, the PDW-1500 is a full fledged deck that has a myriad of up and down convert options. We just finished a project using that deck and I can tell you it works like a charm. It was a SD project, but most of the interviews and host segments were shot in HD.
We did a “center punch” downconvert to 4 x 3 and it looked great. You even have the option to “pan and scan” the “center pull” depending on your needs.

Good luck.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Ron,

3-4 fps is MUCH faster than your typical timelapse requires. I agree that your average DSLR won’t be able to handle that pace. You’ll certainly fill up the memory card before 20 minutes. I typically shoot at one frame every 5-10 seconds.

If you really feel that you need that FPS, then perhaps you should stick with the HDX. I would strongly suggest doing a test before you commit. Your little Canon can easily establish whether your frame rate is sufficient to do what you’re trying to do.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Rate: Can’t answer that. You have to calculate backwards from how long of a shot you need. Example:
I need a 10 second shot. That equals 300 frames (@ 30fps). You need to compress 6 hours of “real time”. That comes out to 50 frames per hour, or about one frame per minute of “real time”.

Frankly, I try multiple “record” rates depending on the action and “real time” you need to compress. It’s not an exact science. The faster the change, the more frames. The slower the change (Building construction for example) the less frames required.

As for lense quality, I’d say sensor size trumps glass in this case. The little canon is great to do some experiments, but once you’ve nailed rate and framing, I’d suggest switching to a better quality DSLR.
The glass on those cameras, combined with the larger sensor is going to easily match or exceed your HDX-900. Keep in mind, the zooms on your HDX are so expensive because they have to Zoom! Still camera primes can be quite good and much cheaper ’cause they don’t have to meet the stringent design requirements for a motion picture lense.

Finally, using a DSLR frees up your HDX for other things. This is a win-win solution.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Ron,

I’ve done a fair amount of this over the years, and lately, I’ve been favoring “none of the above”. My recommendation would be to use a DSLR (Digital SLR) like the Canon or Nikon and shoot a series of stills that can be turned into a timelapse sequence. The advantages of using this method are many. First and foremost, the quality of the image is SPECTACULAR. Secondly, since you’re acquiring at a larger frame size you can “push in” to parts of the frame creating a zoom or pan… something that’s very tricky to do in a normal timelapse method. Finally, you can easily control the “playback speed” by varying the number of frames recorded.

Also, if you’re doing night time timelapse, the shutter control functions are a still camera a much more flexible than your typical video camera, allowing of very interesting slow shutter speed imagery in no light or low light situations.

To experiment with this process you don’t need an expensive camera. Your run of the mill “point and shoot” digital snap shot camera can easily yield results equal to or better than the HDX900.

Good luck.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

I’ve been busy! Churning out hours upon hours of reality TV shows on FCP…

For those that may not know, Bunim-Murray Productions (MTV’s “The Real World”, Fox’s “The Simple Life”, E! “Keeping up with the Kardashians”, Oxygen, “The Bad Girls”, and many, many more) has been ALL FCP, ALL THE TIME for over four years now.

We switched to FCP so long ago everyone thought we were nuts! We weren’t nuts, just ahead of the curve.

Good luck with your efforts to educate your boss!

mark Raudonis

[Mark Raudonis]

Here’s another vote for NOT trying to do this yourself.

There’s far too much specific, arcane knowledge required to do this. Unless you know ALOT about
basic IT infrastructure, setting up switches and DNS… you will crash and burn.

I’ve been running a fairly large X-SAN installation for over three years now, and when it’s time to upgrade or add new equipment, I’m not shy about calling in the experts. Unlike many other Apple products, X-SAN is definitely NOT plug and play.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

You’re using 5.1

Apple has made many, many improvements specifically in Multi-cam performance since then.

The best thing you can do is upgrade to the current level. Until then, you’re going to be struggling with issues that have already been addressed. Do yourself a favor… upgrade now.

mark