[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks Jason.

Just trying to be sure I don’t run out of disk space.

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks for those suggestions, Michael and Nate.

I think I’ve actually cracked it, using something approaching your suggestions. Maybe synchronising each camera separately would have been better, but this worked.

I decided to concentrate on the Concert Part 1 clips from the 4 main cameras and synced them successfully to the main section of my Zoom separate audio. The Zoom audio covered most of the 90 minutes, and I was able to add in and sync the missing bit of audio later.

I then manually added Angles for CAM 1, Part 2 and so on and synced the Part 2s in extra Angles, which I then manually moved into the same CAM angle as the Part 1 cameras. So that got my main 4 cameras in sync, while minimising the number of Angles.

The extra HDV and Canon 5D proved more difficult. FCPX couldn’t work out the sync, so I had to add each clip manually in the approximate location and manually sync them in extra Angles. After syncing I moved all the clips into a single Angle for each camera. I had one FCPX crash at the end, but a restart seemed to leave all OK and in sync. Once the clips were in the approximate location FCPX was able to sync them without problems.

So it worked out OK in the end. Next time though I’ll have to try and use some kind of marker, like a slate, for separate sections of any long events.

Thanks again to all who offered helpful workflows.

Regards,

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks a lot Tom.

I’ll give that a try.

Regards.

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks Noah.

The reference audio is excellent on all cameras. Don’ know for sure about time of day.

That ‘one angle idea’ sounds like a good suggestion.

Thanks,

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks Oliver.

I have Pluraleyes, so maybe I’ll give the FCPX beta a try.

Regards.

[Robert Esmonde]

David,

Just checking further on my multiclip storage issue, it seems that the Mac Pro devotes an independent SATA 2 Bus to each of the internal drives.

Do you know if that is true?

And, if it is, wasn’t Jeff’s suggestion a valid one – splitting my Camera Angles between the two drives and almost doubling the throughput?

While on the topic, how does e.g. an external RAID 0 pair of drives manage to increase throughput if the data is being fed into a single eSATA connection? Or is this something to do with ‘Port Multiplication’. If I went down the external RAID route would I be able to use Apple Disk Utility’s built-in RAID utility for those external drives, or have to use a separate RAID card with ‘Port Multiplication’?

Thanks,

Robert.

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks David.

So it’s the RAID route then….

Regards.

[Robert Esmonde]

Hi David.

But my two drives are internal SATA drives inside my Mac Pro.

Isn’t that faster than FW?

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks David.

And it was beginning to look easy 🙂

If I divide my Capture Scratch footage between two drives so that one has e.g Cam 1, 2, and 3 and the other drive has Cam 4, and 5, will that not spread the load sufficiently for the 5 camera angles multiclip to play without issues? One drive can already cope with multiclip playback from three angles, so what am I missing by providing an extra source drive for the other two camera angles? Isn’t it similar to having RAID 0, except that I manually ensure that the load is spread for this project.

Regards.

[Robert Esmonde]

Thanks Jeff.

It never occurred to me to divide the footage between two Capture Scratch drives. It sounds like a great idea, and, since I’m not likely to be doing any more multiclip stuff in the near future, a better bet than being tied into the risks of RAID 0. I presume I can just move the files and ‘Add’ the new Capture Scratch’ drive in FCP7.

Good to hear I can just Copy/Paste the clips if I do go either route. I’m too new to FCP to have yet used the ‘Reconnect’ option so glad to hear it’s so straightforward.

I have a kind of deadline for the concert edit, but not for any longer-term documentary use, so I think I’ll try to keep going, and, if the need arises later, recapture at the higher resolution.

I really appreciate your clear explanation of my options.

Regards.