Hi, I'm new here and haven't had a chance to peruse the entire board but need a little advice if anybody has any.
Looking at adding a second HDD to my system for obvious reasons and would like to know if anyone has any specific imformation on doing so in respect to video editing. Anything in particular I should consider as far as type or make of disc that would help or any other considerations in respect to hardware upgrades to improve operatins in VideoStudio. Thanks so much.
my equipment:
DELL XPS
Pentium 4 - 3GHz
1GB DDR SDRAM (400 MHz)
120 GB Serial ATA HDD, 7200 RPM
128MB DDR ATI RADEONTM 9800 Graphics Card
Sound Blaster Audigy 2TM sound card with DVD Audio
XP Pro Operating System
Little background, I've run VideoStudio to complete 3 or 4 video projects before and want to get geared up to do a whole lot more. Thinking it would be wise to get the hardware set up for maximum performance first.
Add 2nd HDD (harware considerations)
Moderator: Ken Berry
-
jwarner
It depends on what you plan to use the drive for?
IMO, if capturing video to it, having a second internal SATA drive would be a good thing so that system/program accesses to your main drive do not interrupt the capture process causing dropped frames. Obviously, the bigger and faster the drive, the better.
This is less of a concern if you capture in AVI (no compression so less demanding) or if your capture device has a hardware MPEG-2 encoder.
For editing and rendering purposes, I would expect a second drive to have very little impact on speed.
For archiving purposes, I prefer an external USB or firewire drive. While not as fast, the fact that you can have it only connected and spinning while in use, means it is far less susceptable to drive failures or viruses.
IMO, if capturing video to it, having a second internal SATA drive would be a good thing so that system/program accesses to your main drive do not interrupt the capture process causing dropped frames. Obviously, the bigger and faster the drive, the better.
This is less of a concern if you capture in AVI (no compression so less demanding) or if your capture device has a hardware MPEG-2 encoder.
For editing and rendering purposes, I would expect a second drive to have very little impact on speed.
For archiving purposes, I prefer an external USB or firewire drive. While not as fast, the fact that you can have it only connected and spinning while in use, means it is far less susceptable to drive failures or viruses.
-
ck
good points.
I plan to use it, or at least a large partition of it, mainly for storage of the video that I capture as well as designating for VideoStudio to use when saving project files and clips, whatever.
I had thought about external but didn't like the idea of it being slower or at least I thought it probably would be.
I plan to use it, or at least a large partition of it, mainly for storage of the video that I capture as well as designating for VideoStudio to use when saving project files and clips, whatever.
I had thought about external but didn't like the idea of it being slower or at least I thought it probably would be.
-
jwarner
I have about 30-40 hours of video captured in MPEG-2 using an ADS DVDXpress (USB hardware MPEG-2 encoder). Since capturing is in real time, it represents 30-40 hours of work.
At 4,500 kbps Variable, these files take about 70gb (about 2 gb per hour). They were captured to my main drive where I work on them and archived to my USB drive.
I don't trust DVD's for archiving purposes (too flakey for me) and hard drives that spin 7 X 24 have a tendancy to die or get a virus eventually (especially 7200 RPM drives). So, an external USB drive that is only powered on when I'm using it is the perfect archive device for me. I also use it for system backups.
For me, the secure archiving was 1st priority (I don't ever want to have to capture all those aging 8mm tapes again).
A second internal drive for me is a nice-to-have but, as I said before, would likely only make a big difference in the capture phase and then only if using a software MPEG-2 encoder?
I bought the Ultra USB housing for about $50 and put my own drive in it so it wasn't a lot more expensive than an internal drive.
At 4,500 kbps Variable, these files take about 70gb (about 2 gb per hour). They were captured to my main drive where I work on them and archived to my USB drive.
I don't trust DVD's for archiving purposes (too flakey for me) and hard drives that spin 7 X 24 have a tendancy to die or get a virus eventually (especially 7200 RPM drives). So, an external USB drive that is only powered on when I'm using it is the perfect archive device for me. I also use it for system backups.
For me, the secure archiving was 1st priority (I don't ever want to have to capture all those aging 8mm tapes again).
A second internal drive for me is a nice-to-have but, as I said before, would likely only make a big difference in the capture phase and then only if using a software MPEG-2 encoder?
I bought the Ultra USB housing for about $50 and put my own drive in it so it wasn't a lot more expensive than an internal drive.
-
ck
That's certainly something I need to look into and think about. My next project will involve capturing from DVD-VIDEO disc (-R) so I'm not sure about using an MPEG 2 encoder. I hoped to be able to capture from within VideoStudio directly to the program. As mentioned earlier, I've some but little experience with the program and all that I've imported or captured has been DV from camera tapes.
-
THoff
Regarding the reliability of DVDs vs. hard drives, I tend to trust devices with no moving parts alot more than something with dozens of integrated circuits, capacitors, resistors, voltage regulators, an electric motor to spin the drive, an actuator to position the read/write head, etc.
If my DVD drive fails, I can put in a new one and read the DVD(s) using a new drive. If one of my harddrives fails, I have to rely on backups (which I do make) or send the drive to a data recovery service and hope that the platters weren't destroyed by a head crash.
I'm not saying NOT to trust hard drives, but at about $0.30 each for quality bulk media, making a backup of the data onto DVD disks and storing them properly is cheap insurance.
If my DVD drive fails, I can put in a new one and read the DVD(s) using a new drive. If one of my harddrives fails, I have to rely on backups (which I do make) or send the drive to a data recovery service and hope that the platters weren't destroyed by a head crash.
I'm not saying NOT to trust hard drives, but at about $0.30 each for quality bulk media, making a backup of the data onto DVD disks and storing them properly is cheap insurance.
-
jwarner
Interesting perspective on DVD's...
I have no concern's about the reliability of the DVD player but rather about the media itself. Factory recorded (stamped) DVD's seem fairly dependable but a little scratch or smudge is all it takes to turn them into coasters. Burned DVD's seem even more sensitive and a read error in just the wrong spot and... (that's why they have .bup files).
And we won't know for 10 years or so what their shelf life is like?
As far as the burning process goes, that seems pretty hit-and-miss as well. I use NERO and always do a verify pass only to find often that the write that appeared to complete normally does not pass the verify!
I agree with your point about devices with moving parts. That's why my USB hard drive only moves when I'm actually using it. Given that HD's that are spinning 7 X 24 seem to last many years, my drive that only spins a few minutes per day should easily outlast me!
I have no concern's about the reliability of the DVD player but rather about the media itself. Factory recorded (stamped) DVD's seem fairly dependable but a little scratch or smudge is all it takes to turn them into coasters. Burned DVD's seem even more sensitive and a read error in just the wrong spot and... (that's why they have .bup files).
And we won't know for 10 years or so what their shelf life is like?
As far as the burning process goes, that seems pretty hit-and-miss as well. I use NERO and always do a verify pass only to find often that the write that appeared to complete normally does not pass the verify!
I agree with your point about devices with moving parts. That's why my USB hard drive only moves when I'm actually using it. Given that HD's that are spinning 7 X 24 seem to last many years, my drive that only spins a few minutes per day should easily outlast me!
-
THoff
I've even experienced "DVD rot" with a commercial, pressed DVD. My original copy of "Blackhawk Down" started to get a discolored fringe near both the inside and outside edge of the disk within a year. I suspect that the reflective aluminum layer started to oxidize due to a manufacturing defect. Initially the disk would hesitate during playback, and then entire chapters would become unplayable. Eventually, the disk couldn't even be recognized anymore.
None of the other pressed disks I own or the replacement of "Blackhawk Down" that I bought have had problems. I have also not yet run into a problem with any disks that I've burned, either with CDs or DVDs. Coasters during burning, yes, occassionally, but no disks that mysteriously went bad without mistreating the disk.
I know David Reece has also had his share of problems with commercial disks. Unfortunately, the law prevents him from backing up his investment...
None of the other pressed disks I own or the replacement of "Blackhawk Down" that I bought have had problems. I have also not yet run into a problem with any disks that I've burned, either with CDs or DVDs. Coasters during burning, yes, occassionally, but no disks that mysteriously went bad without mistreating the disk.
I know David Reece has also had his share of problems with commercial disks. Unfortunately, the law prevents him from backing up his investment...
-
rwindeyer
This isn't an especially technical comment (I don't know how to measure these things), just personal impression. I have a laptop; I assume the internal HDD runs at 4500 (or maybe 5400) RPM. I recently acquired an external USB-linked 7200 RPM HDD which I now use for ALL video work.ck wrote: I had thought about external but didn't like the idea of it being slower or at least I thought it probably would be.
The internal one coped fine; the activity light blinked furiously during capture. The new one, if anything, is better. If the light is anything to go by, it's just cruising during a long burst of avi capture. I run digital video in via firewire and out to the HDD via USB2. Not a dropped frame or hiccup.
-
maddrummer3301
- Posts: 2507
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:24 pm
- Location: US
>As far as the burning process goes, that seems pretty hit-and-miss as
>well. I use NERO and always do a verify pass only to find often that the
>write that appeared to complete normally does not pass the verify!
This is SO TRUE. If you don't verify the data you don't know if the burn
was successful. This makes creating a Dvd a longer process but when
finished the dvd works. Most people don't realize these things.
I just finished repairing an external firewire sony burner. The burning would burn
the dvd's and report completed as normal. The dvd's were hit or miss to
play in a dvd player. Sometimes the dvd would have to play 1/2 hour
before the dvd player would hang.
Checked off verify when burning and all the errors started showing up. Tried different brand name media, lower burning speeds.
Rebooted the clients machine and noticed the firewire card
shared the same IRQ as the video card. Usually windows remaps the irq's
to separate irq's but in this case windows XP left the irq's the same.
Put the firewire card into a different pci slot and checked to make sure
the card wasn't sharing an irq anymore and the burner now works fine.
The client burnt many dvd's thinking they are good. Who actually sits and
watches the whole 2 hour video to make sure it works. Not everyone.
Try an experiment.
Open a command prompt window.
Type VERIFY <enter>
Windows will respond with "Verify is OFF".
To turn verify on type VERIFY ON <enter>
Then type VERIFY <enter>
Windows will repond with "Verify is ON"
Turn it back off again before closing the window.
Windows doesn't always check the data it copies unless you
tell it to. It uses a different method to fast verify the data.
MD
>well. I use NERO and always do a verify pass only to find often that the
>write that appeared to complete normally does not pass the verify!
This is SO TRUE. If you don't verify the data you don't know if the burn
was successful. This makes creating a Dvd a longer process but when
finished the dvd works. Most people don't realize these things.
I just finished repairing an external firewire sony burner. The burning would burn
the dvd's and report completed as normal. The dvd's were hit or miss to
play in a dvd player. Sometimes the dvd would have to play 1/2 hour
before the dvd player would hang.
Checked off verify when burning and all the errors started showing up. Tried different brand name media, lower burning speeds.
Rebooted the clients machine and noticed the firewire card
shared the same IRQ as the video card. Usually windows remaps the irq's
to separate irq's but in this case windows XP left the irq's the same.
Put the firewire card into a different pci slot and checked to make sure
the card wasn't sharing an irq anymore and the burner now works fine.
The client burnt many dvd's thinking they are good. Who actually sits and
watches the whole 2 hour video to make sure it works. Not everyone.
Try an experiment.
Open a command prompt window.
Type VERIFY <enter>
Windows will respond with "Verify is OFF".
To turn verify on type VERIFY ON <enter>
Then type VERIFY <enter>
Windows will repond with "Verify is ON"
Turn it back off again before closing the window.
Windows doesn't always check the data it copies unless you
tell it to. It uses a different method to fast verify the data.
MD
-
THoff
The VERIFY command does nothing under Windows, it is there only for backwards compatibility with MS-DOS batch files. Nor would it be able to detect the types of bit errors that cause problems with burned CDs and DVDs, the VERIFY command was used to read back files written using the COPY command only. Furthermore, VERIFY only ensured that the files could be read back after writing them, but did not compare them against the source -- they could have been different, and no error would have been displayed.
-
jwarner
The VERIFY I was referring to is a Nero option "Verify Data on Disc After Burning".
I does a read-back check of what you burned and compares it to the original files.
Since it reads at as fast a speed as it can, the verify is generally faster than the burn. It usually starts at 2-4 times and seems to increase the read speed as it goes - probably until it starts to get read errors.
I does a read-back check of what you burned and compares it to the original files.
Since it reads at as fast a speed as it can, the verify is generally faster than the burn. It usually starts at 2-4 times and seems to increase the read speed as it goes - probably until it starts to get read errors.
-
THoff
-
maddrummer3301
- Posts: 2507
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:24 pm
- Location: US
THoff,
You are correct.
I didn't mean for those statements to be mis-leading.
My intents were not to take data written as totally reliable.
Windoze operating system ya know.
The command session in windows is still very active.
The verify command is a dos command and verifies data written from
the computers memory to disk(programs). So a disk to disk copy isn't verified. But the point is it doesn't verify.
Yes, these are the old dos commands but still active only in a command session.
Xcopy doesn't verify the writes unless you tell it to.
That would be the /V switch when using the command xcopy.
Only OLD people like me still use the command prompt I guess.
You are correct.
I didn't mean for those statements to be mis-leading.
My intents were not to take data written as totally reliable.
Windoze operating system ya know.
The command session in windows is still very active.
The verify command is a dos command and verifies data written from
the computers memory to disk(programs). So a disk to disk copy isn't verified. But the point is it doesn't verify.
Yes, these are the old dos commands but still active only in a command session.
Xcopy doesn't verify the writes unless you tell it to.
That would be the /V switch when using the command xcopy.
Only OLD people like me still use the command prompt I guess.