David -
Avid will almost always work best with "native" Avid files. H.264 files are
very compressed so decoding them takes a lot of overhead that is not needed
with DNX files and accessing them via AMA adds additional complexity.
Using slow drives gives your system that much less overhead. Imagine
talking on the phone with someone who is not a native speaker in a loud
coffee shop. All of those things can slow down the comprehension of even a
simple topic. AMA is great, but it has it limits.
Dave Spraker
<http://www.advancedbroadcastsolutions.com/> advancedbroadcastsolutions.com
<http://www.spraker.tv/> spraker.tv
Skype - davespraker
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
David
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 12:53 PM
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: H.264 QT's stutter under AMA - ??
OK - update, it seems Job may well be right (not that I doubted him)
apparently the H.264 is troublesome for AMA. As to why, who knows.
I could certainly understand RED files be a problem, but H264 ?? Anyway, I'm
a tad miffed at Avid because I feel they were somewhat disingenuous when
extolling the virtues of AMA (not arguing - just venting) and how it could
be used.
Wilson, I hear exactly what you're saying with regards to Seagate drives,
they don't have a great rep. However, FWIW, this past summer we used the
exact same drive with Dnx145 media - via USB2 - and were reltively trouble
free. But I do agree, a RAID array (if we had the $$) would be a more
efficient, and safer, way to go.
Thanks again to everyone for all for the comments,
DB
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com> , Wilson
Chao <wilsonchao@...> wrote:
>
> I bought a couple of those Seagate GoFlex 3TB drives 6 months ago for
> archival use, simply because they were cheap. As I then cautioned my
> technically-challenged client:
>
> "The drives are perfectly adequate for archiving and screening of our
> camera original video files and audio files. However, they are not
> suitable for full-scale editing, which requires higher throughput to
> allow rapid realtime access to multiple clips in quick succession. For
> such editing (especially if we choose to edit in HD, rather than with
> SD downconverts) I would recommend a higher-performance RAID array."
>
> BTW, they are 7200 rpm, but I find their real-world performance to be
> unremarkable. And frankly, I don't have high expectations for the
> long-term reliability of Seagate's low-end large-capacity drives.
> YMMV.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 3:01 PM, David <k27usa@...> wrote:
> > Thanks folks for all the feedback - I was NOT aware that H.264 files
were that problematic - I thought they'd be less work than say an Animation
QT - I guess I should've read the 'Read Me' :-)
> > Also - we're checking now to see if these Seagate Drives are 7200rpm -
thought they were but am unable to confirm if the drive is 5400 or 7200.
> > - taht would definitely make a difference - will update as soon as I
find out.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment