This IS the Avid L2: [Avid-L2] Re: File Size limit on Fat32 4GB

Friday, March 22, 2013

[Avid-L2] Re: File Size limit on Fat32 4GB - one byte?

Yeah it's definitely not the drive as that works fine on esata or FW800 on a voyager dock. It must be something to do with the chipset in the HDX enclosure which I tried on several different macs.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, T Hopkins <hoplist@...> wrote:
>
> It should not be possible to create a partition larger than 2TB using MBR, and even if software appeared to allow it, the partition, would only show as 2TB when mounted. So this is not likely your problem. However, I have learned to never say never. There are always bizarre exceptions. Check the drive in Disk Utility. The info listed at the bottom of page shows the partition type.
>
> If you have a problem with eSATA versus FW800 connections other than a speed difference, then there is something wrong with the FW800 connection, though it could be cable or system and not the drive.
>
> Cheers,
> tod
>
>
> On Mar 20, 2013, at 4:20 AM, johnrobmoore wrote:
>
> > I've had issue with my HDX external enclosure and 4 TB drives. They work fine with esata connection but when I use the FW 800 connection the drives will not read properly. I've always assumed it was a flaw in the chip set. My voyager ext dock is fine with a 4TB with esata and FW 800 so it's not the actual drive. Is the GUID vs MBR size limitation something that would effect an enclosure's ability to read a 4TB drive on FW 800 while not be effected on esata? Just asking I doubt this is the answer for my HDX issue but I was disappointed by this after reading a lot of love for the HDX enclosures.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, namyrb <namyrb@> wrote:
> > >
> > > GUID (GPT) is for drives that are larger than 2TB.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:21 PM, johnrobmoore <bigfish@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the details. I love this list. I only wish all the great tid
> > > > bits of information didn't find an escape path from my brain and I didn't
> > > > need constant reminders like this. What's that phrase, "I've forgotten more
> > > > than you have learned." These days it feels more like, "I've forgotten more
> > > > than I've learned." Everyday a new codec or workflow. It's a challenge to
> > > > keep up with it all.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, T Hopkins <hoplist@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Caveat! I am speaking in the simplified language that applies to
> > > > formatting with Disk Utility. It is actually far more complex in the
> > > > details, so yes, GUID is not ideal for broad Windows compatibility, but...
> > > > >
> > > > > The GUID partition table is, broadly speaking, the partition table of
> > > > record for most modern OS's, including Windows, Mac, and other Unix based
> > > > (Linux). If you format a Windows 7+ drive internally, it will use GUID.
> > > > Macs used GUID before Windows did, but GUID has been supported in Windows
> > > > since Vista I think. A GUID partition can be formatted NTFS or HFS+ (and
> > > > others).
> > > > >
> > > > > However, since GUID support is sketchy in older versions of Windows
> > > > (notably XP), the legacy "MBR" is a better choice for external drives
> > > > needing broad compatibility. MBR is the only "correct" partition map for
> > > > FAT32 drives.
> > > > >
> > > > > The options can be quite confusing to sort out. I focus on the "ideal"
> > > > combinations:
> > > > >
> > > > > Mac OSX only: Mac OS Extended (HFS+) with GUID partition
> > > > > Windows only, internal: NTFS with GUID partition. However, you would
> > > > partition such as drive on the Windows machine and Windows options are
> > > > described differently, especially for internals.
> > > > > Windows external for wide compatibility and large files: NTFS with MBR
> > > > partition
> > > > > Maximum compatibility with all systems, 4GB limit: MS-DOS (FAT32) with
> > > > MBR partition
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > tod
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mar 19, 2013, at 4:59 PM, johnrobmoore wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "I would use GUID on any drive dedicated to a Windows machine."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just want to make sure I'm reading this correctly. You use GUID for a
> > > > Windows machine? In reading your post and from my own experience I thought
> > > > GUID was more of a Mac thing for a bootable drive or something like that. I
> > > > do remember about 5 years ago when something about the GUID formatting
> > > > changed or had another option which caused a little issue on a Terrablock
> > > > for a while. That was caused by the default behavior of the mac clients
> > > > when creating mac volumes on the Terrablock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, T Hopkins <hoplist@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Erase" reformats the existing partition but not all formats and
> > > > partitions are compatible. Erase was originally intended to quickly
> > > > reformat a drive with the SAME or similar format (back when we did not have
> > > > so many!). It will allow you to make bad selections. It shouldn't, but it
> > > > will.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Frankly, I never "Erase." I consider this a legacy function from the
> > > > days of floppies. I always use Partition and I always check the boot record
> > > > type (Partition, under "Options") as Disk Utility does not always set this
> > > > correctly either even when creating a new partition. I use MBR (Master Boot
> > > > Record) for NTFS partitions and GUID for Mac HFS+ partitions. FAT32 (aka
> > > > "MS DOS") must be MBR. Modern Windows systems and NTFS are compatible with
> > > > GUID but MBR is much older and compatible with pretty much everything and
> > > > that is generally my goal. I would use GUID on any drive dedicated to a
> > > > Windows machine.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > tod
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mar 18, 2013, at 4:53 PM, johnrobmoore wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yeah when I woke up this morning I remembered that Avid spans
> > > > clips and that's why I haven't been burned. Curious what is the difference
> > > > between erasing a drive, in this case a flash drive, and partitioning? Is
> > > > it a matter of speed or recover ability?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, T Hopkins <hoplist@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Avid, FCP, Cameras and other apps and devices that have to deal
> > > > with FAT32 generally break files into chunks with "spanning" information.
> > > > Avid's routinely did (do?) this when digitizing. Every camera I've dealt
> > > > with so far limits file chunks to 4GB for this reason. So FAT32 is still
> > > > the ideal choice "in the field."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But the advice you've received on formats is solid.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ExFAT is great if you are transferring only between new systems
> > > > (Win7+ and OS10.5+), but there are still way too many 10.4 and Win XP
> > > > systems for this to be a great choice for "blind" transfers.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > NTFS is better since there is deeper read support on Macs and
> > > > pretty much universal support on Windows. The advantage of Paragon and
> > > > Tuxera over "3G" is speed, but I've installed 3G on many, many machines and
> > > > have never had a problem. I also use Paragon and it is faster. 3G sometimes
> > > > has issues properly dismounting a drive. This has not caused a data
> > > > problem, but simply causes the next machine to report the drive as
> > > > improperly dismounted.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Also, but very careful when formatting using Disk Utility. When
> > > > formatting NTFS, you must partition using MBR or GUID and NOT Apple
> > > > Partition. Disk Utility will allow Apple Partition, but this creates a
> > > > bastard format that is unusable on many machines. I prefer MBR as it is the
> > > > older and more widely supported and better understood partition map.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Do NOT "erase" a drive to change formats. Always create a new
> > > > partition to change formats.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > tod
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mar 18, 2013, at 2:38 AM, John Moore wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Okay I've known about the 4 gig limit for various exports in
> > > > Avid and with fat 32 the size limit is 4 GB minus 1 byte. I'm experiencing
> > > > this limit with a usb jump drive with 16 GB capacity trying to copy a 7.3GB
> > > > QT movie. If I reformat EXFat it will copy. Okay I get this but it seems
> > > > like everyone always says format cross platform media drives etc.... to
> > > > Fat-32 to bounce between Macs and PCs. What happens in Avid with a media
> > > > drive formatted Fat 32 and a media file in excess of 4 GB? What if I do a
> > > > video mixdown to a Fat 32 of an hour show? I'm usually running Mac OS
> > > > extended volumes on my Mac systems but it would seem over the years I would
> > > > have hit a 4 GB road block at some point on Avid, other the the omf/aff
> > > > limitations that can now be bypassed. Not having a problem but I can't
> > > > believe I've never been burned by this with external drives.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > John Moore
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Barking Trout Productions
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Studio City, CA
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > bigfish@
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>