Archiving in ProRes? Seriously?!

Question

Level 1

24 points

Archiving in ProRes? Seriously?!

Ok, so I'm finally taking the big step from HVD to ProRes. I have been using HDV as my editing codec for almost 3 years now and I have never had any problems with the smaller projects (online videos and such). But when it comes to a bigger project (like a feature film) or as soon as I start mixing up different footage FCP starts acting up so I guess I don't really have a choice- I'll start using ProRes! And then oh my!! Was I surprised when I saw the difference in the file sizes! All of the projects that I've done before have been archived as HDV - 720p60 because that was what gave me the smallest file size. And now I'm faced with this ProRes beast and I'm so tempted to just keep archiving everything as HDV - 720p60 and I know some of you will bury me alive for all I'm worth just for doing that.

So I did a little search on here to see what people are suggesting about the different archiving options and it seems like most people suggest that one uses ProRes to archive. Unfortunately, I do 2 projects per week and if I were to archive those in ProRes I would be using up those hard drives like chewing gum. I know a lot of people are going to tell me "But hard drives are cheap! Don't be stingy!" but in the economy today I just can't justify an expense like that. Let alone the idea of having dozens of hard drives sitting around my house sounds scary.

So, this is my question - can someone tell me a way to archive my footage into small (40GB is not small!) projects without losing too much of the quality? Most of the footage I work with is HDV anyway, shot on mini DV tapes... And, no, a $5000 dollar storage solution is NOT a solution to me! I'd rather chew gum! If you know what I mean 😉

iMac, Mac OS X (10.6.4), iMac, 3.06 GHz, Intel Core 2 Duo, Final Cut Studio 3

Posted on Jun 15, 2011 10:31 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Shane Ross

Level 8

43,110 points

Jun 15, 2011 10:55 PM in response to CBeditor

Why archive the captured media? You have the tapes. THAT is what you archive. Not the media. For tapeless, you archive the camera masters...not the imported media. I NEVER archive the captured footage, always the source. You can always rebuild the cut if you keep the source tapes/files.

Reply

Answer 2

CBeditor Author

Level 1

24 points

Jun 15, 2011 11:39 PM in response to Shane Ross

Because I always have to go back to the older projects and make small edits to them or export in a different size... sometimes I'll export for online, then a few months later my boss will tell me "Put this, that, and that on a DVD".... it's crazy. I always keep going back to the projects so I need to keep the captured media. I'm not going to re-capture all the tapes every time I need to make a small change.

My problem is that I have a ridiculous amount of projects (we're a busy company) and I'm always going back to all of them tweaking something and then re-exporting again.

Reply

Answer 3

Shane Ross

Level 8

43,110 points

Jun 16, 2011 10:43 AM in response to CBeditor

OK...If they want to keep a lot of these projects alive constantly, time to start rethinking your media storage. Look into getting 2TB or 3TB Seagate drives...bare SATA drives, no enclosure, cheaper...and keep each project on a separate drive. Then you can access the drives via a drive dock, like this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817392044&cm_re=drive_dock -_-17-392-044-_-Product

Or if they span multiple drives, or you want multiple drives online at a time, get this (I have this):

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816111149&cm_re=5_bay_encl osure-_-16-111-149-_-Product

I have an eSATA card in my tower, and then connect to the device via eSATA. It takes bare drives, and is trayless. Meaning the drives slide in and out simply. This way you can just take the drive out, put it on a shelf, and go back to it when you need it. And the drives are CHEAP. $99 for 2TB, and $130 for 3TB.

Reply

Answer 4

CBeditor Author

Level 1

24 points

Jun 17, 2011 12:57 PM in response to Shane Ross

Thanks Shane,

I'll look into those options and see if I can figure out a better way of doing that. Until then I'll just keep archiving in HDV lol. After all, we can only work with what we're given, right? 😉

Reply

Answer 5

Jim Cookman

Level 7

23,447 points

Jun 17, 2011 1:11 PM in response to CBeditor

If you're converting hdv to prores on ingest, just keep the tapes. And be super anal about reel numbers etc.

Reply

Answer 6

RedTruck

Level 4

2,145 points

Jun 17, 2011 1:19 PM in response to Shane Ross

Just be sure not to let the drives sit on the shelf too long without spinning them up unless you use RDX drives. SATA drives are meant to spin often - if they sit too long the lubricant dries up and you get a bad drive. Also, for archiving purposes, know that SATA drives have a shelf life of 7 years, while RDX drives have a shelf life of 30 years with a lubricant that is specifically designed to sit on a shelf for months if not years without spinning.

If you have a good budget and are serious about archiving large amounts of data check out this:

http://www.rorke.com/prod-prostoreinfinivault.cfm

It's about $10k for the unit, and about $500 for each 1TB RDX drive. It has cataloguing built in. My company was looking at this but eventually went with a 32TB NAS from the same company. This is a nice system though.

Reply