8 Replies Latest reply on Jun 12, 2013 9:41 AM by MD Optofonik

    Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?

    MD Optofonik Level 1

      I have separate drives for still image captures and video captures. Is there any advantage one way or the other to keeping the still image source files where they are or copying them to the video drive?

       

      Thanks in advance.

        • 1. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
          Jim_Simon Level 8

          I prefer to keep them separate, with nothing on the Media drive but video files.  All stills and music files go in the Project folder.  This keeps the load separated.

          • 2. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
            MD Optofonik Level 1

            Well that brings up another question. I have seperate hard drives for everything you mentioned: a video drive, a still image drive, and a music music. In addition my program fiels are on a seperate OS drive, so that means that any Premiere project I'm running has the potential to be accessig four different drives. It sounds like you only have you video files on a separate drive. Is there no real advantage to having seperate drives for everything?

            • 3. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
              Harm Millaard Level 7

              No clear cut answer to that question, because it depends on the nature of your editing.

               

              Ideally, provided you do not use raid arrays, you would have separate disks for each track, but what if you have 16 PIP's of stills only, using 16 tracks? Then the bandwidth of that single disk where you stored your stills will become a bottleneck. Or 16 clips with PIP's? Same problem.

               

              Another issue is organization and ease of use. That is why many revert to high speed raid arrays. No need to distribute your material over different disks, no problem organizing the material and very easy to use. Jim is not among the raid fans, but I am, since it makes life so easy. For editing, I use only 2 volumes, all stock footage and sound tracks on one volume (single disk) and everything else on the second volume, projects, media, media cache, previews, auto-saves (large array with sustained transfer rates of 3.5+ GB/s).

              • 4. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
                MD Optofonik Level 1

                Thanks for the insight it actually answers this question in addition to a few others and confirms my thoughts about what limitations I'll be facing due to the compromises I have to make. Really good insight about asset management. Until now, I've only had to deal with broadcast wav so I've never had to juggle multiple file formats. I gotta say one hard drive per track never occured to me becuase, coming from the audio side of things, it's not uncommon to have 30-60 tracks and allocating one drive per track... yikes.. How many tracks/hard drives do you picture editors normally use?

                 

                I'm gling to start on a practice assembly edit using jpg, m2ts, mov, and wav files this week and I think I'll use the separate drives to start.

                 

                Thanks again.

                • 5. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
                  Harm Millaard Level 7

                  You know of course, there are only two things certain in life:

                   

                  • Income taxes, and
                  • Death.

                   

                  Many consider income taxes worse than death, because they are a yearly burden, death only occurs once. Well, you don't have to take a Civil Service Exam in order to work for the Government.

                   

                  Everything in life is a compromise. It only depends on where your priorities lay. Some edit highly complex timelines with many tracks, lots of multicam edits and huge amounts of audio tracks, others only 1-3 tracks, no multicam edits and limited audio tracks. Some edit long form or feature length, some only highly dynamic short movies. There is no standard.

                   

                  I have seen editors that make it their standard to do 6 camera edits, use up to 12 video tracks and up to 30 audio tracks with timelines of over one hour, but only in SD. I have not done anything more than 27 hours of HDV/AVCHD/XDCAM/MXF source material with 3 cameras over 12 video tracks and 5 audio tracks in a single project, but I think most users stay below that limit.

                   

                  Again, I don't think there is a clear cut answer. You have to weigh what your typical project will be, what that requires in hardware terms and whether the $$$ involved are worth the expenditure. That is highly personal and you are the only one to answer that question.

                  • 6. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
                    Jim_Simon Level 8

                    Jim is not among the raid fans

                     

                    Correction, Jim is not a RAID 0 fan.  I'm very much in favor of RAID 1 for project drives and RAID 3 for media drives.

                    • 7. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
                      dsfsdsdfsdffdsf Level 2

                      I dunno, I think separate drives is a bit of a relic from the old days when media wasn't mixed, drives were slow, edit platforms arrived in a truck, and we had the luxury of distinct offline and online sessions..

                       

                      I've worked at various facilities using all manner of drive organisation (projects and media separate, audio and video separate, video and 'other' assets separate, everything dumped in together) and I honestly haven't been able to notice any discernable difference in performance between the various storage disciplines.

                       

                      Every operator will find a bottleneck on their system sooner or later. I almost guarantee you that dumping material on the same drives won't be the cause of that bottleneck (mine is currently the network pipeline with a bit of CPU thrown in). That assumes you've invested in the biggest, baddest, most redundant RAID array you can afford though..

                      • 8. Re: Any advantage to keeping still image and video sources on separate drives?
                        MD Optofonik Level 1

                        Thanks, Paul. I'm participating in an online course through my union so perhaps I'll have a better idea of developing a particular workflow when it's over. I'll check around here as well. I can't imagine a forum like this without a "what's your workflow" thread somewhere. Can't swing a dead troll in most DAW forums without hitting at least two or three.