"My big hesitation, though, is the tapeless workflow."

Sorry to hear that. Most people who've abandoned tape haven't gone back...


"I don't like the idea of having to load and backup everything. Right now, I don't care if a drive crashes--I have the tapes. "

Hmmm, so what happens if the tape gets trashed? Dust, drop outs, gets mangled in the tape mechanism...

"But I still prefer tape."

Give me the price of a tape solution that stores 1920x1080.

I have to agree with Perrone. I was very nervous about a tapeless workflow initially, but it makes everything much easier - we've never looked back.

For live projects we keep content on a mirrored RAID. Once the project is finished we hand over a hard drive with all footage and finished project to our client and tell them that it is their responsibility to keep the footage backed-up / safe. We also keep a hard drive ourselves, and if we think there is a good chance that the client may be coming back for more changes, etc. then we keep a third drive!

Unfortunately, that's a total deal breaker for shooting live events, which wouldn't be a good application anyway.

And the recording limits are tied to file size and the current European Union tax structure for video recording devices.

When you purchase rails, handles, follow focus, matte box etc for a VDSLR, it may become as large as a normal video camera, and cost more then the actual VDSLR itself, but they can be used for any other cameras down the track... such as scarlet. I'd rather invest the money on a modula system with parts that won't depreciate, instead o spending my whole budget on a proper video camera that will be completly out dated and gathering dust in a couple of years.

I'm a worrier. I love having those old HDV tapes in the drawer. Just in case. I've owned the EX3, 7D, and HD100. The problem is I can't sell the HD100 because then I'm stuck without a deck.

Hard drive must be the worst archive solution ever made. I also don't trust optical media.

I'm hoping to find some sort of DLT solution.

I trust optical a HECK of a lot more than I trust tape. While we often see professionals extol the virtues of tape there is a piece that is always left out. And that is that archive tape needs to live in some very specific conditions.

I backup critical government data as part of my living. And I am not talking about video. We did tape for a long time. BUT that tape lived in a fire safe, in a room that was temperature and humidity controlled, and had a halon system installed.

After watching what happened during Katrina in New Orleans we realized that we had a HUGE liability in terms of water damage. He had protected against fire with halon, against dust and foreign particle intrusion with the safe, as well as physical security, but water was a REAL issue.

Optical media is not susceptible to water damage, dust damage, humidity damage, etc. At least not in normal environments. It requires no physical contact to operate so playing or reviewing the viability of the stored data does not degrade the media. It is not susceptible to magnetic field or x-ray, so transport gets easier. Where optical falls down is in backup speed compared to modern LTO standards, and in density in regards to how much data can be backed up per unit of media. The issue with LTO is that you need the drives to run it, and LTO-3 drives are about $1k right now, with tapes running about $30 each for 400GB. And every other iteration of the technology is not backwards compatible. So LTO-5 will read LTO-5 and LTO4, but not LTO-3. So you have to refresh your library every 3 years or so. We played this game with DLT for years before abandoning it.

So honestly, your choices are:

1. Stay on HDV and use cheap tapes
2. Go tapeless and archive to HDD/Optical
3. Go tapeless and archive to LTO (DLT is worthless at this point)
4. Wait for something new to come along.

Good information Perrone that is mostly overlooked.

Even for those people storing on analog, DV or HDVtapes, you have to keep the camera forever. Ive got an analog tape right now I need some footage off of and no way to get it because the 10 year old camera is broken. Also, I had to capture all my most important, but not all, XH-A1 HDV footage before I could sell the cameras as the tapes become useless when the camera is gone. I did a lot of work in the past on a JVC HDV camera and am stuck with it as a capture device until I find a few hundred free hours to capture the tapes. Camera tape is no solution at all IMO.

Im currently all tapeless nowdays. I have a 3X redundant, fire safed, HDD backup program that works for me until a better solution comes along. IMO, hard drives may not be reliable, but they are inexpensive.

Tape decks/camera *can* be fixed actually.

Perrone actually has me thinking about LTO3, it might not be forward compatible but the $1000 price point is tempting. I'd have to believe the build is robust and that HP(?) will continue to support it parts wise. If not, I'm sure someone, somewhere would have one.

I think HP also makes a lower capacity data tape for considerably less than even LTO3.

Hard drives are currently about $73 per TB, so $1,000 would get you about 13.7 TB. Triple redundancy would get you 4.6 TB of storage out of the 13.7 TB. That's still a lot of money and a possible reason for using LTO if you have lots of TB to store.

LTO 4s are about $40 (800 GB), so 1TB is $50 (plus drive equipment). How many redundant LTOs do you need? Id guess one would be enough.

Ok...

So let's talk tape.

The first two images show our first DLT libraries. I watched 3 of these fail over 3 years. They were so much a problem they were replaced with the gray units you see. Two of those failed (one let blue smoke out of the back with a month of my data stuck inside). Note that they now both live in our technology graveyard. You can see we went to two SAN solutions, one HP, one Third Party. Finally, you can see a photo of half of my local data center. I have 6 similar installations and protect over 100TB daily. We abandoned tape 3 years ago as too slow, and too difficult to deal with. The off-site shuffling, geographic dispersment, etc., were just too onerous.

I get it. I get tape, I really do. And I also get redundancy. Those tape libraries were stored in a temperature and humidity controlled room with Halon. None of you guys is going to spend the $80k it took to build that. And still I had over half of my tape units fail under warranty. At one point, the service tech actually had to source us replacements from overseas because the supply of working units in the US was zero. This was with HP/Compaq.

We had to destroy hundreds of backup tapes with sensitive data on them to leave this solution. And it was worth every bit of the trouble.

So you guys are welcome to ignore what I am saying but I am telling you that tape is NOT the panacea that many people would have you believe. Been there, done that.

Okay but it's the decks that fail right? not the tapes. Presumably the decks and tapes can be untethered? I really don't know as the studio I worked for archived in BetaCam SP.

Your government data bank photos are fascinating. I could be wrong, but I think I spotted the Arc of the Covenant in one of those JPEGs.

Thanks for sharing, Perrone. Now we know where Area 51 threads go after Chris Hurd locks them. :D I switched from tape to disk backup in the 90's when tapes were 1 GB. They're getting more and more inconvenient to lug to offsite backups (at first just 1 hdd, then 1 4-disk array, now 8x1TB disks), but based on your post it sounds like it's worth the trouble.

In this case, yes it was the decks. However, you should verify the viability of your tapes at intervals. Maybe that's once or twice a year. So let's examine the scenario.

You purchase an LTO-3 drive for $1k. You purchase a 8 tapes at $30 each to back up 1.5TB and have two copies of each. Because you don't have a safe location, you buy a safe deposit box to store your safety backups.

You keep this solution for a few years and now you have years worth of data stored on tape. If you buy a new drive, you will need to ensure you do not go beyond LTO-5 because it may not be compatible. This may not seem like a big deal, but as time moves on, and your data collection grows,

You'll have sunk thousands into a storage solution only to have to turn around and buy it all again. I guess this is inevitable with any solution, so choose wisely.

I use a fast RAID for online access of media, and I back that up to a Drobo in which 1 the 4 drives can fail without a loss of data. There is also a new 'Drobo Pro' which holds 8 drives, and 2 of those can fail and the data is still safe. I also have a very fast internet connection (fast upload as well) back up to 'the cloud' via one of the online backup services out there. So I have a lot of redundancy. If my fast online drive(s) fail, I have the Drobo. If my facility burns down I have the 'cloud.'

I used to use tape back up but it got really expensive and was really slow, and in a few years it was obsolete (tapes to small to backup data), so personally I wouldn't use tape again. (Although I do think it has it's uses) Optical also has it's drawbacks, it's not as durable as people think. The aluminum substrate that holds the data can corrode if there is even a little pinhole in the plastic that covers it and this is actually quite common. There are 'gold' media that have more durability and you can take some care to store it in a less corrosive environment.

This is a universal problem we all have. We are creating more and more data every day. We don't want to lose it, but the data is massive. I think the fact that it is digital now is an advantage, backing data from one hard drive to another is pretty easy and can be automated to some degree. I think we have to be resigned to copy over our data from smaller, older drives to newer, bigger hard drives every few years and keep the older drives a extra redundancy but not rely on them as our primary backup.

^^^ interesting, I use a drobo at work as well.

I think you are correct stating "I think we have to be resigned to copy over our data from smaller, older drives to newer, bigger hard drives every few years and keep the older drives a extra redundancy but not rely on them as our primary backup".

I'm only a couple of days into the 7D, but my XHA1 is much easier to get "very good results" reliably. Some of the 7D footage looks really good, but trying to faithfully capture "one-chance-real-life" is more challenging with the 7D and it's shallow DOF. Of course, not being willing to lug 40 lbs of gear makes capturing those moments impossible with the A1. But on the other side there are times on the A1 when I will switch to AF when things go crazy. Not an option with the 7D. I'm still working through the transition (where' my zebra function?....). I'm also not sure how well the 7D will handle camera motion versus the A1.

Having said all that, I purchased the 7D because I wanted a sub $4K camera & accessories capable gathering high quality video and still images, great DOF control, small form factor, and low light capability. I shoot mainly artistic work, so making several attempts is usually possible. If I control the situation and can order a "redo", the 7D ranks high. If asked to shoot a speaker or wedding and I'm by myself, I'll grab the A1. If going to Italy on vacation or business trip, 7D. If shooting a commercial without sound; 7D. Commercial with sound.....Hmmmm.... not sure yet. Basically if it's short segments and I can have a "redo", the 7D is the better camera in most situations. Real life, complicated set-ups, long format, audio is important, I'll probably go with a traditional video camera.

Long term all this is academic as we will likely have great alternatives in video camera trim in the next 6-12 months. Then I can retire the A1 and use the 7D as a 2nd camera.

Roger:

Can't you shoot the 7D at F 7.1 or 8 and get some deeper DOF so you don't have to worry about focus as much?

Also, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for big change in the next 6-12 months. Canon churned out lot of still camera iterations in the past, but is incredibly slow on the video side. Due to the economy and Canons re-positioning, they may be slowing their pace.

Also, it seems they are missing PMA;

"Canon has said it will have no presence or representation at the annual PMA trade show in Anaheim, California, in February. Canon USA has traditionally had one of the largest stands at the show and the Japanese parent company has regularly sent senior figures to the event. However, in light of the convergence of technologies from across its range: 'the decision has been made by Canon USA to only participate in 2010 trade shows and events that have the broadest reach,' the company said. It will still attend the International CES show organized by the Consumer Electronics Association. The event, which covers a wider range of electronics, takes place in Las Vegas, Nevada on January 7-10th."

That's the beauty of bigger chips--you can do what you want with depth of field. However, I agree that somethings are better with the XH A1. Obviously speakers, since you can shoot for an hour non stop. And for Steadicam work, I'll stick with the XH A1.

What happens when it hits 12min. does the viewfinder/lcd go blank or black?
Also curious .....if you are rolling and stop, say after 2 minutes of shooting and restart do you then start over your 12 min time limit?

Yes, if you stop shooting and hit record again you get 12 more minutes, so in an interview I just hit stop/record after each question. If you hit 12 min, the record button goes off. There is a count down meter on the LCD that should help as well.

Yes, you can, but at F 7.1 or 8 the difference might not be that much depending on the lens.


And to add to the thread, for me the 7D is not a video camera and the video camera vs DLSRs issue for me is moot.

A DLSR should be treated as a digital motion pictures camera with all the inherent PITA that comes with it. For me, in my type of work though (30sec spots), the 7D has changed my life and on many occasions the 7D has been alone with me and talent, in hostile, uncontrollable locations and got some absolutely beautiful images! And the 7D, was my first time shooting solid state (used sony hdvs before). I love it, even with transcode time, the work flow is so smooth! NO DROPOUTS!! Oh the dread of a dropout while watching the capture, even though rare for me cost me some nice shots a few times!

A question on Audio.
All of my sound gear, both wireless and hard line have XLR connectors. When you do an interview do you just use an mini plug to XLR adapter? What about a 2 mike setup?
I guess you would have to use a mixer to get 2 channels in since the camera only has 1 input?
Just curious how folks are doing this, because I am seeing video from the 7D with at least 2 people talking.
I would probably still use my Sony HVR S-270 for all interviews but I think it is interesting that people are using the 7D for wireless sound. I just put in an order for a 7D last night after reading all the posts here, so thanks all for your insightful comments. Guess I will now sell my Panasonic AG-HMC40 since the 7D will now become my 2nd camera.
BTW Liam the videos on your site are just beautiful, you have some major talent.
Are any shot with your 7D?

You can record stereo into the 7D. The problems are 1) the auto gain, 2) the lack of balanced XLR inputs, the need for a HOT signal, and the lack of phantom power.

Here is part 1 of 6 of my reviews for sound for the 5D2.
vimeo.com/5370880

To counter auto gain, juicedLink now makes the DN101 add on for their CX products.

Thanks, I watched your reviews and they answered a lot of questions for me.

7D or EX1/EX3?
 

Maybe you guys can help me out a little. I'm currently working with the Sony FX7 cam and although it's a good camera it isn't really suitable for what I'm filming.
I'm mainly making small movies and music clips and the pictures you get with the FX7 don't have a film-feel to it at all. I know you guys have heard the stories about recreating a film-look with HD cams a million times. I know that it is not possible. But yet, the videos seen on vimeo etc. made with the 7D look far more film-like than the ones made with the Sony EX1/EX3 cameras.
Now my dilemma is whether to go with the the Sony EX series and eventually having to buy the letus adapter, Magic Bullet software etc. but being able to work with all the advantages of a real video camera, or to go with the 7D and the trying to get the most out of it by working in somewhat more uncomfortable ways?
My concern is, can the EX series come even close to the pictures made with the Canon (not so much with resolution and things but with the sheer feeling of the film-look) without using the Letus and stuff? Or is it really just suitable for TV broadcasts and not supposed to be used for making movies at all?
I'm really getting more desperate from day to day, as I've got stories and scripts ready but just can't make up my mind on which camera I'll be using for all my future projects.
I've asked already multiple people but never received an appropriate answer, I hope you guys can help me out here.

No, not really.

This is incorrect also. Using the EX to make a film requires a number of compromises to get the look. Just as using the 7D requires compromises. They are different compromises.

Again, they have some VERY different trade-offs for filmmaking. If you are prepared to spend as much on a 7D rig as you would have spent on the EX1, then this is the direction I would go. No question. But you need to think of the 7D rig as shooting electronic film. For all intents and purposes it is a film camera (that shoots to compact flash instead). The workflow should mostly mirror that of film. The shooting techniques, production techniques, etc, should mirror that of film. I DPed our 5D shoot like I was shot an Arri 16mm film. Worked quite well.

We can't help you. Only you can help you. Are you ready to shoot the 7D like a film camera? Including lensing, stabilizers, sync sound, post workflow, etc.? If so, then that's your choice. If not, then use a camcorder and sort out the look.

Frame rate 24 vs. 30?
 

I am still confused about frame rates. On my video camera I shoot 1920x1080 30p and I like the look better than on 60i. Now this is a difference between interlaced and progressive.
How does frame rate play into this. Is the 30p actually a 30 frame rate? And is 60 interlaced really 60 frames.
I know most like to shoot at 24 frames for a film look but when I tried that is always looked a little jumpy. Besides nothing I shoot will ever be projected on a screen, so I go with 30p.
Is there any reason (when I get my 7D) that I would want to use 24 instead of 30?
I love the look I have been seeing online here. Is everyone shooting at 24 frames?
Just a little confused over the difference between frames, interlaced and progressive. Interlaced and progressive I understand coming from a broadcast background..... frames not so much.
Jim

Alright. So you like the look of progressive. Cool.

Yes. 30p = 30 *P*rogressive frames per second.

No, it is 60 half frames per second. Each half is either the even or the odd scan lines


It's supposed to look "jumpy". Just like real film.

Many. But they may not apply to you.

No. People shoot what is required to obtain the look they need. Even in Hollywood film 24p is not always used. Any time you see slow motion, it's likely being shot at 60-120p

30p is not a broadcast standard anywhere in the world. So if you shoot in it, you'll have to convert it for broadcast. There is also no good way to get from 30p to 25p, so if you shoot in this, be SURE it will never have to be broadcast overseas. 30p also requires more bandwidth and computer power to decode for computers, so if you put it on the internet, it will make larger files, and will be harder for older computers to play. 30p looks nice and smooth when your machine is fast enough to play it back well. Computers don't do "interlaced". So if you plan on displaying your work on a computer, you'll need to shoot progressive, or convert interlaced to progressive.


Does this help?

Okay, if I go with the 7D can you guys give me some tips on what equipment I should get with it? I know that there are lenses which can bring amazing results like for example the 50mm f1.2 en 24 mm f1.4. Do these have any drawbacks I should be aware of?
Is there any use of getting zoom-lenses?
Also I got lenses from Nikon, will they work with Canon bodies?
What will I need for audio? I'm used to working with XLR and I can imagine that the 7D doesn't support XLR.

Yes it certainly does. Thank you. One last question, on slow mo you say 60-120p.
Could you explain that a bit further?
Thanks again.

There are about 200 threads in the Canon 5D and 7D areas that address this topic.

Uh yes. They are hell on the wallet! Honestly, you probably won't need anything faster than a 1.8 or a 2.0 unless you are trying to do reality shooting at night. Then that 1.2 might come in handy. Have you ever tried manually focusing on a moving subject with a 1.4 lens wide open? I suggest you give that a shot on your SLR. Just aim at at someone walking, and see how you do.

Absolutely. They increase set up speed by orders of magnitude. However, they also rob you of light by orders of magnitude! And if you spend the jack to get F2.8 zooms, they will rob you of money by orders of magnitude!

Yep. Very popular option. Few exceptions here. Nikon G lenses won't work. And I am unsure if pre AI lenses will work. And some of the specialty fisheyes and such won't work.

Same thing you'd need for film. Cheap options like the Zoom H4 work, more expensive options like the SoundDevices work too.

Get the 7D. It's a tool for craftsman and artists alike.

Hope that helps:)

Thanks Liam, I'm really considering it!

About overheating and professional jobs
 

Guys, I am not as good in english as u native from Us. But I like to share my almost first profesional experience with my 7D (regard all those issues you mention in this post)
I'm creative director and director of a prodution house.

I happeng to shoot a developing drawing with an artist on a sand board for a Bank tv commercial. 20" 5 spots to be exact. We puted the camera cenital with a live monitoring Hd Ikan and spliter to YUV componet for client.

Here is the deal:

The drawing took 15 minutes to get it's best result. grabbing sand with fingers, pouring it to diferent areas of the (1.2mts x 80cm). The camera shoot 12 mins on a 16GB CF and just get turn off the rec system. We changed to a second 16GB CF, and let the camera document the growing picture. The camera at this point went well with the consecutive 12 mins. And Again I change the CF previus to pass the material to my computer. In the next 12 minutes, I got scared when Heating Warning appear around 5 minutes of recording. The drawing wasn't finish, so I decided to go on with the recording pushing with faith on my 7D, the warning was disturbing becouse the client was watching the same signal on the other room. Finally the camera at 10 minutes went off. For good.....After 5, 8, 10 minutes I tryed everything to reanimate the dead 7D...was unsuscessfull. I though the worst: The camera vanished. Again, I tryed at 15 minutes and it wake up....I decided was time to get back in business. But the warning show up 3 minutes later, I turn it off at least every 3 minutes for at least 1 min of rest. and again no more than 6 minutes of this, the camera died again. So in this horrible situacion with the client wondering our delay....I decide to call a rental house and get me a RED ONE cos there was'nt nothing more at that moment ( an EX1 or 3 for examp) . This camera the RED ONE, I have to say , it's no my favorite cos the slow process to work with and the weight. After expend 1 hour attaching to a barracuda with all the security measures for a simple cenital shoot, (7d took just minutes) . We shoot.. but , for my sorprise, it wasn't better compare with the 7D shots. No to mention the tendency to magenta color (you can fix with a IR). The 7D achived a texture in the sand that red had to fight to be the same, RED looks more plain without all the post saturation, gamma, black levels etc etc etc. 7D went just as it record it.

I have admit, it was to much to ask to a 7D shoot consecutive 12 minutes x 3. without put in risk the overheating. So I know I'm going to use it just for simple 1 minute o 3 maximun shots for a tradicional commercial. Just like Phillip Bloom (IoI). I have to say It worth the image result. its very good for my humble opinion but never going to try this extreme situasion with a client on my shoulder.

However I wondering if this all double monitoring was part of the overheating, cos when we change to the RED , I optimized the wasted time setting the 7D as second Camera, for the close shoots in tripod and Without the second monitor, jut the IKAn for our work. And I shoot at least max 5 minutes, turning off the 7D when completed a escene as we need it. And turn it on again for the next. Well....never show us the warning again on a 3 hours job. That make me suspicious and I going to test this again to see if the added equiment have to be resposable in part of this constant overheating.

I got the shots I got the commercials finished And I want to share some of this when the spots have been on air later next April.

thx all of you

sorry again this crap English.

Perrone, guys, your patience and valuable input is always appreciated!

Yes...

Lets say we are shooting at 30p and we have 1 second of footage that we want to make take twice as long. Well, each frame is only so long, so when we ask it to take twice as long, we have half the number of frames we need to fill that space. So our 1 second of video has 30 frames in it, but we are asking it to take up the space of 60 frames (2 seconds worth). Well, without doing anything, we would have black gaps between each of the frames.

There are a few ways around this. The first is to double each frame. So we simply repeat each frame once and now we have 60 frames in the right space. The problem is that it makes the motion look weird. A second way is to analyze each frame and try to have the software calculate the movement between the two, and make a new frame to stick in-between. That is VERY computationally difficult, and takes a LONG time for the computer to figure out. And it's making guesses so there will be errors.

So suppose we started off with 60 frames for the space of 30. Then, we could throw out what we don't need when playing back at 30, but when we need that slow motion, we have all 60 frames to use? This is essentially what happens when you shoot at a higher frame rate for the purposes of slow motion. Just tossing out the extra frames when they aren't needed would lead to issues with stuttery movement, so we ask the computer to do some trickery to make it smooth. But rater than make guesses in the dark, the computer now has all the information it needs to make accurate guesses and the 30p from 60p looks smooth. Shooting at 120p would allow us to slow things down to quarter speed and still have all the information we need to make smooth slo-mo.

Does this make sense?

Yes it makes sense the way you explain it. I am used to video cameras where one has little control, if any over shutter speed so this is all new to me.
Thanks again for your patience and explanation.

I see in your signature, you list Media Composer 3.0... Dude if there is ANY way you can jump to 4.0x DO IT! There is so much new cool stuff it's not even funny. I was blown away.

I have not tried 4 but I hear good things about it. I love Edius, I find it extremely powerful and fast. I always felt Avid was more for film editors, in that it seems to be set up for film makers but is MC4 a little more user friendly?
Unfortunately I have MC3 Academic version and they won't let me upgrade.

Yea, Avid is certainly set up for film editors.. long form editors too. Edius looks very good to me too, but I need some features for my work that Avid has and Edius doesn't. Otherwise I'd be REAL tempted to go that way.