|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 9th, 2008, 09:37 AM | #1 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 400
|
disk storage space required per format?
Hi,
Anyone able to give me a quick comparison of HDD storage space required for HDV 720p v Widescreen DV? all in PAL If it goes in as HDV it will go via Cineform NEOHD into an intermediate AVI. Got a short notice project which requires editing over 72 hours of footage in 5 days! I'll be cutting it in segments and bringing each segment back in as a nested project for the final 10 minute DVD. We only have 600 Gb storage! Agh! Each segment will be made up of 10 hours of rushes and cut into a 1/2 minute piece. How much storage space will we need? Any storage space calculators around? Many thanks Stuart |
June 9th, 2008, 09:42 AM | #2 |
Sponsor: JET DV
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 7,953
|
HDV and DV are both the same size - about 13Gig per hour.
__________________
Edward Troxel [SCVU] JETDV Scripts/Scripting Tutorials/Excalibur/Montage Magic/Newsletters |
June 9th, 2008, 10:44 AM | #3 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 400
|
Many thanks for the rapid reply Edward. That's great stuff.
I'm amazed though that HDV is the same size? I always thought it was much larger!? |
June 9th, 2008, 10:50 AM | #4 |
Trustee
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 1,585
|
HDV is long GOP compression, which brings the data rate way down, even though frame resolution is much higher.
|
June 9th, 2008, 11:10 AM | #5 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 400
|
Thanks guys, that's great.
I've been editing HDV for over 1 year now. I should know that already aye!? ha ha Many thanks again. |
June 10th, 2008, 08:14 PM | #6 |
Trustee
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 1,961
|
Hold on just a sec, pardner. 1080 HDV is the same data rate as DV, but I believe 720P HDV is actually 19mbps instead of 25mbps so it should actually be smaller. The problem may be that Cineform makes larger files than native HDV so you may be looking at something like 40 Gigabytes per hour for your intermediate files. I don't know the exact figures other than 1080 HDV and DV both being about 13Gig/hour but you don't have anywhere near enough drive space to hold 72 hours of Cineform intermediate HD files. You will need to work on your project in sections.
|
June 10th, 2008, 11:41 PM | #7 |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
1080i is approx 13GB per hour
720p is only slightly less. Cineform intermediates will range between 40-60GBph depending on the quality of DI selected. This workflow is laid out pretty clearly in "The Full HD" book. Storage can really bite your butt if you're not careful and prepared.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
June 11th, 2008, 04:47 AM | #8 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 400
|
Wow guys thanks.
Now please excuse the cameraman asking a stupid 'editor' question here, but how come a Cineform Intermediate file is bigger? I thought the whole point of it was to make the native HDV files easier for the edit machine to handle. If the file sizes are so much bigger then how does that make a benefit? Either way, I don't have the storage capacity here, nor the time to get this all cut so we've farmed out the edit! Nonetheless, I'm interested in these file sizes! |
June 11th, 2008, 05:32 AM | #9 | |
Sponsor: JET DV
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 7,953
|
Quote:
__________________
Edward Troxel [SCVU] JETDV Scripts/Scripting Tutorials/Excalibur/Montage Magic/Newsletters |
|
June 11th, 2008, 07:46 AM | #10 |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
It's all about the codec. AVCHD is extremely compressed footage=small file sizes. No computer can natively edit multiple streams of AVCHD...it needs to be converted to a lighter compression scheme to be more readily decoded. A lighter compression scheme means larger files.
Storage is dirt cheap. CPU cycles for desktop editing are not. Therefore, it's more efficient to deal with the larger file sizes in most cases. There are other benefits to the transcoded file formats as well, particularly if keying or heavy C/C is part of the program.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
June 12th, 2008, 04:05 AM | #11 |
Major Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 400
|
Thanks guys. That makes perfect sense now!
|
| ||||||
|
|