FORUMS: list search recent posts

P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.

COW Forums : Panasonic Cameras

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Randy Burleson
P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 7:13:07 pm

I have had some discussion with Jeremy Garchow on the KiPro forum abou this topic. But I was wondering if anyone had done any studies or have any numbers as to how much more efficient P2 is in comparison to logging and capturing tape. I am looking for some hard numbers to use in my proposal to go to P2.
Would you say that it is 50% faster? twice as fast? I am looking for man hours reduced to do the same work. Our typical project would have 8 hour long tapes. so that is a little over 8 hours of "capture now" or "batch Capture" ( we build an FCP log while we shoot in the studio)
How much faster would it be to transfer that same footage on P2 captured in 1920 x 1080 AVC Intra 100?
How much quicker could I be editing that footage? With tape I couldn't start till at least 8-9 hours later.


Return to posts index

Michael Sacci
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 7:36:53 pm

I can't answer the time factor but one of the biggest differences is you have instant clips instead of 8 hours on a tape. ( what are you recording 8 hours to?) So you just do straight dump (no setting In/Out points no logging info the P2 will have small clips to work with instead of a single 8 hour clip.


Return to posts index

Randy Burleson
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 7:43:50 pm

I guess I wasn't clear... when we shoot in the studio we have an assistant log the clips as we shoot.
We hook a firewire cable from the camera to an iMac with FCP on it. the assistant names and logs the in point and the out point on the fly as we shoot. by the end of the shoot we have an FCP log and project that we can batch dig from with names already made and ins and outs already made for rough clips.
we are currently shootin DVCam on the Sony DSR - 570 cameras. We shoot roughly 8 tapes. 4 per Camera.
Sometimes 64 min sometimes 94 min tapes.


Return to posts index


Michael Sacci
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 8:22:00 pm

Okay that is a little different than Capture Now of the first post. :-)

I know you are looking for exact info (which if I was guessing is going to be out there) but to me the difference is in camera specs. Going from SD DV to HD Intra. The other factor on the down side of P2 is storage and backup. There is a lot of time and cost involved that doesn't exist in the tape world.

Also the time to transcode the P2 will depend on the system used. An iMac or a 8-core will capture at the same rate but a new fast Mac Pro will transcode a lot faster.

I think you would be best served to go rent a P2 camera, and put the work flow through its paces. Time YOUR system with ingest.

There is something comforting about Tape that you just don't have with P2 (or any card based system) The time to get to the editing bay is just one of the many things you need to think through.

Sorry to be so off the point, hope it is of some help.


Return to posts index

Randy Burleson
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 8:36:42 pm

Thanks...
Camera specs won't help me sell this to the bean counters....
I have to show a savings in man hours and efficiency, savings in annual tape costs etc...
It sounds like maybe the KiPro may be the way to go instead of P2 for faster time to edit and quick turnaround and cheaper per GB for storage.
I am still looking at the HPX-370. That would be a nice fit with the KiPro.
And Archiving is still a big issue.
LTO4 or Blue Ray?

Boy,,,, with tape... you just stick it on the shelf and your done... acquisition and archive all in one.
In a perfect world, a 64 min P2 card would be just as cheap as a 64 min DVCam tape and you could afford to just put those on the shelf... problem solved. unfortunately this world is far from perfect.


Return to posts index

Randy Burleson
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 9:42:46 pm

Anybody using the AJ-PCD35 PCI EXpress P2 Card Drive? Does this make the transfers faster and more efficient?


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 9:55:57 pm

Hi.

You can read how fast it is (13 hours of footage transferred in less than an hour, try that with tape!) through Helmut's PCD2 article.

http://library.creativecow.net/kobler_helmut/panasonic_pcd2/1


Return to posts index

Steve Eisen
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 27, 2010 at 10:39:30 pm

Future proof yourself and get on the tapeless workflow bandwagon.

I have been tapeless for almost three years and my workflow from shoot, offload, edit to deliver is considerably faster. I have a lot more space in my office because I do not have to store Beta SP/DVCAM tape. I also saved myself thousands of dollars in tape stock compared to the investment that I made in P2 cards.

The HPX-370 or the just announced HPX-3100 is a no brainer.

Steve Eisen
Eisen Video Productions
Vice President
Chicago Final Cut Pro Users Group


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 28, 2010 at 1:38:58 am

Well, I find it VERY fast. Don't worry about the time it takes to import...because the cool thing about P2...well, Log and Transfer in general, is that once the first clip comes in, you can start working. You can start renaming the clips (There is other metadata there that allows FCP to know that the original is even if you rename) and adding other logging data, and start organizing.

You can do this WHILE importing is taking place. Basically do two things at once. Try that with tape.

ANd if you get third party options that read MXF natively like MXF4Mac, P2Flow or Calibrated or Raylight, then it takes as long as it does to copy the files from one hard drive to your Media drive.

Quick. Much faster than tape.

Shane



GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD...don't miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


John Fishback
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 28, 2010 at 5:16:25 pm

I'm with Shane. The P2 workflow has greatly accelerated our post process. We do a lot of work with actors and typical scenes last 30 to 60 seconds. Our workflow with P2, and formerly tape, is to review each circled take and decide whether it should be transferred. With P2 once that decision is made the clip is transferred, and that happens before you can look at the log notes for the next take. We never wait during the P2 ingest process. With tape I'd be sitting around for the (wasted) time it took for the tape to cue and roll for capture. If you transfer long spanned clips, you can add them all to the queue and walk away to do something else. And as Shane says, once the first clip is in you can start your edit.

John

MacPro 8-core 2.8GHz 8 GB RAM OS 10.5.8 QT7.6.4 Kona 3 Dual Cinema 23 ATI Radeon HD 3870, 24" TV-Logic Monitor, ATTO ExpressSAS R380 RAID Adapter, PDE enclosure with 8-drive 6TB RAID 5
FCS 3 (FCP 7.0.2, Motion 4.0.2, Comp 3.5.2, DVDSP 4.2.2, Color 1.5.2)

Pro Tools HD w SYNC IO & 192 Digital I/O, Yamaha DM1000, Millennia Media HV-3C, Neumann U87, Schoeps Mk41 mics, Genelec Monitors, PrimaLT ISDN


Return to posts index

Michael Sacci
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 28, 2010 at 7:54:23 am

[Randy Burleson] "LTO4 or Blue Ray? "
For backing up media, LTO4 is the only way to go, BluRay would take forever and you have 50GB limit vs 800GB (Uncompressed) with LTO4.


Return to posts index

Steve Eisen
Re: P2 Workflow efficiency ratios compared to tape.
on Aug 29, 2010 at 4:20:33 pm

This reminds me of the transition from Linear Editing to Non-Linear Editing. I certainly do not miss the linear days.

Steve Eisen
Eisen Video Productions
Vice President
Chicago Final Cut Pro Users Group


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]