Prores422 as an archive QT

Hi Champs,

My current project is the most complicated i've done to date, many layers of video, all graded with additional effects etc. Upon rendering it in 10 minute chunks i've noticed my hard drive capacity is dropping rapidly due to the accumulated render files.

Also when opening back up the project file, i have found that two or 3 clips in the timeline lose their render files, hence, a re-render is carried out. My idea is to export the locked edit sections as prores QTs, then re-import that section into the timeline prior to final audio mixes, and then export the final sequence to prores QT again for web and dvd versions.

My question is, in your experience - is there really a noticeable loss in generation if the baking-out, flatten-re-import technique is used? I suspect on a literal 'science' level there would be some data loss? but how obvious would it be?

Of course i'll be trying this out and using my own judgement, but in addition i would be interested to hear from anyone who has worked in a similar way and how they found the results i.e passable, not good enough, no difference, whatever . . .

Cheers,
Bluey

>I suspect on a literal 'science' level there would be some data loss?

No data loss if the re-imported footage does not require rendering. And this practice is fine and common. Usually the graded footage comes back as one long quicktime file for assembly with audio.



www.strypesinpost.com

. . . far out, excellent, super, groovy, fantastic, wild, nice . . .

Cheers,
Bluey,

Quote

Upon rendering it in 10 minute chunks i've noticed my hard drive capacity is dropping rapidly due to the accumulated render files.

you would be best off clearing some space.
old renders are a good pace to start,
you can simply delete them manually,
or you can use FCP's Render Manager (look in the Tools Menu)

working in smaller "Chunks" is ok, of course,
that's what happens on many long-form projects.

but if you are that low on drive space, there wil be more problems ahead

when i'm want to work in smaller sections, i actually divide the timeline into smaller timelines.

then i know exactly what each "chunk" is, where it starts and stops.

this is how i work on features.
when i export for a screening, or whatever, i make sure that that sequence, or collection of sequences is copied and backed up (in their own project file),
and clearly labelled with a name & date-stamp that matches exactly the name & date-stamp of the export/s.


cheers,
nick

. . . Hi Nick, i am already working in smaller sections, the feature is split off into 8-10 minute sequs, available space is 90gb on a 500gb g-tech portable . .

ok, cool.
but really, Bluey, get another drive!

you don't really have the room to do what you need to do.


nick

. . . still one 3rd to go on the project so i just bought a 1tb g-tech portable . . . on a side note the lacie drive which i replaced with a 500g g-tech on - lafpug recommendation - has been excellent (wouldnt even use lacies as a toilet ornament in the future) even sweeping everything up and running between trains the g-tech is still mounted, the whole thing running rock solid!

thanks for the tips,
Bluey,

G-Tech drives are not that solid. They used to be very reliable, but they haven't been given a great grade for three or four years now. Not as bad as Lacies, but far, far from infallible. So don't let your guard down.


www.derekmok.com

cheers for the heads-up Derek, i do have a g-tech 1tb on immediate order as well as another 1tb (iomega) for short-term archive storage, and the lacie is now rested as an ark with backups. the g-tech performance and reliability i've seen so far has been pretty good though . . . so you've had g-techs fail on projects of your in the last few months?

Bluey,