Comments on: Wow! I Didn’t Know That…

By: Larry

Larry — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:30:24 +0000

Very interesting. I was not what I expected.

Larry

By: Skip Hall

Skip Hall — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 19:59:14 +0000

This really is interesting, considering that the polar opposite was true in my last version of FCP running on my G5. In that version, trying to change the angles by using the keys on the numeric pad would not work at all. The only way to reliably change from one angle to the next was to use the mouse and click on the frame in the Viewer. The keyboard shortcuts never seemed to work properly. Interesting, huh?

By: Larry

Larry — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 05:41:26 +0000

Good question. I’ll do some testing on this. But, my opinion is that this is absolutely not RAID related.

larry

By: Bruce N. Goren

Bruce N. Goren — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 05:18:19 +0000

Whoops! Yup, that ought to have been bits, not Bytes, still more bandwidth capacity available than you were utilizing.

Have you replicated this or a similar scenario with another brand of RAID? That would point the finger squarely at FCP!

If a power user were ever actually to perform this kind of multi-cam editing they’d probably be a keyboard shortcut jockey anyway, perhaps that’s why this FCP bug has never surfaced before. Congrats!

By: Larry

Larry — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 02:31:00 +0000

Bruce:

I don’t think it’s a bug. First, ProRes 422 only needs about 17.4 MB/sec of data per stream. So, 16 streams would require about 280 MB/sec from the RAID. There’s no reason for the RAID to go faster in this instance, though it can; its just that FCP does not require more speed for this multiclip.

Second, while Accusys website may say it supports 22 streams of ProRes 4444 video, Final Cut does not. FCP only supports 16 streams of video, regardless of format. Also the size of ProRes 4444 files totally depends upon the amount of transparency data in the clip. I would be cautious in accepting this particular statement.

Third, I think you have a “B” in the wrong position. I don’t know anything that will deliver 5 GB/s of data (5 GigaBYTES). However, 5 Gb/s (5 GigaBITS) is more reasonable. And 5Gb/s converts to 625 MB/sec, which was within shouting distance of what I was seeing.

Fourth, I ABSOLUTELY do not think this is an Accusys problem. This is completely a Final Cut issue — and one that I had not discovered before. In this particular case, I believe Accusys is blameless.

Larry

By: Bruce N. Goren

Bruce N. Goren — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 02:18:06 +0000

Methinks you’ve uncovered a big juicy bug? How is the RAID conflicting with your pointing device? Peeking at the website for Accusys it seems to me you should have gotten way better performance if you had the 5GBs PCIe 2.0 interface. Do you have the latest and greatest Mac? Something is bottle-necking big time. The web site claims you can do 25 streams of Pro Res 4444! http://www.accusys.com.tw/exaraid2/solu1.htm and does not say anything about please don’t use a mouse .