Question regarding file structure on NanoFlash CF Cards

Piotr Wozniacki · December 28th, 2009, 11:48 AM

Indeed, I failed to make distinction between mp4 and mp4 proxies.

Perhaps due to the fact that - while having many times dreamed of having proxies to the nanoFlash full HD clips - I sort of rejected it as not being viable with the current hardware, and bitrates available.

Perrone Ford · December 28th, 2009, 12:08 PM

The idea of having proxies written in addition to full-res images is a VERY interesting one. Particularly for NLEs that do not access the media directly, but must copy it over first. I am not sure if systems like CompactFlash would support parallel write operations.

It would certainly be a boon to have DV sized proxy files at say 8-10 Mbps, encoded with the same encoder.

Bob Griffiths · December 28th, 2009, 06:15 PM

Perrone,

Check out ProxyMill. http://www.imagineproducts.com/index...&products_id=1

It is not quite the same as recording simultaneous .mp4 proxies but it's darn close. You have to back-up the CF cards somehow so doing it through a Mac with ProxyMill might do the trick for you.

Perrone Ford · December 28th, 2009, 06:25 PM

Thank you Bob,

However, I have two problems with that.

1. I don't use a Mac.
2. I can do the same for free on the PC. :)

That looks like a nice option for Mac users though.

Chris Hurd · December 29th, 2009, 08:18 AM

Thread title changed from "Basic NanoFlash question" to "Question regarding file structure on NanoFlash CF Cards."

Please avoid ambiguous thread titles on DV Info Net. Thanks in advance,

Dave Chalmers · December 30th, 2009, 04:46 AM

This is an interesting point raised here - is it easier for a NanoFlash to emulate an EX card or an XDCAM disc, and which gives more benefit?

The Nano is producing 50Mbit files as MXFs with no proxy.
The EX produces 35Mbit files as MP4s with no proxy.
The XDCAM HD produces 50Mbit files as MXFs with a proxy.
In addition the card itself has to be named the right thing.

Clearly the Nano isn't about to start producing proxies, so the question is whether, if you create a clone of an XDCAM HD disc BUT without the proxies, is this recognised by NLE apps as a valid disc?
(It might be possible to test this by deleting the proxy files on an existing XDCAM disc)

Regarding editing off the card - that is effectively what Avid AMA gives you, and I don't know if that needs to see proxies to work or not.

CD have already stated that they are working on AMA support for Nano cards in Avid.

The FCP import tools from Sony already work with Nano cards, as they are less fussy about file structure etc.

I guess maybe it's only the PDZ-1 software on a PC that would benefit from this arrangement, but again it usually works off proxies which wouldn't be there.

So, I'm questioning my own assertion that this would be useful.
To be selfish I'd settle for Avid AMA support, but clearly there's other scenarios out there.

Dave C.

December 28th, 2009, 11:48 AM	#16
Piotr Wozniacki Inner Circle Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Poland Posts: 4,086	Indeed, I failed to make distinction between mp4 and mp4 proxies. Perhaps due to the fact that - while having many times dreamed of having proxies to the nanoFlash full HD clips - I sort of rejected it as not being viable with the current hardware, and bitrates available. __________________ Sony PXW-FS7 \| DaVinci Resolve Studio; Magix Vegas Pro; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive

December 28th, 2009, 12:08 PM	#17
Perrone Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Posts: 4,100	The idea of having proxies written in addition to full-res images is a VERY interesting one. Particularly for NLEs that do not access the media directly, but must copy it over first. I am not sure if systems like CompactFlash would support parallel write operations. It would certainly be a boon to have DV sized proxy files at say 8-10 Mbps, encoded with the same encoder. __________________ DVX100, PMW-EX1, Canon 550D, FigRig, Dell Octocore, Avid MC4/5, MB Looks, RedCineX, Matrox MX02 mini, GTech RAID, Edirol R-4, Senn. G2 Evo, Countryman, Moles and Lowels.

December 28th, 2009, 06:15 PM	#18
Bob Griffiths Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Carbondale, Colorado Posts: 117	ProxyMill might work for you Perrone, Check out ProxyMill. http://www.imagineproducts.com/index...&products_id=1 It is not quite the same as recording simultaneous .mp4 proxies but it's darn close. You have to back-up the CF cards somehow so doing it through a Mac with ProxyMill might do the trick for you. __________________ Bob FireDancer Productions, Inc.

December 28th, 2009, 06:25 PM	#19
Perrone Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Posts: 4,100	Thank you Bob, However, I have two problems with that. 1. I don't use a Mac. 2. I can do the same for free on the PC. :) That looks like a nice option for Mac users though. __________________ DVX100, PMW-EX1, Canon 550D, FigRig, Dell Octocore, Avid MC4/5, MB Looks, RedCineX, Matrox MX02 mini, GTech RAID, Edirol R-4, Senn. G2 Evo, Countryman, Moles and Lowels.

December 29th, 2009, 08:18 AM	#20
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	Thread title changed from "Basic NanoFlash question" to "Question regarding file structure on NanoFlash CF Cards." Please avoid ambiguous thread titles on DV Info Net. Thanks in advance, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

December 30th, 2009, 04:46 AM	#21
Dave Chalmers Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: GLASGOW, UK Posts: 71	Is it easier to emulate EX or HD...and do we need it? This is an interesting point raised here - is it easier for a NanoFlash to emulate an EX card or an XDCAM disc, and which gives more benefit? The Nano is producing 50Mbit files as MXFs with no proxy. The EX produces 35Mbit files as MP4s with no proxy. The XDCAM HD produces 50Mbit files as MXFs with a proxy. In addition the card itself has to be named the right thing. Clearly the Nano isn't about to start producing proxies, so the question is whether, if you create a clone of an XDCAM HD disc BUT without the proxies, is this recognised by NLE apps as a valid disc? (It might be possible to test this by deleting the proxy files on an existing XDCAM disc) Regarding editing off the card - that is effectively what Avid AMA gives you, and I don't know if that needs to see proxies to work or not. CD have already stated that they are working on AMA support for Nano cards in Avid. The FCP import tools from Sony already work with Nano cards, as they are less fussy about file structure etc. I guess maybe it's only the PDZ-1 software on a PC that would benefit from this arrangement, but again it usually works off proxies which wouldn't be there. So, I'm questioning my own assertion that this would be useful. To be selfish I'd settle for Avid AMA support, but clearly there's other scenarios out there. Dave C.