PDA

View Full Version : P2 Archiving Solution shown at IBC



Dan Montgomery
09-12-2006, 12:20 AM
Yes, it's true, Quantum and Imagine Products collaborated to demonstrate a P2 archiving workflow at IBC.

The Quantum SDLT600A is a stand alone Gigabit FTP box that can hold 300GB per tape. Being MXF aware, the drive builds a mini-index to any MXF files dropped onto it. This allows for easy partial restores--in other words, you can extract just a few frames of a clip by timecodes. And, the P2 Volumes are preserved in original Contents folder forms.

The files you drop onto the drive are available to anyone on your network without proprietary software, since the files are in original form. You can also connect directly to a single Mac and the drive is small enough to be reasonably portable.

The SDLT600A is very fast too, writing to the tape at 288 Mb/s -- or about 3 times faster than real time P2 video. And the tapes have a certified 30 year shelf life.

Imagine demonstrated upcoming Mac solutions that directly control the tape drive and seamlessly builds a low resolution QT proxy database of all clips (whether P2 or not) for fast searching, full textual cataloging, and managing the storage and recalling clips.

Because the SDLT600A can build new P2 Volumes of selected clip segments, it fits perfectly with Imagine's "asset managment" solutions for P2 users. Look for Q4 software releases.

Fugitive
09-12-2006, 12:25 AM
Wow. Too bad I cant afford P2...

lpcvideo1
09-12-2006, 05:47 AM
This sounds interesting! How much?

Dan Montgomery
09-15-2006, 06:06 AM
This sounds interesting! How much?

The SDLT600A retails for $6999. Tapes are about $100 each and hold 300GB.

Imagine's HDLog Gold is $699 (for single user control).

Quantum also is rolling out a SuperLoader that holds up to 4.8 TB (16 tapes). Due out 4Q for about $12k.

villeluna
09-15-2006, 06:41 AM
crapoloo, too much

Jarek Zabczynski
09-15-2006, 09:23 AM
Eeesh...Bare hard drives on a shelf still seem like the better and cheaper option. What we need are 50gig Bluray discs that cost under $10 bucks a piece.

Dan Montgomery
09-16-2006, 10:58 AM
Well, if you do the math the tapes work out to 30 cents per GB, substantially cheaper than any other format. And, the cost of the tape drive is about half what a Blue Ray deck runs (or older Beta equipment). Plus is a 30 year life. Few hard disks last more than 5 years.

From where I stand it depends on if your serious about archiving or just living for today.

Neopics
09-16-2006, 06:28 PM
The SDLT600A retails for $6999. Tapes are about $100 each and hold 300GB.
But one can get a 300GB hard drive for $100 on sale these days. And with that, you don't need a $6999 drive to host it. The SDLT600A doesn't seem like much of a value except for big companies with money to burn.

Jan_Crittenden
09-19-2006, 01:50 AM
But one can get a 300GB hard drive for $100 on sale these days. And with that, you don't need a $6999 drive to host it. The SDLT600A doesn't seem like much of a value except for big companies with money to burn.


However the biggest difference here is that the tape is a better solution in that, it doesn't have to spin up on occasion. It can sit on the shelf for years and then be pick up and used. This is not true for HDD. They have to spin on occasion or the won't in the long run.

The Quantum is a very nice solution as it does make archive on tape easy and very accessible.

Best,

jan

Antoine_Fabi
09-21-2006, 11:52 AM
==========================
"However the biggest difference here is that the tape is a better solution in that, it doesn't have to spin up on occasion. It can sit on the shelf for years and then be pick up and used. This is not true for HDD. They have to spin on occasion or the won't in the long run" dixit Jan
==========================

Jan,

why HDD have to spin occasionnally ?

If they're stored vertically, they should be OK for long periods of time ?

epicedium
09-22-2006, 03:45 AM
For higher end users of P2 (think news, corporate, advertising), this archiving solution makes a lot of sense ... and really isn't very expensive when compared to digi decks, and P2 cards, for that matter.

I've no doubt that it will sell well, but the majority of the dvxuser crowd are hardly its core market- most can hardly afford the HVX, let alone expensive archiving.

SPZ
09-26-2006, 12:58 AM
How about the new 70 gb REV Drives?

Justin Kuhn
09-27-2006, 06:06 PM
A few questions mulling around in my head here...what kind of tape this is...what makes it good for archival use, for instance--how big is one of the cassettes, how much would a pack of 'em cost you, if it's a hard drive/tape deck system or does it just write directly to the tape, and when I say tape I'm thinking DV tape or something similar to it, am I off base there? I'm kinda confused, and you guys' site was slightly unclear. In any case it seems like a step forward for the P2 workflow, if the tapes or whatever are cheap and don't artifact (much) and store well. So yeah, hopeful...but ever-so-slightly confused.

Dan Montgomery
09-27-2006, 06:29 PM
I agree the message from Quantum may not be that honed yet. As we finalize our integration with the tape drive hopefully our marketing spin will be a bit cleared in P2 terms.

I spent 5 days with these guys in Amsterdam and learned a lot. To get a 30 year shelf life the tape isn't your run of the mill stuff. Also, the deck has smarts when it comes to cueing a file--very fast.

I can't answer the pricing issues at this point. Quantum uses only select dealers for this product at the moment.

What's very cool is the "MXF aware" feature....being able to retrieve only snippets of needed material rather than forcing original file sizes. Also being application independent means the files look just like any hard disk in Finder or Explorer.

The physical size of a cassette is about that of a BetaCamSP. There is no hard disk involved. But, the drive builds an index on each tape for the file listing.

Justin Kuhn
09-27-2006, 09:48 PM
Of course I've got more questions...but for now I'm going to just say it sounds pretty darn good, even for 7K or so.

Jan_Crittenden
09-28-2006, 04:16 AM
A few questions mulling around in my head here...what kind of tape this is...what makes it good for archival use, for instance--how big is one of the cassettes, how much would a pack of 'em cost you, if it's a hard drive/tape deck system or does it just write directly to the tape, and when I say tape I'm thinking DV tape or something similar to it, am I off base there? I'm kinda confused, and you guys' site was slightly unclear. In any case it seems like a step forward for the P2 workflow, if the tapes or whatever are cheap and don't artifact (much) and store well. So yeah, hopeful...but ever-so-slightly confused.


The way that the Quantum Drive works is that it saves blank space at the front of the tape to record the MXF information, this makes for speedy retireival of single clips. The tape is a metal particle tape, unlike DV tape which is Metal Evaporated tape. Quantum does have a white paper on their website about the archival nature of one type versus the other with the conclusion being that Metal Particle tape is vastly superior in the long haul.

When determining the price of the tape you need to bring it down to how much per GB. As I recall the 300GB tape was about $100. This means that your cost of storage is 30 cents a GB. When comparing that to DV tape, DV tape is about 16 cents a minute and unreliable and of course is not HD. DVCPRO HD tape is about $1.00 per GB, so I am sure you can see the savings in the SDLT archive and you have a random access ability that is just not possible on tape.

Hope this helps,

Jan

Justin Kuhn
09-28-2006, 08:26 PM
It does indeed, very illuminating. Thanks!

daveswan
09-29-2006, 04:39 AM
Hmm...30 yr life
Sorry and all, but 30 yr aint archival. To me "archival" means min 100 years. In fact, can it be said that any purly electronic system of data storage be called archival? I think not, but that's a topic for another thread.

dregenthal
09-29-2006, 06:34 AM
"MXF aware" and the way this works is pretty cool, almost overcomes being a linear storage solution. I think I'm going to trudge along with my $750 (bought used on eBay 5 months ago) LTO-2 drive and $20 tapes.

Now if I were a TV station this would be the cats meow . . .

Justin Kuhn
09-29-2006, 11:20 PM
I'd say 30 years is long enough to figure out if your material is worth saving on a film print or not...

dregenthal
09-30-2006, 08:15 PM
I'd say 30 years is long enough to figure out if your material is worth saving on a film print or not...

Ha ha, that's funny . . . film in 2036?

I don't think so.

More likely everything will be reduced to a chip the width of a nose hair and wi-fi'd directly to the brain, bypassing the optic nerve completely. But hey, who nose?

Justin Kuhn
09-30-2006, 09:41 PM
Film is the best way to make sure the footage stays around a good long time...

Neopics
09-30-2006, 09:57 PM
(Retract)

My apologies to Jan. I had made a defensive remark about DV tape being able to hold HD on the HD100, but realized she meant using DV tape as an archiving option specifically for the HVX200, which of course cannot store HD on DV tape.

Again, I'm sorry. It was inappropriate under the context of this thread.

daveswan
10-02-2006, 03:16 AM
As I said, a purly electronic system cannot in any way be considerd archival, if by archival you mean "beyond my / our lifetime"
Provided the base is archival (Estar rather than acetate), and the film is stored sympatheticaly, then the image can always be "read", can the same be said of any electronic/digital system? I think not, even if the data does not degrade, can it be decoded? Again probably not, certainly not in the 100+ year timescale, and remember, old B&W silents of 80 years ago can still be recoverd, and still photos of 150 yr are still around.

Dave

Jan_Crittenden
10-02-2006, 03:28 AM
Dave,

I think in this and other Video applications when we discuss archive, we really are talking about the footage to be useable in our lifetime for our own interests and money making capability. Your point is taken and the Library of Congress would agree with you as for the purest interpretation of the word. However the folks that are working with video as data, need a means of archiving and retreiving their footage shot today yesterday and years ago. On tape, that is pretty straight-forward, just find the tape; in the data domain, one has to retool a bit to resolve that parameter. That is what this discussion is about.

While I am sure it would be in everyone's wildest dreams to have the Library of Congress care about their images being preserved for the next 100 years, most of us really need a means of finding the one clip out of 40,000 that has the subject matter on it that I need, and that is what this solution will help folks do and yes it is called an archive as well.

Hope that puts it into perspective for you.

Best,

Jan

Dan Montgomery
10-02-2006, 05:22 AM
Hmm...30 yr life
Sorry and all, but 30 yr aint archival. To me "archival" means min 100 years. In fact, can it be said that any purly electronic system of data storage be called archival? I think not, but that's a topic for another thread.

I've seen 10 year pen on paper that didn't last.... can't imagine what media you're thinking of. Heck, film isn't much better than 30 years. I think the gentleman that stopped by at IBC had it right. His company budgets to transfer their important archives over to current technology every 10 years.

daveswan
10-02-2006, 08:13 AM
Jan, your point is well taken, and I apologise for hijacking this thread. It wasn't intentional. Perhaps discusions about what constitutes "archivality" belong in another forum

Dave

Arson
11-29-2006, 03:32 AM
All my tape drive backups from 1989 to 1995 when I switched to CDs are demagnetized and non functional. Some of those old CDs that werent gold are toast too.

baremis
11-30-2006, 12:39 PM
what is the best archiving solution ?

Justin Kuhn
12-03-2006, 08:48 AM
That's clearly a matter of opinion and personal need.