GH4 GH5 Clip Spanning

J

Jim Simon

Veteran
For those who have been testing out the GH5, does it sill unnecessarily span longer takes?

One of the things I really liked when I switched from the GH4 to the BMPCC is no spanning. Every clip is self contained into a single file for ProRes, or folder for RAW.

Has Panasonic done away with this entirely unnecessary spanning, or do we editors still have to contend with this highly undesirable design flaw?
 
From everything I've read ( including some great info from our own Barry Green ), the GH5 uses ExFAT SDXC card formatting and segments it's recordings at 96 GB. So 2 segments to fill a 128 GB card, and 3 segments to fill a 256 GB card.

If you shoot AVCHD formats or use SDHC cards that are formatted as FAT32 you will back to the old 4 GB file segments. ( not that big of a deal for AVCHD if you use an import tool that will automatically stitch the 4 GB file segments back to the full clip size )
 
Consider that on a 128gb card, the most you could ever get is one split. On a 256gb card, filled to the brim, the most it will do is create three clips. That's pretty decent, and it would take hours and hours of continuous recording to even get that.
 
Jim Simon said:
An improvement, but still somewhat disappointing.

Most wedding ceremonies are about an hour.
Click to expand...

You plan on shooting wedding ceremonies with 400mbps? To each their own I guess. Seems a bit overkill to me since there is little movement in a wedding ceremony. The 150mbps format offers most of the quality advantages at a much smaller size where you could easily handle a single file.
 
Thomas Smet said:
You plan on shooting wedding ceremonies with 400mbps? To each their own I guess. Seems a bit overkill to me since there is little movement in a wedding ceremony. The 150mbps format offers most of the quality advantages at a much smaller size where you could easily handle a single file.
Click to expand...
Indeed. If 4K, 10bit 4:2:2 @150mbps isn't good enough for your ceremony, you'd better be a Hollywood star marrying European royalty live in IMAX theaters. At that point, I think spanning two clips is the least of your concerns.
 
Jim Simon said:
..... or do we editors still have to contend with this highly undesirable design flaw?
Click to expand...

Geez Jim, I'd not want to live in your world. If having to deal with two files instead of one is a highly undesirable design flaw, it must be a tremendous hardship to have to drag a mouse around to do the other editing tasks. Ok, I'm poking you in the ribs because I don't understand your statement. Why is this a highly undesirable design flaw? I'd classify it as a minor, minor, inconvenience.
 
Paul F said:
Geez Jim, I'd not want to live in your world. If having to deal with two files instead of one is a highly undesirable design flaw, it must be a tremendous hardship to have to drag a mouse around to do the other editing tasks. Ok, I'm poking you in the ribs because I don't understand your statement. Why is this a highly undesirable design flaw? I'd classify it as a minor, minor, inconvenience.
Click to expand...
In theory it could be an editorial headache on a large production, but realistically I've found that the larger the production, the shorter the takes.
 
They have already done away with it. Already on the GX85 there is no longer any spanning.

It is definitely a time saver and avoids problems with for instance Plural Eyes with audio drift adjustments.
 
You guys really don't understand what you're asking for. The longer the take, the larger the file, the more likely the file is exposed to being corrupted. What happens when the battery dies in the middle of that epic take? Would you rather lose the whole wedding or just the last five minutes?
I'm just saying, you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top