Why is this guy hating on P2?

filmtovideo

filmtovideo

Well-known member
This is from a post yesterday in the General Discussion forum on
Cinematography.com

"Hi,

There's a lot of very good stuff out there at the moment for very little money; assuming you're convinced that you need to buy rather than rent, which is a question I have a personal policy of always asking, then I'd look into something HDV.

I have had quite extensive contact with P2 and, despite the fact that I'm entirely comfortable around IT, I have never had anything other than a horrible experience with it. Even if you use Panasonic's prescribed software (and you can realistically use no other, which is a big downer) it is generally a nightmare of intricate file copying and directory rearrangement.

No production I have ever worked with using P2 has ever got away without having to actually write software to make it happen - usually batch files to process things and generate extra metadata.

P2 is a complete bear. Avoid like the plague. It's a great, forward-looking idea, but the implementation is awful."


I've shot a good amount of P2 footage, for myself and others, and love the
HVX-200. The footage I've shot for my own projects is still stored on a Lacie
as I haven't been able to edit yet (even 6 months later.) Is there anything
to what this guy is saying?
 
It all depends on how he's trying to work with it. It can be extremely effortless; just shoot, then edit. Or it can be more involved, usually if you use a Mac you have to employ certain workarounds to overcome the Mac P2 software's limitations. But writing software and writing batch files? I haven't met anyone yet who's had to do that! Granted, P2 Genie is a software tool that was written to automate some file copying tasks, but it's a nearly no-brainer on the Windows platform to:
a) create a directory
b) drag the contents.

I don't really understand how someone could classify that as it being "a complete bear" to be avoided "like the plague." Perhaps the author should clarify where he's run into limitations? There's some 35,000 HVX owners out there successfully using the system right now, so to say that the "implementation is awful" seems like it's a tad unrepresentative of everyone else's experiences.
 
Barry_Green said:
It all depends on how he's trying to work with it. It can be extremely effortless; just shoot, then edit. Or it can be more involved, usually if you use a Mac you have to employ certain workarounds to overcome the Mac P2 software's limitations. But writing software and writing batch files? I haven't met anyone yet who's had to do that! Granted, P2 Genie is a software tool that was written to automate some file copying tasks, but it's a nearly no-brainer on the Windows platform to:
a) create a directory
b) drag the contents.

I don't really understand how someone could classify that as it being "a complete bear" to be avoided "like the plague." Perhaps the author should clarify where he's run into limitations? There's some 35,000 HVX owners out there successfully using the system right now, so to say that the "implementation is awful" seems like it's a tad unrepresentative of everyone else's experiences.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Barry, I feel reassured and looking forward to editing. I have your
book and DVDs and they're great. As far as I know, the people I've shot P2
footage for have all edited okay.
 
filmtovideo said:
Even if you use Panasonic's prescribed software (and you can realistically use no other, which is a big downer) it is generally a nightmare of intricate file copying and directory rearrangement.
Click to expand...
What prescribed software, and what problems resulting from using something else? And contrary to what he says, you do not need to rearrange any files or directories -- in fact you should NOT do that.

filmtovideo said:
No production I have ever worked with using P2 has ever got away without having to actually write software to make it happen - usually batch files to process things and generate extra metadata.
Click to expand...
What extra metadata is he talking about that is required but not present? If you use most other recording systems, metadata doesn't even exist, and with P2, all clips have their full meta data attached already. You can write software to add or change the metadata, but it certainly isn't required to work with the clips.
 
I haven't had problems.

I haven't had problems.

but I'm not an Electronics Engineer, a Computer Engineer, and no longer qualify as a Software Engineer. (20 yrs was enough)!

filmtovideo said:
"I have had quite extensive contact with P2 and, despite the fact that I'm entirely comfortable around IT, I have never had anything other than a horrible experience with it."
Click to expand...

From my perspective, "quite extensive contact with P2" means one is intimate (not just familiar) - and has worked with - the internals, i.e. either, or both, hardware and software. I'd expect this of an EE, a CE, or a software engineer at either Panasonic, a competitor, or another firm looking to somehow exploit P2 technology for some new interface or adapter. OTOH, could I argue that I've had "quite extensive contact with P2", simply because I've handled them so often while swapping cards or offloading? (After 20 yrs of mainframe work, and $ 10 K spent learning C/S and PC progamming, I, too, am "entirely comfortable with IT", but after 6 yrs away from the job, I'm not about to go trying to write programs for a new, proprietary technology.

filmtovideo said:
Even if you use Panasonic's prescribed software (and you can realistically use no other, which is a big downer) it is generally a nightmare of intricate file copying and directory rearrangement.

No production I have ever worked with using P2 has ever got away without having to actually write software to make it happen - usually batch files to process things and generate extra metadata.
Click to expand...

Unless this person is working with self-built or custom hardware or software, I can't imagine what his/her experience has been, or what NLE he/she might have tried to use with P2 files. (I hope it wasn't the original Premier for the Mac). I use the entire Adobe CS2 suite, with CineForm's Aspect HD (neither of which, I believe, is actually "prescribed" by Panasonic) and the workflow is fine with me. It certainly beats capture from tape.

filmtovideo said:
P2 is a complete bear. Avoid like the plague. It's a great, forward-looking idea, but the implementation is awful."
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. Yes, P2 has a few small quirks, and so does the HVX; neither are perfect. I'd be very interested in learning what his/her experience has been.


filmtovideo said:
I've shot a good amount of P2 footage, for myself and others, and love the
HVX-200. The footage I've shot for my own projects is still stored on a Lacie
as I haven't been able to edit yet (even 6 months later.) Is there anything
to what this guy is saying?
Click to expand...

Ditto that.
Unless there's some secret cavern where P2 horror stories are stored, I'm not aware of any complaints that even remotely resemble his/her ragging about P2 use.
While I'll pay attention for stories of similar complaints, until I see some, I'm putting no stock in this observation.

x
 
Been using MAC G4 laptop for 18 months with P2. No problems.
Not one glitch. Maybe I am lucky? Preparation is the key.
I have shot over 500 4 gig cards worth of footage.
Most of the clients I work with are Final Cut Pro. They want to
see footage in a timeline while we are shooting. It eases their
minds. No one I have shot for uses Premiere Pro, Vegas or Edius.
I have Raylight and a PC laptop as well loaded with all three of those
programs just in case I ever did get a PC client.....still waiting.
Next week we are getting a new MacBook Pro, FCS2, 16 gig cards
and a copy of XP so we can sell the PC laptop......
 
I don't really get it when people say you have to work around stuff with the p2 and macs anyway.

Ok maybe PC's save a step but not one that I can see really matters.

Mac Workflow
1) Insert P2 card in slot on laptop.
2) Copy card to laptop or external drive.
Once your are ready to edit ...
3) Open FCP
4) select P2 import and import.
If your scratch disk is in a different place than your offload disc then you're original copy just became your backup when you imported in FCP, something you would need to do anyway. If not then mover your original copy of the P2 card to another drive now.

So given the fact that you should make a backup copy anyway I don't see what the big deal is that you have to import the footage into FCP as opposed to working right off the card in some PC NLE's.

I've worked on 3 shorts, 2 music videos, One Commercial, One Feature all offloading P2's to Macs and it has been seemless and easy, and much much much much much better than working with tape.

Also the new FCP 6 has a kind of sort of P2 viewer which allows you to view the clips before import and relabel them with some automated reel based labeling if you wish.

Just anytime I hear that Mac work flow is difficult with P2's I think, well my mac won't tie my shoes or zip my fly either but both are so easy I don't really need it to. :grin: I mean those things are easy and take no time, given that you must, must make a back up at some point anyway.
 
Last edited:
Jack's suggestions are great, but I have one caveat or step

I always write protect the card before inserting into a Mac.

Other than that, I've not had any issues following essentially the same workflow.
 
I'm up to 400 8 gig card transfers and have lost 1 x 5 sec clip... which could probably be repaired if I really need it...

I think the guy is spitting BS about extensive use of P2...

I'm not saying P2 is easy when you go on a hike into the frozen wastelands with laptop etc... and you do need to get a work flow happening that's suitable for YOUR needs..

Cheers

www.les.herstik.com
 
I don't think the guy is addressing reliability issues... I would guess that his complaint has to do with the "anonymous" nature of P2 card labeling ("NO NAME", random characters, etc.), the associations between spanned clips, and the re-use of the media necessitating SOME field copying process in most situations. These are all things which necessitate a degree of caution because they can occasionally lead to confusion/data loss. As we all know, it's a whole new workflow with benefits and problems all its own. Further, I don't think he was quite so negative; and I'd agree that a few small changes (e.g., autoincrementing names of P2 card volumes, making P2 less dependent on specific drivers, allowing in-camera setting of metadata, etc.) could be a great help.... I don't know who the guy was addressing, for what type of shoot - but in certain cases, the "tape marked with a sharpie" workflow is certainly easier, faster, and more reliable.

Hey, I personally have no problem with the P2 workflow when it's appropriate, but I've seen (and worked with) people used to either film or tape who were dangerously sloppy with P2, and tended to consistently lose footage - certainly their own fault, in an objective sense, but particularly problematic to them because the P2 workflow requires a bit more attention and precision during acquisition, and some degree of computer savvy.

So, there are certainly some people to whom I'd never recommend P2, and others to whom I'd recommend it over all else.
 
Last edited:
filmtovideo said:
I've shot a good amount of P2 footage, for myself and others, and love the
HVX-200. The footage I've shot for my own projects is still stored on a Lacie
as I haven't been able to edit yet (even 6 months later.) Is there anything
to what this guy is saying?
Click to expand...

Just an added note - important data stored on just 1 hard drive is much less secure than I'd be comfortable with - especially a LaCie! Hard drives crash or can be accidentally overwritten; LaCies especially have a bad habit of dying suddenly. As anyone computer-savvy will tell you, backup is always essential. This is indeed some extra copying work, and some extra storage cost, but necessary, especially with P2 - there's no original media to go back to!
 
Okay, for people who don't get why the Mac is an issue, let me just submit that you guys probably know what you're doing and know to avoid the situations that cause the "issues". Lots of people don't.Yes the Mac can work extremely well with P2, if you know what the caveats are.

When we did the Iditarod, we had 150 cards, over 20 days, meaning there were something on the order of 2,000 to 3,000 cards shot. All were offloaded and edited on Macs, and we had no problems whatsoever. Not a single glitch, not a single lost frame, not a single corrupted clip, not a single disappeared volume, nothing. But then again, we had Art Aldrich designing the workflow for us!

So -- here's what you have to be aware of, as I understand it (not being a Mac user, currently, but due to become one sometime this year):

1) You *must* write-protect the cards before you put them in the computer. Lots of people don't do this. Those people get "the glitch". The glitch is very infrequent, but it can happen. Write-protecting the cards first puts a little "condom" on the P2 card, preventing it from catching the "glitch". Practice safe computing and you shouldn't have a problem. Ignore this advice at your peril. Yes I know there are many out there who've never write protected their cards, and never gotten the glitch -- there are also lots of people who have played russian roulette and not gotten shot. But sooner or later it happens. So just write-protect and you'll avoid any issues.

2) Desktop aliases. Someone should confirm this, but from what I understand, when you put a card in the Mac it pops up with a "NO NAME" volume. You then open that up and drag the contents over to your hard drive, all is fine and well. Then, the PROPER workflow is to drag that desktop card image to your "eject" button, and once it's been "ejected" you pop the card out, and can put another card in. BUT NOT EVERYONE DOES THIS. You can actually physically eject the card from a PCD20 (or other reader) and the Mac leaves that desktop alias in place! Which means that the next time you put the card in, it may not update the alias. And when you go to copy the files over, it copies the "shadow" files, not the real files! So when you eject your card and format it, you're actually losing footage!This is bad and dangerous. I haven't experienced this but I've heard from others that it does happen. The solution is, once again, to know what you're doing -- always software-eject the card. But the reality is, some people don't know that, and they lose footage because of it. This is a Mac issue because on the PC when you eject a card it's gone, there is no such thing as a desktop alias in WinXP (but, hmmm... I don't know if that stays true in Windows Vista?)

3) P2 Store volumes mounting. This is a known and documented problem, sometimes MacOS doesn't "mount" all the volumes on the P2 Store to the desktop. Say you offloaded 14 cards to your P2 Store, then plug it into the Mac -- hopefully you'll get 14 "no name" volumes popping up on the desktop (which is another problem, but we'll get to that in a minute). You open each one and successfully copy it over, and all's well. BUT: sometimes not all 14 (or however many) show up! Sometimes you'll get 13. Or 11. Or whatever. If you don't know to manually go in and mount all volumes, you may actually not know that you're not getting all the footage off the P2 Store! Then when you format the P2 Store, you've lost all the footage on those missing volumes. This is a bug in the way MacOS works with the P2 Store, but you've got to be aware of it, know about it, and manually follow the procedure to make sure all the volumes mount. Again, this never happens on the PC because the PC doesn't mount volumes like that, it makes drive letters available and all of them show up at all times. (unless you're on a network and have mapped network drives to something else, in which case I guess the same type of missing-drive situation could happen). But even then, you'd know about it, because the PC mounts drives as individual consecutive drive letters, not as a random smattering of "NO NAME" volumes.

4) That "NO NAME" issue makes working with the volumes more cumbersome. Because the Mac doesn't ascribe individual identifying volume names or in some way give you a way to differentiate them, it increases the risk of missing or cross-pollinating your volumes. Again, not an issue with Windows, where each volume is individually labeled by a drive letter. So if you know what you're doing and are meticulous with your data management you won't have a problem, but for those who aren't so skilled it's not really a surprise to me that they occasionally run into issues.It's possible that the latest version of P2 Store Manager fixes this for Macs, I don't know. On Windows the P2 Store manager can mount the drives as individual drive letters, or also as folders within one master folder. Has the Mac P2 Store Manager been updated to allow the folders-within-folder concept? If so, I highly recommend experimenting with that methodology, it may make this particular mac-related issue much easier to work with.

5) FCP bugs and doesn't import all the files. It's happened in every version of FCP from 5.0.4 to the current 6.0, sometimes FCP reports clips are "corrupt" when in fact they're not. People are able to import the clips using P2 Log, or playing the clips back from the camera (which proves they're not corrupt) but FCP's import dialog is not foolproof. Again, not an issue for those of you who know what you're doing and know that this happens, but for the folks out there who don't know about this it can be maddening. Raylight would solve this by bypassing the whole import process completely.These are my main issues with the Mac workflow.

THIS IS NOT "HATING ON THE MAC"; this is answering the question of "why do we say working with P2 on the Mac is more cumbersome than working with P2 on Windows." Yes the Mac P2 integration is a bit more cumbersome than the PC workflow. Yes the PC integration is tighter. Doesn't really matter, since 95% of HVX users appear to be on the Mac anyway. And they don't complain, which is fine; just be aware of what the issues are and of what you have to do to work around them.
 
4) That "NO NAME" issue makes working with the volumes more cumbersome. Because the Mac doesn't ascribe individual identifying volume names or in some way give you a way to differentiate them
Click to expand...

You're totally right Barry - but let me add that all we mac guys need to do (after you've copied that "no name" folder to your drive) is single click on it and name it something meaningful. DATE/SCENE/card# or whatever you come up with. Your done.

For me this is the stuff that is easy because it's all been worked out now for both mac and pc users. What amazes me is that the rest of the production process no one ever talks about and therefore it's not worked out yet for P2. If you use FCP and you do everything inside of it then all you need to know is "how do I get it from card to FCP". But if you work in P2 at 720p and need to handoff to someone else doing the audio things get more difficult. If you make changes to the edit and need to inform the audio person of those changes things get even more difficult. So P2 is an elegant process if you're a one man band but in a workgroup ... it's not totally baked yet.
 
Agree on the labeling thing. I just go:
In a folder labelled "'project' footage":
subfolders as follows:
p201
p202
p203
etc. for each card.

But how is working with P2 in post any different than working with tape, or film or anything else for post production audio?
 
Clearly I don't understand how somebody from cinematography.com that calls themselves an IT engineer would have problems with P2. That dude is a moron. The limitations have been stated and gradually remyfied for the past two years. The only limitation with the HVX is cost of ownership. If you can't afford it dont bash it. period.
 
Barry:

You have to actually option drag the p2 card no name volume to copy it.

When that occurs a small green circle with a "+" sign appears to alert that it is a copy rather than an alias.

Then to unmount the p2 volume, you drag the original no name volume to the trash icon which become a metallic arrow icon with the word "eject" on it.

You should refine the workflow and make this a sticky.

I've been doing this for sixteen months and have no loss data.
 
But how is working with P2 in post any different than working with tape, or film or anything else for post production audio?
Click to expand...

1. Since P2 dosen't originate from tape we lose an absolute timecode reference. Pretty much ALL tape based workflows rely on this.
2. Since P2 dosen't originate from tape there's no reference to an actual "tape" so there are problems with things like EDL's.

It's only a matter of time before the companies remedy this (Avid, FCP and others). In the meantme we work around it and enjoy the freedom of not having to deal with tape.
 
David S. said:
I've been doing this for sixteen months and have no loss data.
Click to expand...

That's the point -- those who know what they're doing, are getting along just fine. But those who don't know what the particular "gotchas" are, can end up in trouble.

I agree that it should be made a sticky, absolutely. Send me detailed explanations of any step that I got wrong, and I'll turn it into an article on "Working with P2 on the Mac" and post it as a sticky.

Thanks for all your help in helping our Mac users avoid any potential gotchas!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top