why should I keep my MXF's

W

walnutcrunch

Well-known member
We just got the 500 and the camera is most awesome, but the whole workflow thing is taking some serious brainpower.

I know everyone says archive the MXF's. But why?

Once we get them from the field to the FCP workstation do we really need to keep them? As near as I can tell the metadata from the MXF's isn't really transferring when we do our log and import. When we log an import we add our own clip names to the files. There goes the reference to the MXF's. I think. We also use the process to get rid of all the bad shots and only import the good.

Since FCP just removes the MXF wrapper and replaces it with a QT wrapper nothing is really lost in the process. Yes we are going from an open format to a closed one, but really, that seems like no big deal.

From that point it seems really easy to archive the QT's to our server, then data tape.

Otherwise we have to keep these MXF's around plus the imported quicktimes in case we need to rebuild the project. I'm not a big fan of that duplication.
 
My take on backing up the MXF's is that you cant have too many backups. Im only using the HVX with 4gig cards, so we back them up to DVD. Fits real nice. Dunno what to do with the larger than 4gig cards tho.

I see the MXF's as your tapes. Its too easy to accidently delete .mov's. Especially if they are scattered across a few folders in the capture scratch. I feel if that the mxfs are kept in a sane folder structure its much easier to find that particular shot that you want from there, compared to importing from a folder of quicktime movies.

Added to that that the MXF format (i read this on the mxf website ages ago so im a bit hazy on the details) has some kind of data integrity checking inbuilt, and i think that although you dont have to back them up. To me it makes sense. Would you throw out or re-use your tapes, just because you had digitised them all, and backed up the mov files? no.

Also most of the time if your being efficient you dont need to ingest all of the MXF's. in that way you can keep duplication down, until you need it.

I personnally dont feel safe with only the quicktime files. Maybe its just me being paranoid, but i dont think you can be too paranoid wiht this kind of stuff.

My 2c

Mark
 
If you're not a big fan of duplication, why not get Raylight and keep only the MXFs, and get rid of the limited duplicates that FCP makes? You can keep one copy of the source files, the more complete copy, and do away with the whole file import process and instead just edit your footage immediately. If you ever need to transfer footage to a Windows system you'd have a much more interchangeable file format instead of the closed-end Quicktimes that won't play on Windows, etc.
 
How does media management work with Raylight? What I'm concerned with is archiving a project, then going back a year later and rebuilding it. How will everything know to relink?

Also as far a paring everything down goes, I'd be left with using P2CMS to preview and delete any junk clips. If I didn't do that I'd have to leave the P2 card images intact wouldn't I?

Upon finishing a project, I couldn't just tell FCP to media manage everything and take every clip in the bin and copy it to an archive folder because it would be trying to archive individual MXF's wouldn't it?
 
I guess its a quuestion of "relying or not relying on the P2 (or FCP) workflow"...

If you are SURE that your working files (MXF , FCP Copies, AVI intermediates or whatever) are FINE , go ahead and delete the original files.

My impression is that this written sentence is Panasonics warranty not to be blamed for any loss of data caused by harddrives, program crashes or user errors.

In this case, Panasonic will state "simply take your (archived) original MXFs" - done...

ULI
 
walnutcrunch said:
How does media management work with Raylight? What I'm concerned with is archiving a project, then going back a year later and rebuilding it. How will everything know to relink?

Also as far a paring everything down goes, I'd be left with using P2CMS to preview and delete any junk clips. If I didn't do that I'd have to leave the P2 card images intact wouldn't I?

Upon finishing a project, I couldn't just tell FCP to media manage everything and take every clip in the bin and copy it to an archive folder because it would be trying to archive individual MXF's wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

If there was enough interest we could create an application for Raylight that would go through your edit list and produce self-contained quicktimes for every referenced clip, and copy only the referenced clips and an updated edit list into a backup folder to reduce the storage requirements. However I wonder how many people would use that provided the AC is already naming takes and deleting outtakes with P2 CMS before they are copied to the editing system. In that case the cost of backing up 3-4X more storage vs a trimmed project might not be worth the trouble. Or is it?
 
There are PC people, and there are Mac people, and never the twaine shall meet... The question here was asked by (obviously) a Mac person who is not about to dump his beloved computer and FCP for a new work environment - so... Raylight apparently (if their PC oriented website is correct) is not an answer to his question...

I store all the original MXF files in appropriatly named folders on tray-loading 800FW 500g drives (Granite)... They're pretty cheap and don't take up much space..

After I Log and Transfer to Scratch Disks on an external RAID (I'm on a G5 Quad, by the way) I back up the Scratch Disk QT files to yet another Granite tray/drive. Redundancy helps me sleep at night.

The main reason that I don't want everything in my Scratch disks is that I often roll for audio only (I also occasionally accidentally forget to shut off the camera while moving from one place to another - don't tell anyone) and by de-selecting Video or marking IN and OUT points in Log and Transfer I'm able to keep the file sizes (on the RAID) more manageable. ...

In my case I'm working on a feature length documentary, so I have many many hours of footage. Working this way protects my camera original and also protects my QT file choices...

If I was going to scrap something, it would be the original MXF files because once my choices have the QT wrapper on them - and are backed up, and I'm sure I have everything I need - I'm good to go in FCP even if I lose the Scratch drive.

Long answer to a short question, and I'm sure there are many - probably some better - sollutions... but this is what's working for me...

(By the way, my log-in name MAC does not refer to a computer, it refers to Mac and the boys from Steinbeck's CANNERY ROW, where my office is located)
 
Last edited:
I started with Mac, moved to PC, then came back to Mac for our current workflow. Mac right now is the right tool for us for a number of reasons other than, but including, FCP. So platform wise I'm locked to Mac, though not for any religious reason.

We actually use a PC laptop in the field because of the handy PCMCIA slot.

Log and transfer doesn't bug me. It goes fast. Very fast. In comparison to the time it takes to offload a P2 card it goes ridiculously fast. So it's not a huge deal to put a QT wrapper on things and when passing files around different computers it makes life a little easier.

So when shooting the P2 cards go to a laptop drive and then backed up in the field to a firewire drive. Once back at the office, they get imported off the firewire, into QT wrappers, and into FCP.

The import process in FCP lets us cull the clips, but what happens to metadata I don't know.

Now the next step is the clincher. By what you are saying Mac it seems like we have it right. Once we're sure the imported clips are solid, we take the imported folder where the new QT's live, and copy it to our backup server that functions as a near-line library. That server is backed up to tape weekly.

Once we're done our edit, I media manage the clips into an archive, put that on the server. Delete the MXF's from the firewire drive and all should be well in the world.

The only hitch would be importing overcranked or undercranked footage. I'd have to make sure that would be right, or with the loss of the MXF, we'd never get a chance to do it again.

Raylight seems like it gives me the ability to import directly, but adds an extra layer to the process.
 
Mac said:
There are PC people, and there are Mac people, and never the twaine shall meet... The question here was asked by (obviously) a Mac person who is not about to dump his beloved computer and FCP for a new work environment - so... Raylight apparently (if their PC oriented website is correct) is not an answer to his question...
Click to expand...

Raylight is available for FCP.
 
walnutcrunch said:
Raylight seems like it gives me the ability to import directly, but adds an extra layer to the process.
Click to expand...

In a sense, yes, but that layer is transparent -- far moreso than the implementation of the open timeline in FCP 6, which does on-the-fly transcodings of the various file formats to the timeline format. So, in other words, if you like what you see in the open timeline, Raylight should be even smoother.
 
Boy, if Raylight works with Macs they sure don't want anyone to know about it.. I've checked their site in the past, and again just now, and all I see there is Windows..

What are it's advantages in an FCP work flow?
 
Mac said:
Boy, if Raylight works with Macs they sure don't want anyone to know about it.. I've checked their site in the past, and again just now, and all I see there is Windows..

What are it's advantages in an FCP work flow?
Click to expand...

Try the Products page, the link for "Raylight for MAC" or the second link under Latest News at dvfilm.com

The advantages are faster workflow, faster performance, actually being able to use the metadata, and the ability to write to a P2 Card. The website has more details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top