Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: HD Playback on Catalyst

  1. #31
    Have there been any results or comparisons between Mtron SSDs vs xServeRAID?
    SourceChild
    TODD SCRUTCHFIELD

    ...if it ain't broke...
    gimme 5 and then don't act surprised

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Barcelona Greater Area
    Posts
    10
    Hi,

    I have tested also with HDV, DCPROHD, H264 and ProRes codecs... and we only had good performance with one layer.

    We tryed to sync two plays from the same clip (and two different clips) and both are on sync.. but on the Catalyst Display, Video one is at 25fps and video 2 is at 11 fps..

    I know that Richard always recomends DV, but I prefer Photo-JPEG because you can control the compression and the quality is much better since it's a true progressive codec.. so everything but video looks crisper and with better color range.

    Anyway in HD, you cannot use DV (unless you force settings out of standards), so I guess I will continue with Photo-JPEG.

    "OPPSSS... I skyped by accident the posts about Apple Intermediate Codec, I will check it out!"

    But a good option to optimize the performance will be to define two different Content Drives/Volumes as Catalyst Libraries.

    In my case I have a SCSI volume and a Raid Volume of 3 Raptors.

    It will be nice to be able to have some videos on the SCSI and the other layers on the RAID..

    It's possible to define Catalyst Libraries at different volumes?

    Thanks!
    Last edited by jjrecort; 07-01-2008 at 01:49 PM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Barcelona Greater Area
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by samsc View Post

    the problem is that SATA discs have very poor random access data rates - sure they can do 150MB/s or more in a RAID config- but that is for 1 file - read sequentially.
    catalyst does not read 1 file sequentially. It reads 1 file for each and every layer. In a random and unpredictable manner.
    And SATA raids can actually perform worse with catalyst than a single

    But What about WD RAPTORS..are SATA but with the same specs of the SCSI.. 10.000 rpm and

    - Read Seek Time 4.6 ms
    - Write Seek Time 5.2 ms (average)
    - Track-To-Track Seek Time 0.4 ms (average)

    The problem is when we have to move HD files.. we need both.. high output and high access speed!

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Barcelona Greater Area
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by samsc View Post

    you can also investigate whether apple's pro -res codec or DVCProHD is "Uncompressed" enough... for your client.
    ( I could get almost 50frames per second total - from Pro-res 1080p ( seems to be around 30MB/s ) and DVCProHD 1080p ( around 15MB/s ) using MTRON and quad 2.66Ghz Intel )
    If the Costumer is picky... he will notice the DVCPRO HD Compression... ProRes visually is like Uncompressed so it's a good choice.

    but..

    ProRes it takes a lot of computer resources to uncompress, specially over the Graphics board.. on the Decklinks are sigthly better.

    So what you will gain on bandwith probably will affect the overall performance of the system.

    ProRes is a resoure eater codec!

  5. #35
    Apple intermediate codec works best - far better than anything else.

    You need to look at MTRON SSD for HD playback - works so much better than anything else

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by jjrecort View Post
    If the Costumer is picky... he will notice the DVCPRO HD Compression... ProRes visually is like Uncompressed so it's a good choice.

    but..

    ProRes it takes a lot of computer resources to uncompress, specially over the Graphics board.. on the Decklinks are sigthly better.

    So what you will gain on bandwith probably will affect the overall performance of the system.

    ProRes is a resoure eater codec!
    DVC PRO HD codec only installed with final cut pro-
    And only gives 1 layer playback - its performance is very poor.

    For ProRes also need final cut installed.

    AIC works better than both. and looks just as good

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by jjrecort View Post
    But What about WD RAPTORS..are SATA but with the same specs of the SCSI.. 10.000 rpm and

    - Read Seek Time 4.6 ms
    - Write Seek Time 5.2 ms (average)
    - Track-To-Track Seek Time 0.4 ms (average)

    The problem is when we have to move HD files.. we need both.. high output and high access speed!
    raptors do not work as well as scsi.

    Use MTRON SSD. works much better

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by jjrecort View Post
    Hi,

    I have tested also with HDV, DCPROHD, H264 and ProRes codecs... and we only had good performance with one layer.

    We tryed to sync two plays from the same clip (and two different clips) and both are on sync.. but on the Catalyst Display, Video one is at 25fps and video 2 is at 11 fps..

    I know that Richard always recomends DV, but I prefer Photo-JPEG because you can control the compression and the quality is much better since it's a true progressive codec.. so everything but video looks crisper and with better color range.

    Anyway in HD, you cannot use DV (unless you force settings out of standards), so I guess I will continue with Photo-JPEG.

    "OPPSSS... I skyped by accident the posts about Apple Intermediate Codec, I will check it out!"

    But a good option to optimize the performance will be to define two different Content Drives/Volumes as Catalyst Libraries.

    In my case I have a SCSI volume and a Raid Volume of 3 Raptors.

    It will be nice to be able to have some videos on the SCSI and the other layers on the RAID..

    It's possible to define Catalyst Libraries at different volumes?

    Thanks!
    No Richard recommends AIC ( apple intermediate codec )
    HDV, DCPROHD, H264 and ProRes
    All have poor performance - related to CPU - NOT disc.

    Also recommend MTRON SSD - as they work much better than discs.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by SourceChild View Post
    Have there been any results or comparisons between Mtron SSDs vs xServeRAID?
    MTRON works much better than xServeRAID.
    and doesnt weigh 45kg.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by samsc View Post
    MTRON works much better than xServeRAID.
    and doesnt weigh 45kg.
    I agree with you. I have yet to buy an xServeRAID. I do however have several machines with 32Gb and 64Gb Mtrons in them and they work fine. I do have a few seek issues with the Mtron and Catalyst. I end up crashing Catalyst. When I can duplicate the issue I will report it.

    Now that I have SSDs, many of the multi-projector edge blending projects I am doing are getting HD content. I have started taking all of my stock HD content (Motion Loops, Artbeats, Digital Juice) and converting it to Apple Intermediate Codec @ 1920x1080 and 1280x720.

    The problem is, a dozen or so stock content libraries eats through a 64Gb disk fast. At least with an xServe Raid I would have more storage space for some of these permanent installs I'm working on.
    SourceChild
    TODD SCRUTCHFIELD

    ...if it ain't broke...
    gimme 5 and then don't act surprised

Similar Threads

  1. XServe RAID and catalyst
    By samsc in forum Catalyst Technology questions
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 21-01-2007, 10:08 PM
  2. SDI Video Input and Layer Playback Performance
    By Laura in forum Catalyst Technical support
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-09-2005, 01:38 AM
  3. Unpredictable Movie Playback Speed
    By z6p6tist6 in forum Catalyst Technical support
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-05-2004, 06:06 AM
  4. Beta SP Playback
    By Portal in forum Catalyst Technology questions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 19-03-2004, 03:53 PM
  5. Can I do hdtv resolution playback in catalyst?
    By samsc in forum Catalyst Technology questions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2003, 08:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •