On Tuesday, December 30, 2003, at 10:30 PM, Daniel Beck wrote: > > On Dec 31, 2003, at 12:14 PM, James Asherman wrote: > >> On Tuesday, December 30, 2003, at 09:20 PM, Daniel Beck wrote: > >>> My suggestion would be to consider getting Final Cut. Then you won't >>> need to store all those media files. You would have have your >>> project files and would be able to re-capture whatever media you >>> need off your original tapes. Sure Final Cut costs much, but so do >>> hard disks. And with books by Michael Rubin, it's not nearly as hard >>> to learn as you might think. > >> too much precious time and tape drive thrashing. >> My solution? >> 80 gig cuda boot drive. 40 gigs sitting open. >> 80 gig capture drive. Cleaned after every job. also a cuda >> 80 gig storage drive on second bus under DVD drive for deep storage. > > You must not do as much editing as I do then. It doesn't take so much > time nor tape thrashing, because how often do you go back and edit a > finished product? The disk space you save is more than worth it. And > when you do need to edit a finished project, you can have Final Cut do > the capturing while you're sleeping or watching TV or just away from > the computer. > > Of course, this depends on your needs. > > Daniel > I turn out like two hours of finished product every day and turn over about 50 gigs every day. Final cut can capture by itself with or without logs. Sadly , every time I walk away, tape glitches happen. Nevertheless with a good tape I can capture the whole hour or whatever and make my decisions in final cut. Making logs and batch capturing 2-3 hours of tape, makes your tape machine stop, start , search,pause, and is in my mind not preferable to just pressing play and then making decisions off the harddrive. Now if one were doing a feature film or some other LARGE scale enterprise that may in fact, need further revision, then ok. J