Batch Capture on Tapeless Workflow

It seems to me that this would already have been on the forums but despite some stringent searching I could not find it. Also couldn't find it in the FCP user manual.
I do corporate video editing on footage filmed on Canon XL2s. Great cameras - when they were released. I'm trying to convince my boss to upgrade to HD cameras, some HVXs or at least a pair of Canon 5Ds or 7Ds for which we could use our existing lenses.
One thing he brought up is batch capturing. Currently, we have a script supervisor who logs all shots, takes etc. on set, with timecode starts and ends. I can then import this into Final Cut Pro as a batch, which makes digitizing a footage a BREEZE.
On a tapeless workflow I would use the Log and Transfer window as opposed to Log and Capture, and as far as I know batch digitizing only works with Log and Capture. Then again, I've never been on a tapeless line. Does anyone have a concise explanation of how to do this? As far as I can tell, the manual only links batch capture to tape workflows, with the Log and Capture window. I really want to upgrade but my boss (and I) don't want to sacrifice the efficiency we currently have on our post production line.

To answer the simpler question, yes you can batch capture. In tapeless world it's called Log and Transfer. If you do not want to edit your clips before you bring them in (as Shane described), you simply select them all in your in box and send them to the que.
Recognize (depending on the camera) the clip names you will be dealing with will be simply a series of nonsensical numbers and letters. Adding some info in the logging portion is useful.
Also, build into your budget for redundant backup drives. If you go tapeless, you have no external backup (ie the tape) and you'll need a whole new strategy for that portion of your work.
Good luck.
x

Similar Messages

BATCH CAPTURE TAPELESS workflow still FCP is looking for a capture device when going ONLINE

Hi,
I am working on a documentary and about to go online with my edit.
I used Sony FS100. Tapeless. I did Log and Transfer to ProRes 422 in FCP 7.
Later when I run out of space I used Media Manager to RECOMPRESS everything to ProRes Proxi. Worked well.
But now when I try to batch capture to ProRes 422 FCP is looking for a capture device thinking I am working with tapes.
How do I make FCP undrerstand I am tapeless? Does the recompress kill the possibility of bach capturing back to online full quality 422?
Thanks for the support!
Gabor

I have read through some more forums and I only found one mention of the Media Manager 'Recomress' function.
It said:
"Transcoding with MM (recompress). It preserves timecode/reel name, file names, etc... Except the clip ID, which is used along with reel name and timecode to batch capture from source files (at least for P2)."
Clip ID is the metadata relyable for the work of batch capture. It seems without it it is impossible to batch capture.
I wonder why they designed Recompress like that, if it is true?

Online help with Batch Capture

I'm trying to online a sequence in a tapeless workflow. I'm using Log & Transfer along with Batch Capture but Batch Capture keeps looking for a deck. How do I get it to look for my Hi-Res digital files?

Yeah...that's the problem.
You directly imported it and worked with it natively? What is this footage? From what camera?
The only way to offline/online with tapeless is to bring in the footage via Log and Transfer. Log and Transfer to ProRes Proxy...then you can Batch Capture to a higher data rate ProRes format.

Tapeless workflows and Sandy Bridge or other PC's: KISS or LOVE?

Tapeless workflows and Sandy Bridge or other PC's: KISS or LOVE?
Life used to be so simple when shooting video on a tape based camera. You shot your material, captured it for editing and stored your precious original footage on tape in a safe and dry place. Sure, it took time to capture, but the big advantage was that if you had a computer or drive failure, you would still have the original tape so everything could be recreated.
Now with tapeless workflows we have the significant advantage of much faster import of the original footage. Connect the flash card or disk drive to the computer over USB and copy the data to a HDD on the computer, ready for editing. The data on the flash card or disk drive can then be erased, so you can reuse it for more shots. But, like Johan Cruyff has said repeatedly, every advantage has its drawback. In this case it simply means that you no longer have the original material to fall back on, in case of computer or drive failures. That is a very unpleasant and insecure feeling.
The easy anwser to that problem is backups. Backup of the original media, backup of projects and backup of exports. This often means a bundle of externals for backup or NAS configurations. One thing is clear, it requires discipline to make regular backups and it costs time, as well as a number of disks. Four as a minimum: 1 for media, 1 for exports and at least 2 for projects. Note: This is excluding a backup drive for OS & programs.
There are different backup strategies in use. Some say backup daily and use one disk for monday, one for tuesday, and so on. Others say one disk for the first backup, the second for the second backup, then the first again for an incremental backup, etc. and once weekly a complete backup on a third disk. Whatever you choose, be aware that shelf live of a disk is far less than tape. There are horror stories everywhere about ball-bearings getting stuck after some time and without original tapes, you better be safe than sorry, so don't skimp on backups.
What is the relevancy of all this? I thought this was about Sandy Bridge and other PC's.
It is and let me try to explain.
Card based cameras are for the most part DSLR and AVCHD type cameras, and we all know how much muscle is required to edit that in a convenient way. Adobe suggests in the system requirements to use raid configurations for HD editing and practice has shown that raid arrays do give a significant performance boost and improve responsiveness, making for a nicer editing experience. The larger the project and the longer the time-line, the more a raid array will help maintain the responsiveness.
One thing you would not do is using a raid0 for projects, media and exports, even if you have backups. The simple reason is that the chance of disk failure multiplies by the number of disks in the raid0. Two disks double the chance of disk failure, three disks triple the chance, four disks quadruples the chance, etc.
Remember: Disaster always strikes when it is most inconvenient.
Imagine you have been working all day on a project, you decide to call it a day and to make your daily backup, but then the raid fails, before you made your backup. Gone is all of today's work. Then take into consideration the time and effort it takes to restore your backups to the state it was in yesterday. That does not make you happy.
Another thing to avoid is using a software or mobo based parity raid, for the simple reason that it is slooowww and puts a burden on the CPU, that you want to use for editing, not house keeping.
For temporary or easily recreated files, like the page-file, media cache, media cache database and preview files, it is very much advised to use a raid0. It makes everything a lot snappier and if disaster strikes, so what? These are easily recreated in a short time.
This was a general overview of what is required with tapeless workflows. Now let's get down to what this means in terms of system design.
Two approaches or train of thoughts
KISS: Keep it stupidly simple or LOVE: Laughing over video editing
The first one, the most economic one, is to use a system with 3 or 4 disks internally and 4 or more backup disks.
A typical disk setup can look like this:
This is a perfectly sensible approach if one does not have large or complex projects, long time-lines and is willing to take the risk of occasionally losing a whole days work, between backups. Many hobbyists and consumers fall in this category.
The KISS approach keeps it stupidly simple. The drawback is that there is no logical way to add more disks or storage. The discipline, diligence and effort required for regular backups make it far from a laughing matter. In fact it can quickly become a bore. Add to that the fact that the disk setup is simple but not very fast, so less suited for situations where lots of clips are involved, multi-cam is a regularly recurring situation or lots of video tracks are involved.
A number of video editors want more from their system than the occasional platonic KISS, they want to really LOVE their system, which lead to the other train of thought.
This is more costly than the KISS approach, but you all know a fiancée or wife is more costly and dear than the occasional kiss on the cheek by an old friend.
Let's start with a typical disk setup. It may look like this:
Two striking differences in comparison to the KISS approach:
1. Much easier disk organization and more disks and thus more space.
2. It requires a hardware raid controller, causing a higher investment cost. It is like an engagement ring. You don't get LOVE for free, one of the guiding principles of the oldest trade in the world.
These are easy statements to make, but what are the benefits or advantages, that you would fall in LOVE with such a system, and what are the drawbacks? Think back to Johan Cruyff's adage.
The only drawback is cost. The advantages are multiple, easier organization, more speed, more storage, snappier editing, no jerkiness, lesser requirements for regular backups and - this is the major benefit - hardly a chance of losing a day's work in case of a drive failure. Keep in mind that a parity raid keeps all your data intact in case of a drive failure, so lessens the need for up-to-date backups.
We all know, we get what we pay for: "If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. OTOH, if you pay money to monkeys, you get rich monkeys". But in this case you get what you pay for, a much better editing experience with a much easier workflow.
Using a parity raid (be it raid 3/5/6/30/50/60) you get security, ease of mind that you are protected against losing precious media, that you need not worry about the last time you made a backup, that the editing you did today may be lost and you save valuable time editing and a lot of aggravation because of a much more responsive system.
How does this all relate to Sandy Bridge and other PC's?
First of all, the price difference between a Sandy Bridge / P67 platform and an i7-950+ / X58 platform is very small. Of course the new architecture is slightly more expensive than the older one, but the differences are small, almost not worth talking about.
So what are the differences? Look below:
The first thing to keep in mind is that the Sandy Bridge is the successor of the i7-8xx CPU and as such it is much more evolutionary than revolutionary. The CPU power has increased significantly over the i7-8xx due to new architecture and a smaller production process (32 nm), but in essence all the capabilities have remained unchanged. Same memory, same PCI-e lanes, same version, same L3 cache and no support for dedicated raid controllers.
It is great that the processor performs much better than the older i7-8xx CPU's, almost achieving the level of the i7-9xx range of processors, but is still limited:
The Sandy Bridge is unsuitable for anything more than a KISS system.
Why? Because it lacks the required PCI-e lanes to accomodate more than a 16 x PCI-e nVidia card with CUDA support to enable hardware MPE acceleration and the integrated graphics are not supported by CS5.
You may wonder if that is a bad thing. The plain and simple anser is NO. It is a great processor, it delivers great value for money, is a solid performer, but it has its limitations. Intel had a reason to position this CPU as a mid-level CPU, because that is what it is, a mid-level performer in comparison to what is to come.
The term mid-level performer may seem strange when compared to the old generation of i7-9xx CPU's, because they perform almost equally well, but keep in mind that there is a generation difference between them.
So what about the i7-9xx and X58 platform?
It still is going strong. About the same performance as a Sandy Bridge, with only the much more expensive hexa-cores clearly in the lead, both performance and price wise. The quad cores deliver about the same value for money. The main difference however is the platform that allows a dedicated raid controller to be installed, thus making it the platform of choice for those who want to go from a passing KISS to true LOVE.
And what lies ahead?
Sandy Bridge E on the Waimea platform (X68). Now that is revolutionary. More than double almost everything a processor can offer: double the cores, double the PCI-e lanes, triple the memory, more than double the L3 cache, increase the PCI-e support from 2.0 to 3.0, etc...
This is why Intel calls this a high-end CPU / platform.
So what now?
If you prefer a KISS approach, choose either a Sandy Bridge/P67 or an i7-950+/X58 platform.
If you wonder whether in the future you may need multi-cam more frequently, edit more complex projects and longer timelines or even progress to RED, look at KISS/LOVE solutions, meaning the i7-950+/X58.
If you can't have downtime, time pressure is high, delivery dates to clients are critical or you edit highly complex projects, lots of multi-cam situations or lengthy time-lines, choose a LOVE solution, an i7-950+/X58 platform.
If you have the time to wait till Q4/2011, Sandy Bridge E/Waimea looks to be worth the wait.
Hope this gives you some more insight into recent and future developments and helps you make wise investment decisions.

I'm upgrading from an AMD 3800+, cutting with Vegas 7 Pro. Usually shoot DSLR or HDV, sometimes P2, EX or RED. I have ridiculously cheap access to Macs, FCP/FCS, all kinds of software.
I've been agonizing over this for the last month, was originally hoping the UD7 mobo was the solution, read the read about the NF200/PCIe issue a few days ago, http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/non-linear-editing-pc/489424-i7-980x-now-wait-sandybridge-2.ht ml- and still decided to go for a 2600k.
My preference is to treat my video footage the same way as my digital imagery: I make (at least) duplicate back ups of everything before reformatting the cards, never delete the back ups, and only worry about the day-to-day stuff at night. Unless I'm rendering or involved in other long processes, in which case I'll back up the work in process the next day. If I am under a really really tight deadline I might back up as I go.
Yes, a RAID might make it easier, but I'm paranoid enough to prefer a slower, safer backup. You can always duplicate, and usually improve upon, a days work, but you can never get back original footage you lost. I have only ever had one hard drive die on me (a few enclosures crapped out, though)- it took a couple of (mostly unattended) hours to rectify. As a matter of act, I've had far more loss/damage from tapes than from hard drives.
I ordered the UD7, 2 F4s and 4 F3Rs, understanding I will probably want to upgrade to SBE when it comes out, or maybe next year. The 2600k/mobo/RAM will likely hold its value better than a 950/X58, likely because of the marketplace as much as merit.
The UD7 / RAID card issue is in it's early days, there may be a solution/mitigation. Probably not. But if I really really need a RAID card, then I probably really really need a 980, NAS, etc etc.
But Harm still rocks!

Audio Not Syncing After Offline Conversion/Batch Capture from OfflineRT-DV

WORKFLOW:
1. Shooting HDV on a Sony HDR-V1U (DF/NDF Timecode setting is AUTO on the camera)
2. Using the camera to downconvert to DV as I import into FCP 7 (final product will be NTSC DVD).
3. I first capture and log using the OfflineRT NTSC (Photo JPEG) preset
4. I make my Edits, and then use Media Manager to create new project and create offline media referenced by duplicated items. (Set sequences to: DV NTSC 48 kHz)
5. The clips I need are then batch captured using Capture Preset: DV NTSC 48 kHz
PROBLEMS:
A. As I'm initiating my batch capture in step #5 above, the following warning is generated:
WARNING: You are about to capture Drop Frame media from a device currently detecting or configured for Non-Drop Frame media. If you proceed, you may experience changes in logged in and out points, problems relinking media, or removal of master clip relationships.
B. When I playback my sequence, the in/out points are off by several seconds. (like the media within the clip slid ahead several seconds--to fix it, I would have to slide each clip back)
QUESTIONS:
Q1: How can I properly execute my workflow while avoiding the WARNING above and the problem with the in/out points?
NOTE: The OfflineRT clips in the original project (#3 above) are shown as DF (semicolon in timecode), but the duplicated clips in the DV project (#4 above) are NDF (colon in timecode). I have already tried changing my capture preset to Firewire NTSC NDF, recapturing the clips, and the result is the same.
Q2: Should the capture preset be the same or different when logging the first (OfflineRT) and second (DV NTSC 48kHz) times?

Wish I had a simple answer for you, stay tuned, some folks who actually use those cameras will drop by sooner or later.
TrevorRawson wrote:
After importing through log and capture I continue to get a pop up when it's done saying that the audio and video frame rates do not line up.
I'll bet you're shooting with a Canon.
TrevorRawson wrote:
I am using a Canon xl2 and a Panasonic DVX100A,
Ah-HA!
TrevorRawson wrote:I'm shooting in 24p Advanced with a 2:3:3:2 pull down. The capture settings are set up for FCP's default DV NTSC 24p with Advanced Pulldown, same with my sequence settings. This is my first time shooting in 24pa so I'm a little lost at what to do. Does anyone know the correct settings I should be using?
so neither camera captures properly? that's odd. We know the Canon is going to give you trouble but the Pani should work.
Try searching the forum for your camera models, see what comes up. Many different cameras shoot their own versions of various image,frame, and pulldown formats.
bogiesan

Need Help Reconnecting P2 Media- Batch Capture not working

Hey guys,
I used log and transfer and got all my P2 media into FCP 6. I did my edit and then when I opened FCP next time it said that a file had moved. Well, I went and watched Shane's P2 workflow video on creativecow and saw that he just right clicked on the media that needed to be reconnected and went down to batch capture and it all worked like a charm. Well, I could not get it to work. Then to worsen the matter, I deleted another file like Shane does in the demo and tried to reconnect that one using Batch Capture and once again- nothing. Now I have various clips that all need to be reconnected. When I right click and try and use Batch Capture it is giving me a dialog box that discusses a lack of deck, and I am not sure why I am getting a "deck" warning with P2 associated files. Please help- anyone!!!

Just so people don't think I am ignoring someone where my name is mentioned, I answered this on another forum.
Shane

Trying to Understand Tapeless Workflow

I know a lot of editors talk about tapeless workflows and it seems that most of the tapeless workflows involve a camcorder or P2 card reader to get footage into your hard drive but I'm curious... what if an editor doesn't shoot footage or own a camera - what if they just want to be a freelance editor. How would they setup a tapeless workflow? Would the person giving them the work have to give them the camera to capture footage? Or would they have to give them the P2 card? or is there another type of workflow? Any insight on this is greatly appreciated. Thank you

Would the editor need to provide the Hard Drive for the camera person to back up everything on?
Nope. Camera person responsibility. Just like tape stock is their responsibility.
Also if an editor edits with tapeless material - would there be a reason to have a tape deck?
That's the big advantage...you don't. Only if you need to output to tape would you need one. But, if you aren't handed tape, why have a deck? Although many people archive to LTO or DLT data tape. VERY secure. used by banks.
Also what output is typical when you have a tapeless workflow?
Depends on your client. I work in broadcast TV, so it is HDCAM, HDCAM SR, Digibeta...or data file delivery. Some clients want BluRay, others just a web video. There is no such thing as TYPICAL, as there are literally DOZENS of delivery options for video. All based on what the clients wants and how they intend to view it.
Shane

Batch capture opening rather than log and transfer

What causes batch capture to open rather than log and transfer? Attempting to media manage and reimport clips but only batch capture will open? Thanks, Michael

Hey there camera400,
were there any solutions you found? I'm having exactly the same issue at the moment....
I'm following the "RED FCS White Paper" dated November 11, 2008 from the RED support page-
Doing "Workflow 2: Work offline Using ProRes; Finish Using RED Quicktime Media" - (my offline was ProRes (hq)).
Based on this workflow, I get all way through step 5.3 of Workflow 2 -- creating offline project and setting Log & Transfer settings.
The Paper suggests that when I right-click the new offline sequence, select "Batch Capture" from the shortcut menu, the Log & Transfer window will appear, allowing me to reinjest RED footage.
However, it opens Batch Capture instead...
Any insights appreciated.

Tapeless workflow with FCP 5 and Canon XL H1

Is it possible to establish a tapeless workflow with FCP 5 and a Canon XL H1 shooting in HD mode?
We have to shoot many days of lectures and want to skip the import of the footage. The firestore FS-C can only record up to 7.5 hours in HD but we don't have the time to empty it overnight so it can be available the next day...
We can connect a couple of 500 GB lacie to a 17" Macbook Pro and wanted to use FCP to live capture from the camera. Is that possible?
Or did anyone try to do that with the Canon Console software (windows only) and then import its stream in FCP?
Thanks

No time to unload a drive when you have all night? Why would that be? Isn't this just a big drag and drop? Can't let it start and go to dinner?
If you shoot HDV you should also record it to tape becuase disk drives can fail etc during the shoot.
You can capture live from the camera's FW port but again I'd shoot tape as well... use capture now but also use the device control that works with that camera to get the TC thru too. (probably FW HDV basic)
The camera also has an uncompressed output but that would take a capture card and fast disk array (faster than FW for sure) to capture the uncompressed HD.
Jerry

Unable to locate timecode in batch capture

Hi there, I have been working on this problem for a while and would really appreciate some help.
I have a documentary project I have been working on for some time and have completed the EDL. I am now trying to batch capture the footage again in full res and am having problems with a couple of the tapes.
First the specs:
The video was shot on a Sony HDR-HC1 in HDV(1080) mode.
I am using this camera to capture the footage.
I am trying to recapture the footage in a sequence with the easy setting on HDV1080i50.
I had originally captured the footage in SD on an older version of final cut pro (I am now working with FCP6) and didn't realise that my 16:9 footage was actually all 4:3 letterboxed. To fix this problem I used the media manager to export and then in the new project batch capture all the footage again from the tape. The project uses 18 tapes, 16 of which were batch digitised with only minor troubleshooting required. However 2 of the tapes are proving to be very problematic. It seems that whatever clip I select on the tape it gives me a message saying "unable to locate timecode".
I have tried setting the tape to the exact location of the clip before selecting the batch capture, but the computer always seems to look for a spot which is 2-3 mins out of sync with the clip. For example, if the in point is 00:10:00:00 the computer will roll the tape to around the 00:12:00:00 mark and start jogging around there for about 30 seconds until eventually giving me the "unable to locate timecode" message. Looking in the information in the bins, the in and out points are accurate, its just that when I try to capture, the computer rolls the tape to the wrong position.
If anyone knows a workaround for this that will help me avoid having to edit the footage all over again I will be extremely grateful.
Thanks
Liam

HI I have the same problem, the capture window says: Waiting for time code, the device must set in vcr mode and then This operation could not be complete as there is no video, the F!#!%$$ problem is very illogical ,at this mooring I do batch capture without a problem but since the second tape this problem starting, I update to FCP 6.0.4 and,. @@#%#@%#$ the first tape capture but the second not capture and the problem starting againd, note that IMOVIE capture the tape and work very well, iI replace fire wire, camera VCR and , I trayu with Canon, Sony, JVC and the problem persist , I have quicktime 7.4.5, FCO 6.0.4, note that I have two Macs with the same problem in both macs IMOVIE work like a PRO edition Software but FCP is very bad, I have with this problem a long time, I formated Mac, reinstall FCS2 many timers and the problem persist. IS not a problem whit easy setup or wherever , I download the FireWire SDK from Apple and test all connection with the applications of sdk and in all case , the camera and the fire wire are OK, the problem is with quicktime and FCP, If any one is working OK with FCP and DV NTSC devices and JVC PRO HD devices, please tell us HOW DO. I'm working with FCP since 2000 and in this month FCP makes me very UNHAPPY.

Batch capture settings do not match project settings

Batch capture audio settings do not conform to project settings-
PROJECT SETTINGS ON CREATION OF NEW PROJECT:
For editing with IEEE1394 (FireWire/i.LINK) DV equipment.
Standard NTSC video (4:3 interlaced).
48kHz (16 bit) audio.
Drop-Frame Timecode numbering.
General
Editing mode: DV NTSC
Timebase: 29.97fps
Video Settings
Frame size: 720h 480v (0.9091)
Frame rate: 29.97 frames/second
Pixel Aspect Ratio: D1/DV NTSC (0.9091)
Fields: Lower Field First
Audio Settings
Sample rate: 48000 samples/second
Default Sequence
Total video tracks: 3
Master track type: Stereo
Mono tracks: 0
Please note audio setting for project 48kHz (16 bit) audio.
When I set for batch capture by creating off-line clips using the "Log Clip" option the off-line clip shows audio as
32KHZ 16-bit everyting else is correct as project settings.
Just prior to creating the off-line batch capture clip I had sucessfully captured from the same device using the same tape shot with the above settings including 48khz 16-bit audio by using standard " Capture" by setting in & out then clicking Capture>In/Out.
I've looked at capture settings etc...unable to determine to change audio settings etc or why the audio settings under batch capture do not conform to project settings...
Any ideas?
Tnx,
mick

Thanks for your reply, Harm....
Well now...having negated all the possibilities you listed, I decided to do a an actual batch capture with clips which I previously logged which reported audio at 32kHz instead of the project setting of 48kHz:
1. two clips were selected from the same device/tape ( both selected from the logging util which erroneously reported audio at 32kHz) for the batch
2. both clips captured "flawlessly"
3. both clips after the batch capture then reported audio as being 48kHz
Btw, I also did a batch capture from the same device/tape in Pr 6.x...and it reported and captured at 48khz...I must say, I must prefer the legacy version of Pr 6 for batch capture which creates a log .pbl file which can then be easily exported as a csv to and .xls etc..IMO, much more useful...and useable..
Mi dos pesos(.002US)
So it would appear there is some kind of bug in the Pr cs4 batch capture util that is erroneously reporting audio settings?
Should this go to the devel as a possible bug?
Tnx,
mick

Unable to batch capture with Premiere Pro CC via Kona LHi

AJA's web site claims Premiere Pro CC is compatible with the Kona LHi card, but I can't get the two to work together properly. After repeated tries, I uninstalled and reinstalled everything AJA, but still no luck.
I need to batch capture DV clips from some mini-DV tapes on my Sony MVR035U tape deck. But I also need to upconvert them from 480i to 720p60 using my Kona Lhi card. I should be able to do this with Premiere Pro CC. But the PPCC Capture window won't give me any audio feedback when I select "AJA Movie Capture" in the Capture Settings pull down menu. I only get audio feedback when I enable "DV capture" but then I'm no longer able to upconvert.
Looking forward to any feedback on this issue. Been tying all day to trouble shoot this problem.
[Text formatting removed. Please type your posts here, rather than pasting.]
Message was edited by: Jim Simon

And now with CC June 2014 you can't even capture from HDV, I need to go back to Premiere CC 2013 for that....Adobe might think tape capture is over... but it isn't totally yet...

"No Video" error when Batch Capturing

I am getting a new error that I have not seen before when using Batch Capture in FCP. It cues the tape, starts the pre-roll and then spits out an error message that there is "no video". Of course, there is video.
The same thing does not happen when capturing one clip at a time nor does it happen if you capture live (hitting Capture "Now" in L&C window).
Any thoughts?

I also don't want to keep paying $23 a month for software that is not 100%.
Software as complex as Premiere Pro will never be 100% bug free.
I'm also inclined to believe this is more of a system issue than a PP issue. I don't recall other reports of this nature, and it works fine on my own system.
The only other thing I can think of to suggest is another FireWire port, possibly by adding a FireWire card to the system. I've read that the chip makes a difference, so research over in the Hardware forum.

Help! Batch Capture Changes My Logged Clips' Media Start & Media End

I'd be very grateful for any help on this.
I log a tape with about 40 clips ranging from 30 seconds to 4 minutes. I select the clips and start a batch capture. Everything appears to be capturing normally and I receive no error messages or dropped frame warnings - after my last clip is captured I get a "Successfully Captured" message.
However, as soon as I click "Finished," all of my clip media start's, media end's, and durations in the log window arbitrarily change to weird times. All my media start points are 26 frames too early (I've tripple-checked that "Add Handles" is indeed deactivated), and the media end points make no sense at all.
A clip that was once 44 seconds long is now only 12 seconds long, the media end point moved a whopping 34:03 too early. Another clip will become 2 seconds longer, the media start point still shifted back 26 frames, but with the media end now 31 frames too late. Checking the original files on my drive confirms that only these weird, unusable segments are what has been captured.
What complicates things is that I just discovered today that if I capture locally to my internal hard disk, the clips capture normally (the times remain unchanged). But if I set my capture scratch to my external hard drive (a LaCie F800 2-TB RAID-5 using Firewire-800), that's when the clips start changing themselves. I ran disk utility and found no errors on the drive, and have never had a problem with it or any part of my configuration until the last month or so... the only changes to my system being the regular use of Software Update.
On top of that, my colleague is experiencing a similar problem with batch capture changing his clip times, even though he is using a different computer (single-processor G5), a different video deck (Sony DHR-1000), and a different storage medium (Apple Xserve RAID).
So my question is: What is happening! The only thing I can think of is that perhaps some update has a bug - but I can't find anyone with a similar problem online.
Any help on this would be extremely appreciated! Thank you in advance for your advice.
Dual 2.3GHz PowerPC G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4) Deck: JVC CU-VH1 / Storage: LaCie F800 2-TB RAID-5
Dual 2.3GHz PowerPC G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4)

Here's an update on this. Both my colleague and I have confirmed that if we capture to an internal or external drive that is not a RAID FCPro batch captures just fine.
But, if the drive we are capturing to is a RAID (in my case a LaCie Biggest F800 and his case an Apple Xserve), then we get dropped frame reports and/or clip in's and out's changing after the batch capture is complete.
We even tried reformatting one of the xServe's and rebuilding it as non-journaled, it didn't solve the problem.
It seems impossible that we're the only ones to be experiencing this problem... does anybody have any help or suggestions!?

Batch capture problem

I'm trying to batch capture my clips, so i logged them all but when i select them all and choose batch capture an error comes up after a while and says "end of tape reached". The only footage i have on my tape goes from the beginning of the tape to about three minutes in. Can someone please help me here.
thanks,
Paul

Don't know if you are still looking for a solution to this but...
You most likely set your in point very near the first code on the tape. FCP needs to roll back a few seconds, before the in point, in order to ensure the deck gets up to speed before the capture begins. If it rolls back and can find not code before your in point, things get confused and FCP will not do the capture. This is also why, when shooting, you should always roll at least 5 seconds before the action starts.
Try moving the in point forward at least seconds.

Batch Capture on Tapeless Workflow

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for