3 ms·

The article is written by a Youtuber for his Youtube content creation. If you're going to extend the scope to feature films and music videos because that's what

The article is written by a Youtuber for his Youtube content creation. If you're going to extend the scope to feature films and music videos because that's what you're used to, obviously my assumptions won't be valid. I'm not biking to work on a $15k carbon fiber bike or storing my left over dinner in a walk in freezer either. And I repeat another point. Using his own numbers, this editing NAS has space for over 220 hours, more than 9 consecutive days. What kind of music video production even has that much video footage? Like I wrote in my initial comment, I fully understand using plenty of uncompressed video while editing, it's the saving of hundreds of GB per finished and delivered Youtube video I question.

geerlingguy 4y ago
I typically have 5-10 videos in production in a given week (doesn't mean I'm working on them actively, but I'll sometimes shoot parts of different videos depending on the schedule). Some videos are 10 minutes, others are more like 20. On average I end up with 100-200 GB/video by the end. So you're correct that I don't need 14TB (that's overkill) for now... but anyone who plans storage knows you're better front loading the extra capacity if you can afford it, because needs always seem to grow faster as time goes on (e.g. 4K to 8K, ProRes LT to something with more color space maybe...). And right now I keep all my "A-roll" (scripted takes, usually with about double the run time of the actual video), but I'm considering setting up a script to automatically convert those clips to H.265 afterwards so I can still have reasonably good archival footage but at like 1/100th the file size. All B-roll shots (Dolly shots, handheld closeups, illustrations, etc.) I save at full original resolution, because they are often useful in follow-up videos. But that's usually only like 30-40% of that 100-200 GB per project. (Edited to add: sometimes there's a unicorn video that also has raw Timelapse footage where you roll at normal rate then generate a Timelapse afterwards (and use some of the real-time footage). Those can have hours of footage and a couple have gotten beyond 400 GB. But I try to limit that just because of the hassle. Easier to have one camera devoted to the Timelapse, and another for some other shots for real-time use.)
- dylan604 4y ago
  slight nitpick, as timelapse is an actual thing for me. your sped up footage isn't timelapse. tomato/tomahto, old dog says words have meanings, blah blah. On tape, we'd call that varispeed playback. Now it's more of a timewarp (even if you don't do the ramping). Please, don't cheapen my career shooting actual timelapse! ;P
  - geerlingguy 4y ago
    Note that I shoot both, depending on the project needs ;) I usually like to use my Nikon D700 for that.
- sorenjan 4y ago
  > I'm considering setting up a script to automatically convert those clips to H.265 afterwards so I can still have reasonably good archival footage but at like 1/100th the file size. FFmpeg has gotten decent AV1 support with SVT-AV1 recently. I think it would make for an interesting video to compare different codecs and see which one is "best" for a certain set of trade offs. You could make a script that encodes a video snippet while varying parameters like codec, preset, crf, grain, 10-bit, hardware or software encoding, etc, use one of the automatic quality metrics like Netflix's VMAF, and plot size, quality, encode time, power usage against each other.
dylan604 4y ago
>The article is written by a Youtuber for his Youtube content creation. This creator can't do other editing gigs besides his own content? Granted, he's probably pretty busy keeping up with his own stuff, but don't put baby in the corner by suggesting they only work on YT content. You'd be amazed at how many balls an editor can juggle. I currently have a couple of corporate gigs in various stages, wrapping up a music video, and a plethora of personal side projects on my system right now. Currently in preproduction meetings with new client to specifically help them start their YT and other social media content creation. So because the conversation started with a YT content creator means the conversation can't be expanded to introduce you to the bigger picture of the same topic?

geerlingguy 4y ago

I typically have 5-10 videos in production in a given week (doesn't mean I'm working on them actively, but I'll sometimes shoot parts of different videos depending on the schedule). Some videos are 10 minutes, others are more like 20. On average I end up with 100-200 GB/video by the end. So you're correct that I don't need 14TB (that's overkill) for now... but anyone who plans storage knows you're better front loading the extra capacity if you can afford it, because needs always seem to grow faster as time goes on (e.g. 4K to 8K, ProRes LT to something with more color space maybe...). And right now I keep all my "A-roll" (scripted takes, usually with about double the run time of the actual video), but I'm considering setting up a script to automatically convert those clips to H.265 afterwards so I can still have reasonably good archival footage but at like 1/100th the file size. All B-roll shots (Dolly shots, handheld closeups, illustrations, etc.) I save at full original resolution, because they are often useful in follow-up videos. But that's usually only like 30-40% of that 100-200 GB per project. (Edited to add: sometimes there's a unicorn video that also has raw Timelapse footage where you roll at normal rate then generate a Timelapse afterwards (and use some of the real-time footage). Those can have hours of footage and a couple have gotten beyond 400 GB. But I try to limit that just because of the hassle. Easier to have one camera devoted to the Timelapse, and another for some other shots for real-time use.)

dylan604 4y ago
slight nitpick, as timelapse is an actual thing for me. your sped up footage isn't timelapse. tomato/tomahto, old dog says words have meanings, blah blah. On tape, we'd call that varispeed playback. Now it's more of a timewarp (even if you don't do the ramping). Please, don't cheapen my career shooting actual timelapse! ;P
- geerlingguy 4y ago
  Note that I shoot both, depending on the project needs ;) I usually like to use my Nikon D700 for that.
sorenjan 4y ago
> I'm considering setting up a script to automatically convert those clips to H.265 afterwards so I can still have reasonably good archival footage but at like 1/100th the file size. FFmpeg has gotten decent AV1 support with SVT-AV1 recently. I think it would make for an interesting video to compare different codecs and see which one is "best" for a certain set of trade offs. You could make a script that encodes a video snippet while varying parameters like codec, preset, crf, grain, 10-bit, hardware or software encoding, etc, use one of the automatic quality metrics like Netflix's VMAF, and plot size, quality, encode time, power usage against each other.

dylan604 4y ago

>The article is written by a Youtuber for his Youtube content creation. This creator can't do other editing gigs besides his own content? Granted, he's probably pretty busy keeping up with his own stuff, but don't put baby in the corner by suggesting they only work on YT content. You'd be amazed at how many balls an editor can juggle. I currently have a couple of corporate gigs in various stages, wrapping up a music video, and a plethora of personal side projects on my system right now. Currently in preproduction meetings with new client to specifically help them start their YT and other social media content creation. So because the conversation started with a YT content creator means the conversation can't be expanded to introduce you to the bigger picture of the same topic?