Cantar disk burning

[David Waelder]

While the Cantar is a wonderful recorder, I've had some difficulty in the past with timely disk burning. By and large the disk burning proceeds well and the disks produced are almost always readable by post without difficulty. However, sometimes the burn process is too slow and gets me into trouble.

If the takes are long, or multiple microphones and tracks need to be used, the burn process can require so much time that the camera crew has the next shot ready before the idle copy can be completed. This is particularly acute if one is also performing a Poly-Rotate function. When all these factors combine, one cannot complete the copy process on an as-you-go basis and one falls farther and farther behind. At the end of the day, there is a large file copy chore remaining. This is not just an inconvenience; it is a job killing necessity because production managers protest having to pay additional wages for the extra burn time.

I've wondered if there might be an alternate way and believe I have a partial solution. (Forgive me if the following is information everyone already knows and understands.)

I postulated that the process might go more expeditiously if one copied to a hard drive rather than an optical medium. Of course, one still has to have something to turn in at the end of the day and some post facilities can't directly employ a hard drive. But I ran some tests and think that the improved performance of the hard drive may justify the additional burn time on a laptop.

I specified a new project on my Cantar called CopyTest to check the hypothesis. I connected a G-Tech drive to the recorder and designated it as the medium for Idle Copy. (For those not closely familiar with the Cantar, Idle Copy is a mirror function. The recorder makes a copy to the designated media between takes.) I placed a portable radio, tuned to the NPR News program, adjacent to the recorder and put the machine into Record. With all the tracks armed, I pushed the slate mike button and recorded audio onto eight tracks for set periods of time. I repeated the test with a DVD-RAM disk to ascertain how long it took to copy essentially the same files onto an optical disk.

These were my results:

Hard Disk Copy

5 minutes recording, eight tracks (a 330.7 MB file) = 2 minutes 22 seconds Idle Copy

10 minutes recording, eight tracks (660.5 MB file) = 4 minutes 46 seconds Idle Copy

DVD-RAM Copy

5 minutes recording = 9 minutes 47 seconds

10 minutes recording = 17 minutes 22 seconds

Even with eight tracks in play and using the Poly-Rotate function, the recorder was able to make a file copy in less than half the time consumed by the original recording.

Conversely, to make a DVD RAM required nearly twice the time consumed by the original recording.

Of course, the product of this copying is still a hard drive file, not a product that can be easily handed over to a production manager.

I connected the G-Drive to a Mac laptop and copied the files to a DVD-R using Toast. I used two laptops, a current model MacBook with the Intel processor and an older G-4 machine. I didn't time setting up the laptop or launching Toast but only the time between initiating the copy and seeing the screen message that the disk could be ejected. Copying both the 5-minute and the 10-minute files (total 991.2 MB) I recorded the following times:

Intel Mac-Book - 4 minutes 35 seconds

G4 iBook - 8 minutes 22 seconds

Laptop specs:

MacBook – 2.13 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB memory

G4 iBook – 1.42 GHz Power PC G4, 512 MB memory

Presumably, the faster MacBook Pro machines would better even these times.

Adding all the times together, one gets:

Hard Drive - Idle Copy + DVD-R burn = 11 minutes 43 seconds on the Intel machine

Hard Drive - Idle Copy + DVD-R burn = 15 minutes 30 seconds on the older G4

By comparison, the Idle Copy to DVD-RAM required 27 minutes 9 seconds to accomplish the same thing. Of course, if there were always plenty of time between takes, then the Idle Copy would be complete at the end of the day while one might still have several minutes of laptop burning with the hard drive copy. But if one has not been able to keep up, the burn process with the internal burner is very slow. And, the laptop burning can proceed while one is packing the gear and would probably be done by the time all the gear was stowed in the truck.

Obviously, this approach is most useful if one is working from a sound cart but might work over the shoulder as well. Since the hard drive is only working in Idle Copy mode, the issue of possible bus hangs should not be a concern.

David Waelder

[Jeff Wexler]

Much of what David says here again points up what Brian was saying about design considerations relating to how people use the machine. So much of David's comments relate to the way we work here in the US and so many of the things that are issues with the Cantar's use here are non-issues in other countries that have a completely different workflow. I will make some direct comments to David's post:

"If the takes are long, or multiple microphones and tracks need to be used, the burn process can require so much time that the camera crew has the next shot ready before the idle copy can be completed. This is particularly acute if one is also performing a Poly-Rotate function. When all these factors combine, one cannot complete the copy process on an as-you-go basis and one falls farther and farther behind. At the end of the day, there is a large file copy chore remaining."

This is a total deal breaker for me and I suggest that it may be for others as well. In the very early days of the Deva, everyone was focused on the deliverable "what do I hand over to the driver who runs up to the insert car at 6pm and has to take something to the lab because they just broke film". When the Deva adopted the style of mirroring that it still uses today, sometimes referred to as an idle copy, we had our answer. Unlike the Cantar, the idle copy works the moment you hit STOP and if you need to go into REC immediately, it stops the idle copy and picks up right after you hit STOP again. There is also Continuous Mirror if you wish to use that in which case it mirrors while you are recording (but will lag ever so slightly behind the primary recording because of media read-write speed differences).

"I postulated that the process might go more expeditiously if one copied to a hard drive rather than an optical medium. Of course, one still has to have something to turn in at the end of the day and some post facilities can't directly employ a hard drive."

This is rarely an option on a day to day basis with present workflows, schedules and the way the majority of facilities are configured. I used to turn in the Deva hard drive on my first movie using the Deva (1998) but that was because it was the only option.

"Of course, the product of this copying is still a hard drive file, not a product that can be easily handed over to a production manager."

As before, not an option.

"By comparison, the Idle Copy to DVD-RAM required 27 minutes 9 seconds to accomplish the same thing. Of course, if there were always plenty of time between takes, then the Idle Copy would be complete at the end of the day while one might still have several minutes of laptop burning with the hard drive copy. But if one has not been able to keep up, the burn process with the internal burner is very slow. And, the laptop burning can proceed while one is packing the gear and would probably be done by the time all the gear was stowed in the truck."

I would hate to have to think back to how many tracks I used, how long were the takes, how many hours did we shoot sound, to determine just how long I might be waiting to have something to turn in to production. Some of the P.A.s I've worked with want to know why I haven't given them the pink office copy of my sound report... don't I know we've wrapped?

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

[Marc Wielage]

If the takes are long, or multiple microphones and tracks need to be used, the burn process can require so much time that the camera crew has the next shot ready before the idle copy can be completed.  ...When all these factors combine, one cannot complete the copy process on an as-you-go basis and one falls farther and farther behind. At the end of the day, there is a large file copy chore remaining. This is not just an inconvenience; it is a job killing necessity because production managers protest having to pay additional wages for the extra burn time.

It's no different on the Deva. One problem is the inherent slow speed of those thin 9mm DVD-RAM drives; they're not speed demons. I haven't compared the Deva's Panasonic drive to the external Sound Devices drive, but I bet they're not that far apart. A full-size drive can do 50X or more, at least on DVD-R media.

My hope is that the need for DVD-RAM is going to start fading away as more post houses and editors can take CF cards and/or hard drives instead. CF and HDs are infinitely faster for mirroring than DVD-RAM, especially with a lot of tracks.

I've mulled over the possibility of just mirroring to a small external firewire drive, then pulling that off and burning the actual disk on a computer during a break (maybe at video village). But things are so hectic, there usually just isn't enough time. And usually there's some frenetic DIT trying to copy and backup all the CF cards or drives for the shoot; the last thing he wants to worry about is sound.

My only suggestion for David is to burn two discs a day and have one done by the first meal break. Then, you'll only have to worry about half as many takes at the end of the day. It's not ideal, but I can't think of another solution. (I've tried putting my face very close to the drive and yelling "hurry up!", but it doesn't work.)

--Marc W.

[Jeff Wexler]

My hope is that the need for DVD-RAM is going to start fading away as more post houses and editors can take CF cards and/or hard drives instead.

--Marc W.

I know that you, Marc, will want to weigh in on this issue that Robert Kennedy at Coffey Sound mentioned to me the other day while we were talking about CF vs. DVD-RAM. I expressed the usual and current sentiment that it will be so terrific when we can get off DVD-RAM (or any optical disc format for that matter) for our deliverable. Robert pointed out that CF is not an archival format, meaning that we are turning in something which works great as a daily deliverable to post but once the primary transfer is done and the media is put on the shelf, it is not a robust or stable master. When the transfer house used to store the 1/4" tapes until they were turned over to sound editorial, the studio would then keep the master tapes for a period of time. The DVD-RAM discs that we make do have considerable longevity and could be considered archival. Robert is telling me this is NOT the case with CF. Of course, the responsibility could be put on the facility, even at the daily level, to make copies to a medium that IS considered archival. There are those who say that all this concern for archive doesn't matter because so much of what is being produced barely has a first life and certainly not a second. To a certain extent I agree with this, but the issue of archivability is still something to consider.

-  Jeff Wexler

[Brian]

Hey guys,

I own a cantar, and yeah sometimes we get behind a little.  Here's the thing for me.  It may be different in television series where they want break offs right away, but for a commercial it's usually done at lunch.  This is where I catch up.  You must be doing some long takes and a lot of tracks to be that far behind.  I usually find that by the time I pack up a few items, get some time sheets done, I'm ready to burn.  If production is on your back, donate your time for the burning.  I know we should be on the clock but if your work is suffering from it, it's a small price to pay.  Good suggestion was made to make a disk at lunch then your burn time will be cut in half.  Burn a Dvd-r and just use the idle store function.  This is what I do on long term doc stuff.  I poly rotate 2, and Idle store.  When I get back to the hotel or my house, I burn a dvd-r (which goes way faster than a dvd-ram) I hop in the shower, and voila.  On the last production the camera assistant came over with his lacie drive, and I would dump straight from the Cantar.  No fuss.

I suggest as Cantarist that we campaign for continuous burn, while recording.  This way we can stay ahead. 

By the way Jeff, what do you guys usually do with Deva?  Burn all the time, or Burn when not recording.

I actually hate the poly-rotate that happens with Cantar.  This is the only reason that it takes as long as it does. Mono...Mono...

B

[Jeff Wexler]

I suggest as Cantarist that we campaign for continuous burn, while recording.  This way we can stay ahead. 

By the way Jeff, what do you guys usually do with Deva?  Burn all the time, or Burn when not recording.

I actually hate the poly-rotate that happens with Cantar.  This is the only reason that it takes as long as it does. Mono...Mono...

B

I personally have stayed with the standard mirroring procedure that we have had with the Deva, that is mirroring while in STOP mode (only referred to as "idle copy" when referencing other machines --- we just call it mirroring). There is no downside for me doing it this way since the only time I might have to wait a little bit will be the last take of the day (and then usually that will be no longer at the very most the length of the take itself). As for the poly-rotate thing, I suppose it is a great feature for Cantar users as a workaround but I would hate to have to wait for this. It is an absolute requirement on the majority of jobs we do to deliver poly files so the mono option is not an option.

Also, does it not seem a little pretentious to refer to those who use the Cantar as "Cantarists"? I certainly would not want my skill, experience, creativity and professionalism tied to a piece of equipment I may be using. The unfortunate consequence of this sort of thing is that some producer in the future will "hire" the equipment and get anybody to operate it.

[David Waelder]

This matter of burn speed is the one hitch in the Cantar world. For many users it's not a problem at all.

Some users have reported that they just make a one or two-track burn of the mix and at a later, more convenient time, provide disks or a hard drive with the ISO tracks. That's a valid approach if one can do it. The Cantar can virtually always keep up if burning only one or two tracks; the difficulty of not having enough time between takes really only arises with multi-track burns. For me, the problem arose because, as a 2nd unit or "double-up" mixer I was expected to accomplish whatever the regular mixer did. And, since I was only day-playing, there was some reluctance to letting me leave without turning in all the elements that editorial might need. I guess the reasoning is that I might take an assignment on "The Deadliest Catch" and be off the coast of the Aleutian Islands and unavailable for months at a time. If they knew me better, they would know that I don't take any assignments far from Room Service but, that's another matter. For one reason or another, I am expected to turn in all the elements of the recordings before I go home.

Checking some files from my assignments on one show, I recorded the following:

Day 1 (AAD - native Cantar, mono): 6.62 GB

Day 1 (AAR- poly-rotated): 8.39 GB

Day 2 (AAD - native Cantar, mono): 3.41 GB

Day 2 (AAR - poly-rotated): 4.61 GB

Day 3 (AAD - native Cantar, mono): 4.29 GB

Day 3 (AAR - poly-rotated): 6.27 GB

This is a typical sequence. As you can see, the file sizes grow a bit after Poly-Rotate processing. I think it may be that the resultant files are all eight track files while the original recording would only have data for the armed tracks. Obviously, more than one disk per day was required simply because the data exceeds the capacity of a DVD-RAM. Probably I was turning in a disk at a lunchtime break. The first disk is not a problem because I would be able to use the lunch hour for disk burning and the task would be accomplished by the time I returned. It's the second disk at the end of the day that was sometimes problematic.

Also, does it not seem a little pretentious to refer to those who use the Cantar as "Cantarists"? I certainly would not want my skill, experience, creativity and professionalism tied to a piece of equipment I may be using. The unfortunate consequence of this sort of thing is that some producer in the future will "hire" the equipment and get anybody to operate it.

You know, with the Cantar, I haven't lost a moment's sleep worrying that a producer would go out and hire the recorder and get just anyone to run it.

Anyway, my post about using a hard drive as an intermediate element in the data processing was an attempt at a work-around for the burn issue. It looks promising. By rotating a couple of drives, I can always assure that yesterday's material is on a different drive so re-burns, if required, could be accomplished without disturbing the recorder. (DVD-RAM Disks burned directly from the Cantar are very, very reliable. I'm not sure that applies to DVD-R disks burned from a laptop.)

If anybody ever hires me again, I'll report on how it all worked.

David

[studiomprd]

" CF is not an archival format, "

post, in steps following our delivery, is placing the files on archival storage. it is, as it ought to be, a part of their workflow. 

in typical projects, the CF is robust enough to more than last through the production/postproduction life of the project.  In the rare cases where that cycle extends to years, clearly the archiving of files (image and sound) needs to be addressed once this issue is realized...

[Brian]

Hey Jeff,

"Cantarist" is just a fun little word someone came up with on the user group. My skill, experience, creativity and professionalism are not tied to a piece of equipment I may be using.  I don't promote myself with this word.  I promote myself with all of the above mentioned adjectives that came from your post.  Sensitive.....

B

[Marc Wielage]

Robert pointed out that CF is not an archival format, meaning that we are turning in something which works great as a daily deliverable to post but once the primary transfer is done and the media is put on the shelf, it is not a robust or stable master.

That's true -- but bear in mind that it's just a copy of what's on the Deva drive. Technically, the Deva files are the master, and the CF (or DVD-RAM) are mirrored BWAVs. I think if anybody is worrying about archival stuff, that's too old school at this point; it's not like there's going to be generational losses, certainly not with one digital copy.

I do think it'd be a good idea to copy all the files at the end of the show and give the post team a copy of that drive, just as the double-secret emergency backup. But I wouldn't necessarily look on the DVD-RAMs as the "archival" copy. I'm not even convinced those disks will last a long time. I think recycling the CF cards every week would be fine, as long as the editorial team archived them to a hard drive every day.

"Cantarist" is just a fun little word someone came up with on the user group.

Hmmm' date=' would that be the Cantar Cantarists vs. the Deva Devils?  [img']http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/devil-naughty.gif

--Marc W.

[Brian]

Yes Yes I like those names!! Now someone has a sense of humour!!  Way to go Marc!

B

[LED Sound]

I just finished a film where the mixer was using a Cantar and we came across the same issues of burn time.  Namely with the poly-rotate burn, the times for burning were just too long.  We had production buy 2 hard drives, and would copy to the hard drive between takes.  Then at the end of the day power down the machine, unplug, hand off, and go home.  In the morning we would get a hard drive back, plug in, and go.  It made life a lot easier and post was happy as well.  After we started doing this we never heard a complaint about files not being able to be read or bad disks. 

[studiomprd]

anyone tried "thumb drives" ??

USB-2 is pretty speedy...

[John Blankenship]

Hmmm, would that be the Cantar Cantarists vs. the Deva Devils?

Since this is a kind of religion for some folks, I thought the term was "Dehovas" -- as in a devout "Dehova Witness."

Don't jump my case; I use a Deva.

John B.

[Philip Perkins]

Re: CF reliability and archiveability: they certainly COULD be those things if someone set themselves up to do so--they are much more reliable than hard drives, which is where most of the media used in the post of nearly any project anymore ends up living.  Re: Cantar--  it seems like that the Cantar is the only recorder among those commonly used by professionals to not have a CF-recording solution.  I'm hoping that with the advent of the Tascam 9-pin controllable CF decks that telecine bays--the main user anymore of sound on DVDs, will be able to sync from CFs.  Meanwhile, I thought it was possible to use an external FW CF device with a recorder that can record to external FW media?  Could that be a solution?

Another meanwhile: on a number of "card-cam" shoots lately (RED, 5D, P2 cams) the dumpist has gotten so far behind that I ended up burning a DVD of the audio from my CF anyway, in order to get myself off the clock.  The jobs had been spec'ed to have the data manager do it all, but with multiple cameras on long takes their laptop setups were too slow  (esp now with 32 GB camera cards).  I do have a very nice external Plextor DVD drive that is very fast (and can read write DVDRAM), so that helps.

Philip Perkins

[soundtrane]

Philip, yes, you can use an external firewire CF reader like the Sandisk Extreme or Lexar UDMA. This is exactly how i am going to do it in my next project. Earlier on both my major features in 2008 and 09, I had a bus powered Lacie that used to travel to pic edit and back to me.

Senator, the Cantar does not use USB, only firewire as of now. I believe JP is waiting for USB 3 to come...

-vin

[Marc Wielage]

Since this is a kind of religion for some folks, I thought the term was "Dehovas" -- as in a devout "Dehova Witness."

I didn't realize how hip Glenn was until I read a book on Buddhism last year and found out <b>what a Deva really is</b>. I just about fell outta my chair. You could definitely say it's close to a religious reference.

--Marc W.

[Brian]

I think Reberto uses a Firewire to Compact flash adapter with the Cantar. 

I think it exists? Anyone can comment.  Firewire to Compact Flash.

[Jim Gilchrist]

I think it exists? Anyone can comment.  Firewire to Compact Flash.

They are available from both SanDisk and Lexar. I've been using my SanDisk reader/writer with various Sound Devices recorders, my Mac laptops and a Mac Mini as a recording destination for a few years now. Works just fine.

The Lexar unit: http://www.lexar.com/readers/pro_udma_reader.html

The SanDisk unit: http://www.sandisk.com/products/readers-accessories/sandisk-extreme-firewire-reader

Best regards,

Jim

[Brian]

Thank you Jim.  I appreciate the links.

Hey Vin, Can you comment on what works best with cantar.  What cards and reader writer are you using.  You can contact me off list if you like.  I would like to start using this for over the shoulder work as a safety.

You never know.....

Brian Hanish

[soundtrane]

Brian, I ordered the stuff but I am yet to get it. Once i get my hands on it and put it all to work, I'll let you know...

-vin

PS: the Cantar Manual lists both these card readers. I ordered the Sandisk because I wanted Firewire 400 as well, just as an option to the 800. I also ordered a JOBO CF to  SHDC adapter and a 16GB (not very fast) SDHC card. 

[ben lowry]

The Delkin Devices Reader 39 (FW800 + FW400 adapter, ferrite choke on cable) has worked solidly with Cantar X, Deva 5.8, Fusion, SD 744T, & 788T for a couple of years now. Unfortunately I think it's discontinued.

I've also used the SanDisk Extreme with Cantar & 744T. Worked fine.

Ben Lowry

[Brian]

Thanks guys,

I appreciate all the information.  Big Help.

Vin, lemme know how your testing goes.

Brian Hanish