#Image Storage Problem
17 messages in this thread
I have reached the point where I am about to start production of
animation files (and matching sound files). What is the best solution to
the storage problem?
(1) Buy a second, large hard drive? Expensive, and would it only be
a temporary solution? And what if it crashes?
(2) Bernoulli disk drive? Sound attractive; are there any snags?
(3) 25MB floppy drive? Any snags here?
(4) Tape backup drive. This is attractive, because inexpensive.
I have no experience whatever of such systems. Can one break
up the back-up operation into separate files which can then
be retrieved individually? If so, would this require a linear
search, or would the tape have a table at the front end listing
what has been downloaded onto it? I realise, of course, that
the transfer process would be slow, but this wouldn't matter,
since transfer operations would only be required infrequently.
(5) I heard somewhere that there is a VCR backup system (by
Omnitronics?) which uses video tape, and which is very
inexpensive. Anyone know anything about this?
Stephen
Stephen,
Best bets:
1) Get an an erasable optical drive. Expensive.
2) Get a Bernoulli – 90M capacity per cartridge.
This may not be enough for long sequences. Advantage is
good speed, on-line random access, doubles as backup device.
3) 25M floppy – limited media availability – why bother?
4) Tape backup. Fine if you want to maintain space on the
hard drive to load/unload segments as needed. File by file
method is best, and directory is stored @ head of tape.
Problem is slow access, difficulty on some models of
specifying files to be retrieved, impossibility of
retrieving ANY files if bad tape transfer, media problem
within a single file, or media problem in directory. While
same is true of other media, tape dropout is not uncommon
(ask anybody who uses audio cassettes. Tapes can also
break if the BOT or EOT (beginning, end-of-tape) sensor
gets dirty.
5) VCR backup. Very slow, does use redundancy. Expensive for
what you get. Bad idea.
Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
Kevin,
I guess you've completely written off the Syquest. Serves me well here,
although I haven't tried any multi-drive inter-changeability tests they
work great for offline storage. And cheap too!
James
James,
The Syquests are an alternative. It's true that there is not great
interchangability between drive marketers. I had only responded by item
number to what was already listed. And I *like* Bernoullis.
Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
Kevin,
you running your Burnoulies via SCSI, or are you one of those fortunate
souls that can spare a slot? (8 slots used, four hard drives and counting)
James
James,
On a PC, a SCSI adapter is usually used – it does not have to be
from Iomega. I have also used the parallel-SCSI adapter (running the
Bernoulli off the parallel port) and was surprised how fast that was. Only
problem is, some parallel ports won't work. I had real fun trying to load
our 3D Studio presentation (subbing for Autodesk @ a Video Expo last May)
onto a Compaq 486/33. Finally had to go parallel to our Compaq portable,
then Flying Dutchman (@ 1M/minute) to the other Compaq. Mac, of course,
just requires a SCSI cable & the drivers.
Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
Kevin,
You mean if I get an external drive ( Bernoulli SCSI), I can use the SCSI
port on a PC and then plug into a MAC (with software drivers?) to get those
40 meg TIFF files to be seperated and imaged? PC's have a ways to go for
the high end seperations so it's to the MAC and back for a while.
And they hold a couple of seconds of animation too!
James
James,
You will need file transfer utilities (Iomega has a set for
conversion). Generally, you must format cartridges on the PC, and use the
File exchange software so the Mac can mount the cartridge. Similar to the
procedure for 3.5" diskettes between PC & Mac. Other companies also make
transfer software (I think Iomega's is restricted to 32M partitions), such
as Dayna. Various removable media, up through optical disks may be used.
Most common file transfer I see is .TGA on the PC side brought over to the
Mac (and used either as .TGA or converted to PICT).
Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
Kevin,
Many thanks for yopur very helpful reply.
Given my particular needs and circumstances, I think the Beroulli is
a clear winner.
Stephen
Stephen,
Having wrestled with mass storage, I've boiled the issues down to what I
think are the two main considerations:
1) Reliability/useability – the device must be fast enough and robust
enough to make its use seem easy to the operator. Otherwise, it won't be
used. I use a worm drive, it's slow by very stable and has LOTS of space
and it's cheap compared to anyother optical media. The Lab uses
magneto-optical (MO) drives. We've found that they are very good drives,
they are eraseable, but they can cause heart aches if they are not
completely ISO compabible. ISO compatability allows use of the disks in
other ISO compatable drives. Whatever drive you get, be sure that the
controller can handle additional devices (like CD-ROM's) or won't conflict
with other controllers or devices. We've found that the WD 7000 is pretty
limited to what it can control and conflicts with the Future Domain cards
(another common SCSI controller) but works well with little RAM for our
Lab's optical stack.
I'd suggest a large, fast, robust fixed disk with a MO as offline storage.
2) Transportable media – You must think about where you may want to send
your data. If you have a client or will be sharing data with someone else,
be sure you can read eachothers data. Due to this, I've often had to resort
to using SPLIT/COMBINE and mail many floppies to offsite colleagues while I
look fondly at my 150 meg tape drive on my SUN and my 940 meg Panasonic
WORM drives.
MO's that are ISO compabible will allow you to send data to others with ISO
compatible drives, but only if they are formatted with the same version of
DOS. We've overcome this by keeping 3.30, 3.31, 4.0 bootdisks around ready
to load the needed OS of the incomming disk.
2a) There's always a "gottcha" when it comes to this issue.
John
-John-
Thanks for interesting and informative message.
What your reply makes clear to me is how dependent the *ideal
solution* is upon one's particular situation. Let me describe mine -since
there may be others in the same situation.
(1) I print everything to video, and cannot currently envisage
a situation where I would really need to transport digital.
(2) Most of my files consist of small clips. My largest
Animator file to date is less than 10 Megs, so that even its
Animator Pro equivalent, at 640 X 480 would only be 40 Megs.
This being the case, a Bernoulli might be a vaible option.
(3) I am a *person* as opposed to a *business* or *employee*
hence am operating with a *bottom line* which is fairly
sharply circumscribed. To put it differently, I am obliged
to cut my coat according to my cloth.
Again, thanks for the useful info which I have carefully filed away.
Who knows, my situation may change.
Stephen
I don't take the money side of hardware very lightly, I'm always working
with hardware vendors to keep prices in-line with market restraints. But,
there are real costs involved with a good, workable hardware solution, and
they must be factored in when generating a solid business. Corporations are
*people* in the legal sense and are comprised of the same. All of us work
with and within budgets, we're no different.
Rendering is an expensive operation in terms of CPU cycles and time.
Avoiding re-rendering has popped up as an important issue to us and mass
storage, in digital format (on disk) or analog (on tape) are both viable
options. The analog solution requires an investment in tape editing
equipment and the digital in disk storage hardware.
John,
I wasn't implying that employees and business owners weren.t
*people* but only that they have *different* budget constraints!!
This is what I mean when I say, for example, that Autodesk 3DS and
Autocad are beyond the reach of *people* in that no one -who is otherwise
doing quite well (for example, most of my associates are Ph.d scientists
and engineers working in the upper echelons of government laboratories) who
have children to educate and mortgage payments to meet can possibly justify
the expenditure of 3K for *a* piece of software for their personal use.
May I ask one more question? I am seriously interested in looking
into the Bernoulli Disk option, but don't seem to come across many
references to them in the standard journals. As with everyone else, I am
running out of slots on the motherboard and am wondering whether Bernoullis
can be plugged into a hard disk card. I currently have a card capable of
driving two hard disks; the one which I have is a Metropolis ESDI 150M.
Thanks again for the information supplied
Stephen
Stephen,
PC Week did a review of all the removeable media solutions a couple of
weeks ago (but no Optical products). You might try your local
university/public library for a look….
James
James,
Am not sure if I responded before. Anyway, thanks…I'm sure that
one library I know of has it
Stephen
There's a couple of options for all of us slot-less folk. First is a SCSI
controller which will run many drives, CD-ROM's etc all daisy-chained
together. The other's a new SCSI parallel port converter which allows you
to attach a device to the parallel port of your computer and access SCSI
disks at some very high data rate (actual figures I lack at the moment).
Our investigation, if I recall correctly, indicated that Omega's new 90 meg
cartridge can use that adaptor.
I agree that $3k is difficult for any individual wanting to use products
like ACAD and 3D Studio for home or personal use. It is, however, the
lowest priced product of its kind in the market. In fact we came in a 25%
of the cost of a Topaz system when we released the product and we've driven
the price down on it and other like software. We still belive that old
Autodesk motto, "90% functionality for 10% of the cost" and honestly think
we came very close to fulfilling that objective.
John
John,
Thanks a lot for your survival hints for the slot-destitute.
About 3Ds and Autocad pricing……as I'm sure I mentioned before,
software pricing seems to us outsiders to be a strange, surrealist,
alchemical type business -sort of, a branch of astrology; one gets the
impression that it's *decoupled* from actual production costs -sort-of
floating free in space. May I ask this question -necessarily apostrophic
(no, I'm not an English major) because I can hardly expect Autocad to tip
its marketing hand here….but, *If* you sold your product for $750, *and*
as a result, five or more times as many people purchased your product,
would you do it? If it worked out, everybody would be ahead. And, as a
bonus for Autodesk, you might have caused at least some of the larcenous
pirates who are presently freeloading on you to have avoided sin -or
whatever.
[—-I promise not to bring this up again—-]
Stephen