ORIGINAL: maikii

Although DVDs are larger than 4 GB, individual files on them are usually not larger than 1 GB.

Hey maikii, I believe that's because the authoring process splits the larger blocks of data into smaller 1gb chunks, then the DVD player seamlessly stitches them back together during playback.

I like to archive my video files in their original, raw .avi format which are several gb's larger than they are in their DVD MPEG-2 incarnation. So the 4gb limitation of FAT32 is a barrier for me. That's really the only issue for me in the FAT32 vs. NTFS debate (if you can call it that).

ORIGINAL: maikii

ORIGINAL: juicerocks

I recently started working with videos and audio and files more than 4 gb is becoming more and more common. I had to convert over to NTFS after witnessing failed file transfres.

Although DVDs are larger than 4 GB, individual files on them are usually not larger than 1 GB. Are there really many cases where individual files are larger than 4 GB?

That is true maikii, but I wasn't referring to DVD's I was refering to MiniDV tape files from camcorders. I do live recording events that take up a 60 minute tape. I can't sit there and screen throught the tape so I capture it on my laptop which is in realtime so 4 tapes from 2 cameras recording 2 hours of material is 4 tapes.

Each tape of one hour comes out to roughly 12gb per tape bedfore editing. That's about 60 gb broke into 4 files.
Of course afterwards I move them to my main machine for editing and an external drive for storing. And then those files broken down into 5 minute songs come out to be roughly 1 gb each. Then they get compressed down to flash media to about 20 to 30 MB files for internet viewing.
See here to what I end up with. http://www.juicerocks.com/gpage.html

12gb is common for just 1 60 minute camcorder tape.

ORIGINAL: juicerocks

ORIGINAL: maikii

ORIGINAL: juicerocks

I recently started working with videos and audio and files more than 4 gb is becoming more and more common. I had to convert over to NTFS after witnessing failed file transfres.

Although DVDs are larger than 4 GB, individual files on them are usually not larger than 1 GB. Are there really many cases where individual files are larger than 4 GB?

That is true maikii, but I wasn't referring to DVD's I was refering to MiniDV tape files from camcorders. I do live recording events that take up a 60 minute tape. I can't sit there and screen throught the tape so I capture it on my laptop which is in realtime so 4 tapes from 2 cameras recording 2 hours of material is 4 tapes.

Each tape of one hour comes out to roughly 12gb per tape bedfore editing. That's about 60 gb broke into 4 files.
Of course afterwards I move them to my main machine for editing and an external drive for storing. And then those files broken down into 5 minute songs come out to be roughly 1 gb each. Then they get compressed down to flash media to about 20 to 30 MB files for internet viewing.
See here to what I end up with. http://www.juicerocks.com/gpage.html

12gb is common for just 1 60 minute camcorder tape.

OT--

I guess I chose an easier route, in getting a camcorder. I have one that records to a compact flash card, directly into video files (MPEG-2). I have not recorded long enough to find out, but I suspect if the file one was recording to became 1GB in size, a new file would be started. When you press the pause button, then re-start, a new file is created, handy for chapters, songs, etc. Much easier than dealing with transferring from miniDV.

Unless you have an old Windows ME or earlier system with which you need to have file compatibility, use NTFS.

There's no performance benefit in partitioning a drive. The heads need to move just as far regardless of the partitioning.

I've done it without a problem (its a conversion not a reformatting). However, you should still make sure you have a backup of your data before attempting it.

ORIGINAL: jay_zhead
... All those advantages are lost when using a partitioned drive, you will end up with one drive that is always slow by default, and the access times for the fast drive will be hurt by partitioning as well.
If you just want another drive letter, then mount an NTFS folder as a drive using windows' disk management control panel; you'll have another virtual drive, with no need to partition anything.

... see, THIS is why I come to this forum (since I'm not going to post in that thread, or the other one for that matter)... you learn something new every day. Here I've been blithely partitioning drives for the past few years, never suspecting that it could be messing up my disk performance.

This is timely too, since I am about to go and pick up my new quad machine and begin setting things up, and I would doubtless have partitioned the system drive at least. Now I won't. Thanks for the info!

ORIGINAL: juicerocks

I recently started working with videos and audio and files more than 4 gb is becoming more and more common. I had to convert over to NTFS after witnessing failed file transfres.

Yeah.. that's the big reason to go NTFS. If you work with video. When I bring in camcorder tapes it's about 14 per hour. Some software will automatically bust up the video into files if you are captureing to FAT32 but I hate that. It's nice to be able to just do anything and not worry about how big the file will get.

Also, you really shouldn't make a FAT32 partition more the about 30some gig. The Windows disk manager won't let you do it. Most drives are much larger then that now so you would have to partition it up and that will cause performance and file organization problems. So in most cases NTFS is the way to go for big modern drives.

OT--

I guess I chose an easier route, in getting a camcorder. I have one that records to a compact flash card, directly into video files (MPEG-2). I have not recorded long enough to find out, but I suspect if the file one was recording to became 1GB in size, a new file would be started. When you press the pause button, then re-start, a new file is created, handy for chapters, songs, etc. Much easier than dealing with transferring from miniDV.

Hello,

That is why I would not use a camcorder like the one you have. MPEG-2 is not the format you want your video to start out, if you are going to edit it. MPEG-2 is a compressed format (like MP3 is to audio). When I capture DV from a DV camcorder or my Canopus ADVC110 the format is a lightly compressed AVI file. When you load edit your MPEG-2 file and then compile for DVD your video editor will re-MPEG it (like decompressing an MP3 then saving it again as an MP3, you've thrown away more information. The camcorder makers have actually opted for lower quality video in new camcorders in order to accommodate using flash memory or writing directly to DVD media. The consumer video industry's deep dark secret.

GK

ORIGINAL: Geokauf

OT--

I guess I chose an easier route, in getting a camcorder. I have one that records to a compact flash card, directly into video files (MPEG-2). I have not recorded long enough to find out, but I suspect if the file one was recording to became 1GB in size, a new file would be started. When you press the pause button, then re-start, a new file is created, handy for chapters, songs, etc. Much easier than dealing with transferring from miniDV.

Hello,

That is why I would not use a camcorder like the one you have. MPEG-2 is not the format you want your video to start out, if you are going to edit it. MPEG-2 is a compressed format (like MP3 is to audio). When I capture DV from a DV camcorder or my Canopus ADVC110 the format is a lightly compressed AVI file. When you load edit your MPEG-2 file and then compile for DVD your video editor will re-MPEG it (like decompressing an MP3 then saving it again as an MP3, you've thrown away more information. The camcorder makers have actually opted for lower quality video in new camcorders in order to accommodate using flash memory or writing directly to DVD media. The consumer video industry's deep dark secret.

GK

Yeah.. half the fun of getting the video into your computer is to edit it down and render a new version. If your video is already compressed that means you will be re-compressing video that is already missing most of it's frames.. not good. However, if the camcorder writes MPEG2 (DVD spec and does a fair job of it) AND you are going directly to DVD with no edits then it's not bad.

ORIGINAL: maikii


At first, I thought you were making a pretty good case for FAT32, regarding recovering data. I hadn't heard of that before. Why would one be more likely to be able to retrieve data from a corrupt partition if the drive is formatted FAT32?

Yet, you conclude that NTFS is better.

I guess if one may ever use a Mac in the future, it might be better to have the external drive formatted as FAT32, as Macs don't read NTFS. Or--can the new Intel-Macs read NTFS? What about Linux--can it read NTFS?

I was giving him the differences, from both sides of the equation.
As for repairing a FAT drive, there are a ton of forensic tools that you can use to reclaim clusters, rebuild links and so forth.
You can even sit for days rebuilding the actual FAT table by hand if the data is that important.
Or of course you can use one of the "boot the CD and say fix it" type tools as well.
They work rather well and your chance for recovering data is actually decent.

Not so with NTFS.
Yes there are tools out there but the success rate for them, especially in the hands of a novice is almost zero.

All that being said, these days storage is cheap, backups are a normal day to day thing and that is how we cope with data failure.
That wasn't always the case.
I didn't mention Win98 compatibility because I didn't think anyone here would still be using it.

Sorry if I came across as saying FAT is better, it's not.
NTFS is the only way to go unless you are interested in Linux and then I would say ext3 with a good RAID card.

I also agree with jay_zhead that partitioning the drive is not a great idea these days.

Actually the data transfer rate at the edge of the platter is "greater" than that at the center due to zbr:

http://www.dewassoc.com/kbase/hard_drives/hard_disk_sector_structures.htm