8TB for 2hrs of footage is crazy even compared to other high end cinema camera, going to be an interesting work flow for anyone editing this as thats not a a trivial amount of data even by today's standards
> going to be an interesting work flow for anyone editing this
We've had techniques for editing videos on underpowered PCs since the 1990s. Possibly earlier.
You use something called a "proxy workflow": For each 8K source video, generate a 480p "proxy" with the same frame timing but a much more manageable amount of data. You edit the entire film using the 480p videos. Then once you're happy you "render" the video - which swaps the high quality sources back in and produces an output file. The final render might take all weekend for an hour-long video - but you've only got to do it once.
They did that with film too. The editors sliced up a copy of the developed film, called a “workprint,” spliced it all back together, and produced a list of numerical edit points as they went along.
Then a person called the negative cutter would go through the list, duplicate the editing decisions on a high-quality negative without the generational loss, and that would go on to become the final print.
That’s why sometimes you’ll see a deleted scene from a movie whose picture quality looks quite poor. That was most likely taken from the workprint, and never went through negative cutting or any finishing.
> is crazy even compared to other high end cinema camera
Is it really? I haven't touched "high end cinema cameras" but if my consumer camera can generate ~1TB/hour and it's a "normal" consumer camera, I'd easily expect 4x that in high end cinema gear for 3D video (multiple videos stitched into one essentially)
But again, haven't used any of those or looked it up, so what do I know. It doesn't sound outlandish to me though.
> A high-end iphone can record 4K 60FPS video and an hour's footage takes up 24 gigabytes.
According to https://support.apple.com/en-us/109041 4k60 recording in ProRes needs 220 MB/s storage, so an hour would be ~792 GB. Sure, you can choose to throw away most of that data with more lossy compression, but the barely-acceptable bitrates used by streaming services are not at all the right point of comparison here.
Raw 8K video at 60 fps out of something like a Nikon Z8 is around 1.5 TB/hour, 400-500 MB/s.
Of course most people wouldn't shoot at 60 fps for historical reasons, and raw video codecs are intra-only so data rate scales linearly with fps. They're just relatively heavily lossily compressed raw images in a box, basically.
Fair, maybe "prosumer" is more fitting, was thinking of the Pocket Cinema 6K (also from Blackmagic). Not exactly "high end cinema camera" so I still think the data rate doesn't sound out of the world.
I've been curious on the real-world throughput of a directly attached Thunderbolt RAID vs a 10GB (single or bonded) Synology NAS. It's annoying to have to go to my desk to connect to the USB-C Drobo, and I have to jump ship sooner or later.
I have gone down this path myself for doing 8k editing. TB3 attached SSDs IO to my Mac at about 3GB/s. The ones on my server connected over 10GB fiber Ethernet actually only reach about 800MB/s and I suspect that that macOS networking stack is just not at all optimized for 10G.
10GBit networking is really only 1.25GBytes per second, so 800MBytes/s isn't saturating the link, but is 64% of the way there. TB3 has a theoretical throughput of 40GByte/s so 3GByte/s => 24GBit/s is 60%. Realistically both are lower to the theretical link performance than I would have guessed, so there may be some bottlenecks involved beyond just computational overhead, but it makes sense TB3 was going to win assuming the storage had the bandwidth.
To prevent causing issues upstream you would want to write to a fast NVME SSD first before backing up to a HDD array. Unfortunately, it doesn't support this use case as the NAS is designed for movie streaming, offices, security cameras etc.
We've had techniques for editing videos on underpowered PCs since the 1990s. Possibly earlier.
You use something called a "proxy workflow": For each 8K source video, generate a 480p "proxy" with the same frame timing but a much more manageable amount of data. You edit the entire film using the 480p videos. Then once you're happy you "render" the video - which swaps the high quality sources back in and produces an output file. The final render might take all weekend for an hour-long video - but you've only got to do it once.