capture to network drive

willisub wrote on 6/15/2004, 7:06 PM
I have a gig enet card in dual xeon server and in vegas workstation dual xeon also. We transfer and backup video files at 2-3 gigabytes per minute. Have previously captured Mpeg 2:1 compression files to network drives.

With vegas 5, when capturing dv to the network drive, Vegas tells me network is not set up right, and might not work properly (or something of that nature) . I start the capture and I get about 1-2 seconds before dropping frames continuously. The network folder is mapped as a drive letter.

I have tested this with the network quiet and only vegas and server online. It's not a network traffic or server load issue.

Previously, I had captured (version 3 and maybe 4) to a 100 megabit network sucessfully with much slower computer and drives on the server.

I'm not using or have I set up network rendering.

Any ideas?

Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 6/15/2004, 10:50 PM
What O/S is running on the server and on the Vegas workstation? There are serious performance issues moving files between different Microsoft operating systems across the network (would you believe that transfers can slow to 15% when transferring between computers running different Microsoft operating systems; if one of the computers is a dual boot and is rebooted to have the same operating system as the computer to which it is sending files, the performance goes back up again).

I have been looking for two years for a solution to this problem.

FWIW, I have captured, with no dropped frames, across a 100 mbs switched network, so I know it is technically possible.
SonyPJM wrote on 6/17/2004, 6:49 AM

A change we recently made in Vegas 5.0b improves the performance of
writing AVI files over the network in many cases.
shogo wrote on 6/17/2004, 11:53 AM
I have the same type setup are you running server 2k or 2k3. What I have found is that you need to disable SMB signing on the server and the workstations in the registry.

For the server the key is located here
Enabling SMB Signing
To require SMB signing, use the Registry Editor to create or assign the following Registry key values: NOTE: SMB signing is only available on Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows 2003
SMB signing will cause a 10-15% performance hit.

HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\LanManServer\Parameters

Value Name: EnableSecuritySignature
Data Type: REG_DWORD
Data: 0 (disable), 1 (enable)

NOTE: The default is 0 (disable)

Name: RequireSecuritySignature
Type: REG_DWORD
Value: 0 (disable), 1 (enable)

NOTE: The default is 0 (disable)

also I disable HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\LanManWorkstation\Parameters

This should help out when I did this I could capture no problem and playback several videos on the timeline flawlessly...

Again this is the registry so be carefull - no undo's in the registry ;-)

willisub wrote on 6/17/2004, 3:14 PM
I'm not sure what version of 5 I have. I'll check.

I'm running 2003 server on a dual xeon w/ 8 drive stripe. As said before, I get 2-3 gigs of files across in 1 minute from Vegas editing machine copy from Windows explorer. I'll try to a win 2000 server as we have that also. I may also try just going to anothe XP machine.

I'll be back
shogo wrote on 6/17/2004, 5:18 PM
You should try the SMB registry fix made a huge improvement for me. My server is 2k3 and my workstation in XP PRO just like your setup try this I bet it helps out.
willisub wrote on 6/18/2004, 7:00 AM
I can't find 5.0b. Is it posted anywhere? Can I get a beta of it?

SonyPJM wrote on 6/18/2004, 7:33 AM
We have not released the 5.0b update yet... soon though.
willisub wrote on 6/21/2004, 6:44 PM
Update. Using a shared drive from XP pro, I'm able to capture and edit from that drive both with 100 and gig enet. I"m thinking maybe sony might need to look at what's going on with the 2000 and 2003 server when capturing.

I don't know who's problem it is, but it should be looked into. Avid and Apple sell file sharing solutions for DV editing with multiple users. Unless Vegas is just for hobbyists and small shops, this should get fixed. We shouldn't have to go editing the registry.
johnmeyer wrote on 6/21/2004, 9:58 PM
There is a long Microsoft KB article on this very topic.