musicvid10 wrote on 4/9/2010, 7:00 AM
A 2GHz single-core Celeron is not adequate for editing AVCHD.
farss wrote on 4/9/2010, 7:51 AM
DO you actually plan to do the editing on the media server or simply pull the data from it to edit on another PC. In general all media servers are just that. They don't use very fast CPUs as they don't need to, they need to keep power consumption down to save money and noise.

musicvid10 wrote on 4/9/2010, 8:11 AM
Good point, Bob. If the media server is for storage, and the actual editing machine also has SATA drives, it "may" be fast enough, but not as fast as hooking a big drive up directly to the editing machine.

Network servers are known for sluggish performance under heavy simultaneous read / write operations, but I actually do this quite often for SD source editing and rendering.
logiquem wrote on 4/9/2010, 10:12 AM
Sure, i never envisaged to use a celeron to edit anything...

The server only duty is for sources files.

I will edit with my main i7 station and acces the files via a fast ethernet link.

bsuratt wrote on 4/9/2010, 11:48 AM
I have a HP Mediasmart (WHS) used for storage of completed projects on a 1k network. Occasionally I have opened a veg and assocaited files stored there from my editing PC over the network and had no problem editing and rendering HDV projects.
Chienworks wrote on 4/9/2010, 1:00 PM
1k network? Really?

The first dialup connection we had from our dorm building to the campus computer center back in 1985 was faster than that ... 1.2K.
logiquem wrote on 4/9/2010, 1:08 PM
Thanks a lot. Exactly the kind of feedack i hoped for.
UlfLaursen wrote on 4/9/2010, 8:02 PM
Hi Bastien

I have an i7, 12 GB and win7 64 / Vegas 64 and am importing 30 min. of AVCHD files from my Netgear Ready-NAS frequently just to cut the ends of them, place a "local" intro and "outro" and then render.

I would not like to edit very much in the files when it comes to AVCHD I must admit. DV and probably HDV would be ok.

If you only by this mediaserver to be able to do this, I would try and see if I could do some testing somehow first. I use mine mostly for archiving cutaways, pictures, intros, outros, renders etc. that I use on different PC's all the time.

musicvid10 wrote on 4/9/2010, 8:09 PM
Ulf's observations raise an obvious question:

Why do you want to do this over a network?
bsuratt wrote on 4/9/2010, 8:15 PM

In case you didn't know 1K = 1000

(as in MBps)!
musicvid10 wrote on 4/9/2010, 8:32 PM
In case you didn't know 1K = 1000

No, you are incorrect.

1 Kbs = 1000 bits per second.
1 MBs = 8192 Kilobits per second.
Kelly's response was correct.
Coursedesign wrote on 4/9/2010, 8:48 PM
The original Ethernet was 1 Mbps.

And no wimpy twisted pair wiring either but honest-to-goodness thick coaxial able, on a BNC T-connector.

I remember the NICs costing $1K each!

And you needed repeaters on each floor, sigh.

It was such a liberation when AT&T brought StarLAN to the world, 1 MBps still, but over TP.

(TP=twisted pair :O))
bsuratt wrote on 4/10/2010, 5:37 AM
Geesh guys!!! I mean't it in a literal (slang) sense!

"The D-Link DGS-2208 10/100/1000 Mbps Gigabit Switch"

The point of the question was "can you edit across a network using a WHS server for storage". The answer is: "Yes it will work on a network running at (up to) 1000 Mbps"

Nuff said!

AlanC wrote on 4/10/2010, 8:42 AM

Don't teach Kelly (Chienworks) how to suck network eggs. He is one of the, if not THE expert on networks in this forum.
bsuratt wrote on 4/10/2010, 6:54 PM
Sorry... I didn't know that about Chienworks!