Nearly every post project involves multiple steps performed at different times, often in different places. That means efficient production depends on the unimpeded movement of video data among workstations. It''s been clear for years that “sneakernet” — simply moving around physical drives — is less than ideal. Physical security, version control, and file system compatibility are problematic, and the data on each drive is only accessible to a single workstation at any given time.
Local Area Networks (LANs) offer a partial solution, but the Ethernet protocol (10BaseT, 100BaseT, or Gigabit) on which most LANs are based doesn''t reliably support realtime playback of time-based media. Thus LAN-based networks typically involve a library-like system in which project elements are “checked out” from a centralized server, downloaded to a local drive for actual production work, and then checked back into the master project on the server. This approach can create big version-control headaches for projects involving lots of materials and a big team, and the downloading and uploading represents wasted time.
To get around the potential hassles of an Ethernet LAN, systems designers for video and audio post generally suggest installation of a dedicated Fibre Channel Storage Area Network (SAN) and leaving email and other non-production networking tasks to the company LAN. Fibre Channel — a serial interface that connects not only workstations and storage but also devices such as switches and servers — supports the high throughput needed for uncompressed video data streams. And the complications of downloading/uploading to local drives are eliminated, because each workstation on the SAN accesses the same shared array (integrated collection of drives). The volumes defined on the array appear to each user as if they were local, and in some configurations multiple users may access the same files simultaneously.
Unfortunately, the initial investment in a SAN can be a big hurdle, usually quite a bit more than a LAN. In theory, this outlay is rapidly recouped through improved efficiency: less time spent on transfers, less version-control administration, greater flexibility in allocation of edit bays and other facility resources, and more opportunity for parallel workflow. To see how this theory translates into reality, we checked in with representatives of four diverse SAN-equipped facilities, and asked them what they had hoped to gain by moving to a SAN, and how it''s worked out so far.
Video Systems spoke with Mark Baird, producer, NASA/Johnson Space Center, Houston; Chuck Carey, executive producer/partner, Troika Design Group, Hollywood, Calif.; Bob Gross, video editor, Faith Is The Victory Church, Nashville, Tenn.; and Randy Tinfow, president, Image Plant, Fairfield, N.J.
VS:
What were the motivating factors that caused your facility to make the investment in a SAN? What areas of post-production does it serve?
Baird: We chose a SAN primarily to relieve scheduling difficulties. Having five editors available is no help if the two projects that need work on a particular day are both on the local drives of the same NLE. You could transfer them over the 100TX network, but that still takes a couple of hours. With SAN you can sit down on any attached machine, pull up your project and you are ready to work. A SAN also helps with centralizing project files for backup, and it makes it easier to share commonly used video clips relating to the current mission.
Three of our five NLEs are served by the SAN right now. Two more will be added in the near future when we get fiber lines run between two of our buildings.
The SAN is divided into two volumes: one for traditional productions — educational, training, safety, or PR — the other for mission-specific products such as pre-mission press kits for the media and post-mission presentations for the crews. With the addition of the other NLEs, our flight-day highlight programs will also be done on the SAN.
Carey: The SAN provides us with two major benefits: the bandwidth to handle uncompressed video and the ability to share large files between multiple workstations without having to consume time with LAN transfers. It has delivered on both counts.
Our Fibre Channel SAN services our Macintosh G4 workstations that run Final Cut Pro, Adobe After Effects, Cinema 4D, and other design applications.
Gross: Our primary reason for adding the SAN was to minimize posting downtime, and allow us to use that gained time in a more creative manner. Because of our growing broadcast schedule, we decided that a SAN could alleviate some of the pressure of using a single editing system, and minimize downtime due to rendering, capturing, and printing to tape.
On a weekly basis, we post six 30-minute “Victorious Living” programs, along with spots, promos, and commercials.
Before we had the SAN, we wanted to get customers to spend more on graphics production and audio, but we were missing opportunities. Clients would often run out of time before we''d had the opportunity to fully develop a rich graphical package. So we saw SAN as the technology that would allow delivery of concurrent services; we''d be able to edit and provide ancillary services — at the same time using the same source materials.
Now there''s no reason to wait until an edit is finished to begin graphics production and audio sweetening. The video work we do on the SAN is mostly editing and graphics.
VS:
What were the most important requirements and choices you faced in tailoring the SAN to the specific needs of your facility?
Baird: The primary factor was compatibility with our Incite NLEs. We were looking for a five-seat system with upward expand-ability to a 16-connection system. Our vendor, Cine-Sys, offered us an eight-port switch with a trade-in option if we want to move to a 16-port switch within a certain time frame. We also went with an array for performance.
We maintain a private 100TX network for video and media production, and we also upgraded that network from a hub to two switches in order to ensure good metadata performance and the capacity to handle a dozen or so machines we were adding to the network. Everything from our NLEs to our 3D art stations to our online CGs and DDRs can talk to each other over the 100TX network, and they can all reach the SAN disks to leave graphics there for an edit session, or to pick up sequences to work on in a compositing application and then deposit back for inclusion in a show. It''s very versatile.
Carey: The reason we invest in technology and have our own facility is to give our designers easy access to the best resources to create their work. Since our process is a collaboration between creative directors, designers, animators, and editors, a SAN [featuring a Vixel 7100 switch with AccelWare software] was the best choice to support our collaborative process.
Gross: We wanted to add an additional edit station, integrated with our current setup, with larger memory capacity and the ability to access all the same files from both stations. We contacted Tim Duncan of Zap Digital Media in Nashville, who had installed our first Matrox/Incite edit system, and he explained the concept of a SAN and how it would meet our needs. Tim then put us in contact with Brent Angle and Mike Winkleman of CineSys, who put together and installed our second edit station and an eight-bay 438GB SAN-Array, with removable 73GB, 10,000 RPM Fibre Channel hard drives.
Tinfow: Back in October 1998 I''d never heard the term SAN. We read about the promise of Fibre Channel architecture, and then we asked our VAR to recommend an appropriate solution.
VS:
How has the SAN changed your workflow? What does it allow you to do better or faster than before?
Baird: With the next release of Incite, the SAN will allow us to work with a file while it is being captured. This will make a huge difference in the way we produce our daily highlights program. With the new system, one NLE can become a dedicated capture station for our outbound feed, 18 hours a day. Once we start capturing a day''s files, we can then immediately begin working with the file on another NLE. This will be a tremendous time-saver in our workflow. However, it will likely be mid-summer before this is fully operational.
Carey: The primary workflow benefit we have realized is easy collaboration between our animators and editors, because two of our primary tools — After Effects and Final Cut Pro — are both QuickTime-based.
Gross: We have two edit systems, with one editor constantly utilizing both. One system is predominantly used for capturing, rendering, printing to tape, and some basic editing. The other is used for editing, graphics design, and After Effects work. The addition of our SAN has cut my posting time by nearly 50%, and allowed for more time to be spent on the creative side of our production.
Tinfow: When multiple activities are taking place at the same time, the post-production pace is much greater. Clients are involved in a swirl of activity, never bored. Within three months of incorporating the SAN, clients were using a fuller range of our services, and our average billings had doubled. Since then we''ve added more services, including compression and DVD authoring, which have become significant portions of our income.
VS:
Are there any limitations or unexpected downsides to the SAN?
Baird: Right now we are having some problems with writing directly to SAN drives over the 100TX network, which is something we expected to be able to do. We can use various art applications and compositing software, but the output files have to be written to a local drive first, then copied or moved to the SAN. Direct saving to a SAN drive has proven problematic. We are investigating the cause of this.
Carey: The biggest challenge of the SAN is getting people up to speed with a sharing environment, and dealing with the management and structure of project folders and files. Good archiving is key in case you have to go back and revise a project for a client and various bits and pieces have lived on different partitions from different artists. Our producers have to step up a bit more on the technical side to organize projects.
Gross: One thing I wish I could do is access the same file on both systems at the same time. Another limitation in our system is that we did not add a SAN metadata controller, so when we need to restart one system, the other system is interrupted and must shut down.
Tinfow: Two workstations can''t write to the same volume at the same time. Any given project must have a volume for source material as well as a second volume for write access by the graphics workstation. Also, when we add a file from one computer, it can''t be seen in the folder of the other computer without opening the Fibreshare control panel and hitting “update.”
VS:
How has your investment in the SAN worked out from a business perspective?
Baird: We characterize our payback in terms of productivity. The SAN allows us to maximize the use of our personnel, and that leads to tremendous efficiencies. Our producers turn out more products each year and spend less time idle, waiting in line for editing. Our only real limit right now is how many productions our producers can handle at once.
Carey: The SAN is a long-term investment for us. The switch was a considerable investment, but the scalability of the system will save us money in the long run.
Gross: Overall, the addition of our SAN has definitely improved workflow and has allowed for a major improvement in our facility. We are very pleased with the convenience of the SAN, and at the amount of time and money that is saved.
Tinfow: The SAN has enabled us to grow from a small editing house to a full-service post facility serving five of the Fortune 100. The investment was recouped in less than three months. We''ve since doubled its storage and upgraded its capability to serve two of our Apple G4s. In the 39 months since adopting SAN technology, we''ve more than tripled our income, due in large part to the efficiency provided by shared storage.
SAN specs
NASA JOHNSON SPACE CENTER, HOUSTON
Devices directly connected via SAN: Five Incite NLEs
Storage: Two RAID-0 arrays, each with four 72GB drives
Maker/model of SAN system: SAN custom-built by CineSys Inc, Houston; array constructed by Rorke Data; Tivoli SANergy software; SanBox switch
Approximate investment in SAN: Not available
TROIKA DESIGN GROUP, LOS ANGELES
Devices directly connected via SAN: Two Macintosh G4s; expansion to four G4s pending
Storage: 360GB; upgrade to 720GB pending
Maker/model of SAN system: Vixel 7100 switch; AccelWare software
Approximate investment in SAN: $10,000-15,000
FAITH IS THE VICTORY CHURCH, NASHVILLE, TENN.
Devices directly connected via SAN: Two Matrox/Incite edit systems
Storage: 438GB (removable 73GB 10,000RPM Fibre Channel hard drives)
Maker/model of SAN system: Rorke Data MaxArray-FC (rackmount version, eight-bay)
Approximate investment in SAN: $32,500
IMAGE PLANT, FAIRFIELD, N.J.
Devices directly connected via SAN: One Media 100 workstation and one workstation with Ice-accelerated After Effects, Media100, Cubase, and Cleaner
Storage: 144GB Level-0 RAID
Maker/model of SAN system: Seagate Cheetah drives; CharisMac RAID and Fibreshare software; configured by Jems in Jems cabinet
Approximate investment in SAN: $7,500
This article is available in 