Re: WMM capture

Hello there,

It sounds as though you might need a tune up. You can get a few pointers in the
FAQ section of my website. Basically when capturing you should not have any
other program running and you should disconnect from the internet, and defrag
your hard drive...take note that the XP defrag utility does not defrag the free
space (which is what you want) Perfect disk from RAXCO does a very good job and
the trial version lasts for around 30 days....I ended up buying it...worth
every penny.

Anyway, check out the FAQ on my site relating to Speed, Hard Drives and Movie
Maker.
--
Best Wishes.....John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
www.the-kellys.co.uk
---
All material gained from other sources is duly acknowledged. No Value is
obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work

John,

A couple of follow up questions. I too use a Sony
Dig8/Firewire and haven't had any issues. So I ask,
1) how would DSL affect the process? It hasn't been a
problem leaving the modem on for me.
2) what actually happens when defragmenting free space? I
assume you mean that the program tries to put all of the
free space together, not just condense the files. I did
notice when I left one movie on my C: drive that it sat in
the middle of the free space after defragmenting and I
wondered why it wouldn't just move the whole block forward
on the disk to keep all the free space continuous.

I have 3.0GHz Dell Dimension 8300 with 512MB RAM, 60GB
hard drive and a second 200GB hard drive. Maybe I've been
lucky because of my PC specs.
>-----Original Message-----
>Hello there,
>
> It sounds as though you might need a tune up. You
can get a few pointers in the
> FAQ section of my website. Basically when
capturing you should not have any
> other program running and you should disconnect
from the internet, and defrag
> your hard drive...take note that the XP defrag
utility does not defrag the free
> space (which is what you want) Perfect disk from
RAXCO does a very good job and
> the trial version lasts for around 30 days....I
ended up buying it...worth
> every penny.
>
> Anyway, check out the FAQ on my site relating to
Speed, Hard Drives and Movie
> Maker.
>--
>Best Wishes.....John Kelly
>www.the-kellys.org
>www.the-kellys.co.uk
>---
>All material gained from other sources is duly
acknowledged. No Value is
>obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work
>.
>

Hello there,


On 11-Aug-2004, "Steve" <ndsteve24@msn.com> wrote:

> 1) how would DSL affect the process? It hasn't been a
> problem leaving the modem on for me.

The objective is to remove all unnecessary calls to the CPU, to that end
getting rid of the communication that is constantly taking place is a step in
that direction. In addition if the machine has a firewall, whilst the modem is
live the firewall is constantly taking a look at what data is inbound and is
applying its various tests to see if it is acceptable. Removing that as an
issue releases both RAM and CPU time. I should have said previously to disable
both firewall and antivirus software.


On 11-Aug-2004, "Steve" <ndsteve24@msn.com> wrote:


> 2) what actually happens when defragmenting free space? I
> assume you mean that the program tries to put all of the
> free space together, not just condense the files. I did
> notice when I left one movie on my C: drive that it sat in
> the middle of the free space after defragmenting and I
> wondered why it wouldn't just move the whole block forward
> on the disk to keep all the free space continuous.

Consider "free space" to be a type of file...having it defragmented results in
one contiguous area for witting too by any program. In the case of video
capture you want the hard drive heads to do the least amount of work
possible...contiguous free space is the closest you can get to that.

Regarding the movie you left on the drive. Yes that's exactly what the XP
defrag does.....if it finds that from where the file header is onwards (start
of the file) the most efficient procedure would be to leave it where it is then
that is what occurs.....the result is what you describe...spaces before and
after the file.

You may not realise that when you look at the "map" of your hard drive, what
you are seeing is a series of lines, each one pixel wide, drawn top to
bottom....but that one pixel width will in almost every case be wider than the
resolution actually needed to accurately display the disposition of files. You
do not therefore see any gaps left to right except where that gap is very
wide...... That's not a big deal, in database usage, of any significance, its
actually a benefit...a new record can be added to the end of the existing file,
but when you need to dump a very large file quickly to your hard drive its a
serious problem....The file's start will be at the first acceptable free
slot.....the heads then have to jump forward rapidly to the next free slot and
at the same time pass back to the previous slot the address they have just
jumped to...in the meantime your video capture is carrying on throwing yet more
data at the hard drive..!!

Hope that helps a bit

--
Best Wishes.....John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
www.the-kellys.co.uk
---
All material gained from other sources is duly acknowledged. No Value is
obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work

Thanks John. I didn't realize the defrag was that
inefficient in XP. I was thinking I might have to do it
multiple times. Best bet for me is to use the larger drive
as storage space, and the 60GB drive as 'working' space.
Always deleting/backing up movies and defragmenting
afterwards.
>-----Original Message-----
>Hello there,
>
>
>On 11-Aug-2004, "Steve" <ndsteve24@msn.com> wrote:
>
>> 1) how would DSL affect the process? It hasn't been a
>> problem leaving the modem on for me.
>
> The objective is to remove all unnecessary calls
to the CPU, to that end
> getting rid of the communication that is
constantly taking place is a step in
> that direction. In addition if the machine has a
firewall, whilst the modem is
> live the firewall is constantly taking a look at
what data is inbound and is
> applying its various tests to see if it is
acceptable. Removing that as an
> issue releases both RAM and CPU time. I should
have said previously to disable
> both firewall and antivirus software.
>
>
>On 11-Aug-2004, "Steve" <ndsteve24@msn.com> wrote:
>
>
>> 2) what actually happens when defragmenting free space?
I
>> assume you mean that the program tries to put all of the
>> free space together, not just condense the files. I did
>> notice when I left one movie on my C: drive that it sat
in
>> the middle of the free space after defragmenting and I
>> wondered why it wouldn't just move the whole block
forward
>> on the disk to keep all the free space continuous.
>
> Consider "free space" to be a type of
file...having it defragmented results in
> one contiguous area for witting too by any
program. In the case of video
> capture you want the hard drive heads to do the
least amount of work
> possible...contiguous free space is the closest
you can get to that.
>
> Regarding the movie you left on the drive. Yes
that's exactly what the XP
> defrag does.....if it finds that from where the
file header is onwards (start
> of the file) the most efficient procedure would be
to leave it where it is then
> that is what occurs.....the result is what you
describe...spaces before and
> after the file.
>
> You may not realise that when you look at
the "map" of your hard drive, what
> you are seeing is a series of lines, each one
pixel wide, drawn top to
> bottom....but that one pixel width will in almost
every case be wider than the
> resolution actually needed to accurately display
the disposition of files. You
> do not therefore see any gaps left to right except
where that gap is very
> wide...... That's not a big deal, in database
usage, of any significance, its
> actually a benefit...a new record can be added to
the end of the existing file,
> but when you need to dump a very large file
quickly to your hard drive its a
> serious problem....The file's start will be at the
first acceptable free
> slot.....the heads then have to jump forward
rapidly to the next free slot and
> at the same time pass back to the previous slot
the address they have just
> jumped to...in the meantime your video capture is
carrying on throwing yet more
> data at the hard drive..!!
>
> Hope that helps a bit
>
>--
>Best Wishes.....John Kelly
>www.the-kellys.org
>www.the-kellys.co.uk
>---
>All material gained from other sources is duly
acknowledged. No Value is
>obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work
>.
>

Hello there,

Ah Ha!! Now there is something I keep forgetting to say.

If you have more than one hard drive, AND, providing the second drive does not
have any "virtual ram" stored on it, then capturing to that drive will always
be significantly better (assuming all other things are equal) Better yet, if
you have a modest hard drive available so that you can use it for one purpose
only, make your virtual memory reside on that drive only...this will
significantly improve access to drive C, on those occasions when the virtual
memory would be in use. The knock on effect carries through to the capture to
some other drive.....disk activity becomes a lot more efficient and there is
less chance of a hickup.
--
Best Wishes.....John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
www.the-kellys.co.uk
---
All material gained from other sources is duly acknowledged. No Value is
obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work