Hi. It is a long story, but basically the video editing got dumped in my lap. Now I am blessed with the opportunity to sort everything out, and get up to speed as fast as possible. I still have a lot to learn, but I have some questions, and am hoping some of you old pros would please be so kind as to help me finish figuring out how to configure the computer.  I appreciate your patience and help.
I need to make 2-6 hour documentaries, with the base footage shot in an indoor studio with three point lighting.  I will be editing on a three year old Dell Precision 380 workstation with a Pentium D 930 at 3.0 GHz. I have 4GB RAM on Windows XP SP3, with the Control Panel preferences set to 'performance'. NLE is Vegas 8. Hard Drive C is twin 250GB 7200 RPM HDD's in RAID 0 that back up externally to a 1TB Seagate via Symantec BESR 8.0.  Hard Drive D is twin 1TB Seagate 7200 RPM HDD's in RAID 1. The video card is a Palit (NVidia) GeForce 8600 Super +1GB. The primary filming camera is a Sony HDR-FX1, but I will use an HDR-HC1 to feed the tape into the computer via firewire.
Here are the questions I have identified so far. I would very much appreciate any help or assistance you could give me in fine-tuning my machine.  Thank you very much for your help.
1. My main concern is the processor. Is a Pentium D 930 at 3.0 GHz capable of handling and rendering 2-6 hour films with Sony Vegas?  The Sony website (http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/vegaspro/sysreq) gives the minimum system requirement for HDV in Vegas at 2.8 GHz, but I read somehwere that this is only the minimum system requirement, and that it is much better if your processor is significantly stronger than that, especially once the machine gets warm. I can upgrade to a 3.4 GHz processor (Pentium D 950) for about $120.00, or to a 3.6 (Pentium D 960) for about $240.00, plus grease, but my question is: is this upgrade worth the cost? Would upgrading to 3.4 or 3.6 GHz processor make the editing/rendering process more stable, and more reliable on long renders? Or is a 3.0 GHz Pentium D 'plenty' of processor even for long HDV rendering? And what are my rendering times likely to be for a 2-6 hour film?
2. A related concern is the codec.  I am told that Cineform NeoHD can convert the HDV codec to HD. It is expensive, but I am told that processors can handle HD much easier than they can handle HDV. (I am also told that it gives greater fidelity). Does anyone have experience with this? If I purchase Cineform NeoHD, would I still need/be well advised to upgrade the processor to 3.4 or 3.6 GHz? Or is a 3.0 GHz Pentium D 'lots' of processor, especially with HD (not HDV)? Â
3. My second main concern is the HDD arrays.  Instead of having C: in RAID 0 and D: in RAID 1, would it be better to put C: in RAID 1 and D: in RAID 0, and then back up the D drive externally? Either I would have to find a 2TB external drive, or else with the standard compression I could probably back up to a 1.5 TB Seagate Free Agent drive. Alternately, I could leave C: in RAID 0, and put D: in RAID 0 without too much trouble.
I should probably say that there are four internal drive bays, and I have not considered RAID 5 because I do not know how it works. I just want to make sure I have enough speed and capacity to handle HD/HDV.
4. Is the video card adequate?Â
5. Do I need any kind of a video capture card? I have just been feeding things in to the motherboard via the 1394 Firewire port. Is that good enough?
Thank you very much for your help. We used to have a budget, but not any longer. Still, it is do-or-die time, and this is my life, and I love what I do. If there is something that will make a difference, I will find a way to do it.
Norman
