Format CF to capture VGA video until card full

[tailwind]

Thanks, I didn't came up with this method, I'm just passing the informations around. =)

Tailwind, if anybody want a nomination for best help on the Fuji
forum I want you to have it for this one post. I followed your
directions and now I get a full 219 seconds from my Ridata 256
(20x) where before I only got about 60 seconds. You need to post
this anew whenever it falls off the page. Flesh out the directions
a little for those who are not as comfortable on the computer as I
am but a great hint. Just in time for my cruise I am leaving for
tomorrow.

--
tailwind - S602Z
http://www.pbase.com/tailwind

 

[Wolff]

I thought my cheapie 128 mb sandisk CF was useless for video in my S602 since it would only record 15 seconds in QVGA before closing the file. I reformatted to FAT 8K and it works great. VGA still quits after 30 seconds though :-(

 

[hc242]

Hi all,

I was hoping someone could help me...

taking it up to 16K, I was able to record at QVGA for the full card, but only 160 secs on VGA. So I tried 32K and it got up to about 56% of the format until it failed.

now I can't format the card using my pc anymore. It fails every time.

the card still works though, and I'm able to format on the camera still...

does anybody have any idea???

cheers, and thanks in advance.

I thought my cheapie 128 mb sandisk CF was useless for video in my
S602 since it would only record 15 seconds in QVGA before closing
the file. I reformatted to FAT 8K and it works great. VGA still
quits after 30 seconds though :-(

 

[Benoit Racicot]

Are you trying to "quick" format or full format the card on your PC?

Try a full format.

I had the reverse problem: my card would stop working in my Photosmart card reader when formatted with 32k clusters, so I had to reformat it using the camera.

I was hoping someone could help me...

taking it up to 16K, I was able to record at QVGA for the full
card, but only 160 secs on VGA. So I tried 32K and it got up to
about 56% of the format until it failed.

now I can't format the card using my pc anymore. It fails every time.

the card still works though, and I'm able to format on the camera
still...

does anybody have any idea???

cheers, and thanks in advance.

I thought my cheapie 128 mb sandisk CF was useless for video in my
S602 since it would only record 15 seconds in QVGA before closing
the file. I reformatted to FAT 8K and it works great. VGA still
quits after 30 seconds though :-(

--
Benoit
http://www.pbase.com/glutier

 

[hc242]

No, I always do a full format. Quick formats aren't really formats. I think they only rewrite the index tables.

Any other ideas? I can't figure it out. I can't format it with any cluster size now. Nothing works except the camera format. Though I think that they are quick formats as well considering the speed...

Try a full format.

I had the reverse problem: my card would stop working in my
Photosmart card reader when formatted with 32k clusters, so I had
to reformat it using the camera.

I was hoping someone could help me...

taking it up to 16K, I was able to record at QVGA for the full
card, but only 160 secs on VGA. So I tried 32K and it got up to
about 56% of the format until it failed.

now I can't format the card using my pc anymore. It fails every time.

the card still works though, and I'm able to format on the camera
still...

does anybody have any idea???

cheers, and thanks in advance.

I thought my cheapie 128 mb sandisk CF was useless for video in my
S602 since it would only record 15 seconds in QVGA before closing
the file. I reformatted to FAT 8K and it works great. VGA still
quits after 30 seconds though :-(

--
Benoit
http://www.pbase.com/glutier

 

[FUGI GUY]

I can't seem to get it to work with my Sandisk 64MB card. Try formatting various cluster size from 1024 up to 8192.

Does this only work with Type II CF or Type I
Or HighSpeed

I just got a basic 64MB SanDisk CompactFlash (SDCFB)

 

[Hugo111806]

Sandisk was a slow brand for 32 Mb and 64 Mb. I don't know if they are doing anything better now, but they are hopeless on this ones. Maybe you should just buy a new one looking at the prices. 256 Mb are a deal.

I can't seem to get it to work with my Sandisk 64MB card. Try
formatting various cluster size from 1024 up to 8192.

Does this only work with Type II CF or Type I
Or HighSpeed

I just got a basic 64MB SanDisk CompactFlash (SDCFB)

 

[Walrus]

I got this technique from an taiwan digicam forum...

Background:
Compact Flash are just formatted like a harddrive, it uses FAT
system ("NOT FAT32"), and by default...
128MB CF uses 2048 Allocate Unit Size
256MB CF uses 4096 Allocate Unit Size
512MB CF uses 8192 Allocate Unit Size

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

I can't say it enough. It worked. I just took my 340 MB Microdrive formatted it to 8192 size. Then played around shot 3 minutes & 41 seconds of video. Then shot two bursts of 5 pics each on 6M Fine & still had room left. Only stopped to download & test it already. No delay waiting for storing except after each completed burst string.
WOW! Now I can use the video the way it was meant.
Any downsides you know of?

You realize giving advice like this is going to give you carpal tunnel. You will now be known as one of the all wise and knowing. You willl be typing responses till your hands start to numb.
Well I for one appreciate it very much.
Thanks again.
Walrus
Capturing souls through one viewfinder at a time.

 

[tailwind]

I though Microdrive suppose to give you unlimited VGA capture. That's not the case? What was the length of your VGA video before format with 8k allocation table size?

tailwind

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
I can't say it enough. It worked. I just took my 340 MB Microdrive
formatted it to 8192 size. Then played around shot 3 minutes & 41
seconds of video. Then shot two bursts of 5 pics each on 6M Fine &
still had room left. Only stopped to download & test it already. No
delay waiting for storing except after each completed burst string.
WOW! Now I can use the video the way it was meant.
Any downsides you know of?
You realize giving advice like this is going to give you carpal
tunnel. You will now be known as one of the all wise and knowing.
You willl be typing responses till your hands start to numb.
Well I for one appreciate it very much.
Thanks again.
Walrus
Capturing souls through one viewfinder at a time.

--
tailwind - S602Z
http://www.pbase.com/tailwind

 

[John R Branson]

Tailwind,

I followed this thread even LONGER than other cautious people... waiting and waiting for the downside to show up... it didn't. So... I formatted my Viking 256 with 8k clusters. I did not previously note any video problems.. but niether had I explored video capability to any degree.

What I did notice was about a 50% reduction in the time it takes to write to the CF card in all situations. 5 shot burst mode is a real pleasure now. Everything just seems to work faster in all modes. I did notice something a little strange, the first five shot series will take about 20% longer to store than the following groups. The following groups store at 3mg fine about as fast as you can release the shutter and press it back down again. All in all a tweak that makes a good camera even better.

I'll join the chorus in voting this the best tip brought to our attention in the whole forum. Doesn't matter if you thought it up or not... you brought it here. I would have paid $50 for a performance increase like this.
Thanks!
Johnny B

 

[Walrus]

I though Microdrive suppose to give you unlimited VGA capture.
That's not the case? What was the length of your VGA video before
format with 8k allocation table size?

Before the change I usually could only record about 13 or 23 seconds of VGA video, (sorry I forgot the numbers since it has been awhile).

Anyway the problem now is it seems to have made a temporary change. Since my first test I now find I can only record approx. 200 seconds of video before having to wait for it to show busy while writing to the CF card. This is the same whether using CF or Microdrive. I have experimented with all the different allocation sizes up to 32K many differant times. Card will not except large sizes as I am sure you know. The first test results will not repeat. I don't know why.
Any ideas on how to get the first results back?

Have been using cheap CF cards, "simpletech" but the MD is IBM. Same results with both.
Still have the same slow wait time after a short 5 shot burst mode at 6M fine.

tailwind

http://www.pbase.com/tailwind

--
Capturing souls through one viewfinder at a time.

 

[chris gunn]

Before the change I usually could only record about 13 or 23
seconds of VGA video, (sorry I forgot the numbers since it has been
awhile).
Anyway the problem now is it seems to have made a temporary change.
Since my first test I now find I can only record approx. 200

sizes up to 32K many differant times. Card will not except large
sizes as I am sure you know. The first test results will not
repeat. I don't know why.
Any ideas on how to get the first results back?
Have been using cheap CF cards, "simpletech" but the MD is IBM.

Do you mean you want the 23s result back? Why?
Ah! You mean you a) got full card, but now get 200s, which is less!?

If re-formating does not help, I do no know.

--
cheers!

Gunn

 

[Karl Gnter Wnsch]

Before the change I usually could only record about 13 or 23
seconds of VGA video, (sorry I forgot the numbers since it has been
awhile).
Anyway the problem now is it seems to have made a temporary change.
Since my first test I now find I can only record approx. 200

sizes up to 32K many differant times. Card will not except large
sizes as I am sure you know. The first test results will not
repeat. I don't know why.
Any ideas on how to get the first results back?
Have been using cheap CF cards, "simpletech" but the MD is IBM.

What model MD do you have (MDMD or DSDM)? If it is the MDMD drive then your problem is understandable since that is the first series of drives available and that was way slower than the newer ones...

Do you mean you want the 23s result back? Why?
Ah! You mean you a) got full card, but now get 200s, which is less!?

If re-formating does not help, I do no know.

It probably will, because filling the card with different combinations of pictures and video will probably fragment it and then the hickups start again....

--
cheers!

Gunn

regards
Karl Günter Wünsch

 

[Walrus]

Before the change I usually could only record about 13 or 23
seconds of VGA video, (sorry I forgot the numbers since it has been
awhile).
Anyway the problem now is it seems to have made a temporary change.
Since my first test I now find I can only record approx. 200

sizes up to 32K many differant times.

What model MD do you have (MDMD or DSDM)? If it is the MDMD drive
then your problem is understandable since that is the first series
of drives available and that was way slower than the newer ones...

My Microdrive is: Model: DMDM-10340 P/N 22L0046
It is a IBM 340 MB Microdrive.

Do you mean you want the 23s result back? Why?

No I want to be able to record video for the entire 340 MB without a pause.

Ah! You mean you a) got full card, but now get 200s, which is less!?

I am not as concerned if I have to lose some space on the card. I would sacrifice a little space for the lose of pause time.

If re-formating does not help, I do no know.

It probably will, because filling the card with different
combinations of pictures and video will probably fragment it and
then the hickups start again....

Tried reformating several times. Then tried video only. Same problem 200 Seconds record before busy signal.

Strange I thought the trick worked the first time. Can't seem to repeat it though.

Walrus
--
Capturing souls through one viewfinder at a time.

 

[forrest70]

I have 2 256 CF cards. A Sandisk ultra which went from 33 secs VGA to 215 secs VGA. The second card is a Robanton which went from 37 secs of VGA to 81 secs. This was only at the 8k reformat size. Will try this card at 16k, hold on . . . . . . . . . .IT DID THE WHOLE CARD. WOW!

Someone really ought to inform Fuji of this. Fuji should immediately put an addendum into each and everyone of the 602 boxes that ships. And they should send a letter saying, "We're sorry we didnt figure this out ourselves, but here is a way to make your camera work like we advertised it." to every man, woman, and child who put their hard earned money down for their 602 (which is a darn fine camera even without the video).

Fuji should have made the 602 format all CF cards with the larger allocation units, then every 602 owner wouldn't have had to go through the PAINFUL realization that his 602 doesnt do video like it should.

Thank you Tailwind for your post.

Fremen
May the Fuji be with you.

I got this technique from an taiwan digicam forum...

Background:
Compact Flash are just formatted like a harddrive, it uses FAT
system ("NOT FAT32"), and by default...
128MB CF uses 2048 Allocate Unit Size
256MB CF uses 4096 Allocate Unit Size
512MB CF uses 8192 Allocate Unit Size

What to do:
What they suggested is to use a bigger allocate unit size than the
default setting, when you try to format it simply by right-click
and select "format", the allocate unit size is fixed. To avoid
that...
(All the steps are according to windows XP, I don't if other
version have the same equivalent)
1. Open Control Panel
2. Open Administrative Tools
3. Open Computer Management
4. Go to the Disk Management
5. Select the CF and format from here...now you can specify the
allocated unit size.

Results:
I have a 256MB Dane-Elec CF card, before using this method, I could
only record 63 seconds of VGA videos. Then, I formatted it using
8192 allocate unit size, and now I can record uptil I have 1 second
left, that's 218 seconds (the card shows that I have 219 seconds
buffer when it is blank), no idea why it won't record for that 1
second.

Side notes: with the old format, 3M Fine gives me 200 pictures, but
after format with the bigger unit size, now it shows that I only
have 199 pictures.
--
tailwind - S602Z
http://www.pbase.com/tailwind

 

[chris gunn]

I have 2 256 CF cards. A Sandisk ultra which went from 33 secs
VGA to 215 secs VGA. The second card is a Robanton which went from

Good for you!

Someone really ought to inform Fuji of this. Fuji should

It seems hard to believe they could be so incompetant?

Fuji should have made the 602 format all CF cards with the larger
allocation units, then every 602 owner wouldn't have had to go
through the PAINFUL realization that his 602 doesnt do video like
it should.

You're right.

However, it could be they were keen on selling their Fuji MDs

BTW, does anyone know if this speeds up things like 5fps in6mp fine mode?
Would it make any difference with the faster cards?

--
cheers!

Gunn

 

[Cameron43]

eg. the photo is 100 byte

if the CF is formatted to write data for every 5 bytes, that means
there will be 20 messages transfer between the camera and the CF,

if the CF is formatted to write data for every 10 bytes, then there
would be only 10 messages being transferred between them.

correct me if i'm wrong...

Anyone has tested that trick on 64 Mb CF card?
I don't understand,....does that trick improve the video

Writing to a drive with larger cluster sizes will always be faster simply because the program or in the case of camera's the Pic file is more

contiguous, its also slightly faster due to the smaller size fat table that is required, this is why older Fat16/Fat32 systems is noticably faster than say NTFS .

The downside is that you will get slightly less pics on a card probably 2 or 4 less. The reason they use small cluster sizes on hard-drives is because the wastage by using large cluster sizes across a big drives can be quite significant.. this is the reason drives need de-fragging occasionally to reduce the wastage and free up previouslu used space.

Remember on a hard-drive or a ram-drive which is all a CF card is...if say the cluster size is 16K then saving a file which is only 1k in size then 15k

gets wasted and there will be wastage left over for every file on the system. Also because the drive is broken up into larger chunks if you like... the resulting fat table is less complicated and smaller so the system reads it faster too. As drives became larger it was necessary to change the fat systems so that a larger range of numbers could be stored in the fat table
hence 16,32,64 bit numbers etc.

Formating any card to a larger cluster size will have the effect of faster writing/read times.. ie. only slightly but will make a difference of succesfully filling the whole card with video especially on those cards where the cards speed is borderline for video when formatted at Fat16.

Fat16 has been the standard fat used on camera memory cards for many years, When the cards first came out it would have drastically reduced the number of pictures stored had they used a larger cluster size due to the then small size of the pic files.

Fuji have merely kept to what has become the de-facto (FAT16) standard for use on CF/SM cards etc. Its always going to be a compromise where file systems are concerned, but a manufacturer should not be criticised for adhering to what is now the standard file system for camera's.

Cameron

 

[Cameron43]

I have 2 256 CF cards. A Sandisk ultra which went from 33 secs
VGA to 215 secs VGA. The second card is a Robanton which went from
37 secs of VGA to 81 secs. This was only at the 8k reformat size.
Will try this card at 16k, hold on . . . . . . . . . .IT DID THE
WHOLE CARD. WOW!

Someone really ought to inform Fuji of this. Fuji should
immediately put an addendum into each and everyone of the 602 boxes
that ships. And they should send a letter saying, "We're sorry we
didnt figure this out ourselves, but here is a way to make your
camera work like we advertised it." to every man, woman, and child
who put their hard earned money down for their 602 (which is a darn
fine camera even without the video).

Fuji should have made the 602 format all CF cards with the larger
allocation units, then every 602 owner wouldn't have had to go
through the PAINFUL realization that his 602 doesnt do video like
it should.

Thank you Tailwind for your post.

LOL

I'm sure Fuji is far more aware than any of us...of the difference and the effect that formatting at different Fat levels has on the speed of reading/writing files, but it would take a brave person to deviate from what has become the de-facto Fat16 standard for CF/SM cards.

Writing to a drive with larger cluster sizes will always be faster simply because the program or in the case of camera's the Pic file is more

contiguous, its also slightly faster due to the smaller size fat table that is required, this is why older Fat16/Fat32 systems is noticably faster than say NTFS.

The downside is that you will get slightly less pics on a card probably 2 or 4 less. The reason they use small cluster sizes on hard-drives is because the wastage by using large cluster sizes across a big drives can be quite significant.. this is the reason drives need de-fragging occasionally to reduce the wastage and free up previouslu used space.

Remember on a hard-drive or a ram-drive which is all a CF card is...if say the cluster size is 16K then saving a file which is only 1k in size then 15k gets wasted and there will be wastage left over for every single file on the system. Also because the drive is broken up into larger chunks if you like... the resulting fat table is less complicated and smaller so the system reads it faster too. As drives became larger it was necessary to change the fat systems so that a larger range of numbers could be stored in the fat table

hence 16,32,64 bit numbers etc. Formating any card to a larger cluster size will have the effect of faster writing/read times.. ie. only slightly, but will make a difference of succesfully filling the whole card with video especially on those cards where the cards speed is borderline for video when formatted at Fat16.

Fat16 has been the standard fat used on camera memory cards for many years, When the cards first came out it would have drastically reduced the number of pictures stored had they used a larger cluster size due to the then small size of the pic files.

Fuji have merely kept to what has become the de-facto (FAT16) standard for use on CF/SM cards etc. Its always going to be a compromise where file systems are concerned, but a manufacturer should NOT be criticised for adhering to what is now the standard file system for camera's.

Cameron

 

[leogenghis]

I've been lurking in the Fuji forum for awhile because I plan to purchase an M603 when it comes out. Currently I'm using a Canon S300. Does anyone know if this procedure will work on a Canon camera, where the maximum video length I can get now is only 30 seconds? I know I could format it myself and find out, but I don't have Windows XP so would need a friend to help me do it. I don't want him to take the trouble if I know for sure it won't work.

Thanks!

 

[Cameron43]

I've been lurking in the Fuji forum for awhile because I plan to
purchase an M603 when it comes out. Currently I'm using a Canon
S300. Does anyone know if this procedure will work on a Canon
camera, where the maximum video length I can get now is only 30
seconds? I know I could format it myself and find out, but I don't
have Windows XP so would need a friend to help me do it. I don't
want him to take the trouble if I know for sure it won't work.

Thanks!

Assuming the Cannon has not been limited to 30 seconds in its firmware like some camera's then it may help. The gains are only small, but AIS in my earlier postings it may help where card speeds are marginal with regard to writing video files. To be honest, although the 602 is admittedly better than other still cams with regard to video, It simply cannot compete with a proper firewire MinDV camcorder and neither can any other stills camera.
If you want good video get a camcorder... let the flaming begin.. LOL

You dont need Windows XP. All versions of Windows including Dos 6.22 etc. are capable of formating at different cluster sizes. Just type 'Format ?' from a dos box to see all the options.

Cameron