Windows Thread, Movie Maker 2 in Technical; Anyone using this on a network?
Some staff want to get the students to make a small film and overlay ...
1st February 2008, 02:49 PM #1
Movie Maker 2
Anyone using this on a network?
Some staff want to get the students to make a small film and overlay some text and sound, they will be short films so shouldn't be massive. As movie maker 2 is built in to XP and we don't have Premier we are going to try it.
Has anyone tried it on a network or do you really need access to the local drive?
It will only be a couple of students at a time so i'm not over concerned about bandwidth.
IDG Tech News
1st February 2008, 02:55 PM #2
Hi, we have it running here. access is not needed to the C: drive although some times large file sizes are created. This is rare so we tend to bump their space up a little to accomodate till the project is finished with then we store them to CD and remove from server. Bandwith is'nt a big deal.
1st February 2008, 03:03 PM #3
We use it (alongside things like photostory) quite extensively for movies and static image slideshows/montages with music and narration etc. You don't need to grant access to the c: drive - all our files are saved to the network (project files deleted/archived as and when) without issue.
The only piece of advice I would give though is that movie maker has a habit of crashing...often! Encourage regular saving!
1st February 2008, 03:15 PM #4
make sure updates/patches sound and graphics drivers are upto date. that should keep the crashing down to a minimum
1st February 2008, 03:20 PM #5
- Rep Power
Yup, used movie maker, albeit with a class split into small groups. But we had no issues with it. As people say, save often and there shouldn't be a problem.
1st February 2008, 03:51 PM #6
Excellent i'll have a play.
1st February 2008, 04:25 PM #7
When capturing film from the camera, it is best (if not essential) to have local disk access due to transfer speed issues, but the actual editing and wotnot can be done over the network without issue.
Here's a question regarding downloading film from cameras though - since USB2 is faster than FireWire, why do cameras insist on it? Is it just a hang-up from the days when things were still USB1, so slower than FireWire?
1st February 2008, 04:56 PM #8
Firewire is supposedly a superior interface for certain applications.
I don't think they're generally things that will affect data transfer though, it's probably just a snobbery hangover from USB 1.1 as you say.
Apparently people think that Apple sabotage USB 2 on macs to encorage use of firewire as USB 2 operates way faster on a PC than on a mac. This could be why it's recommended in the Mac world.
Last Post: 31st March 2010, 12:08 AM
By j17sparky in forum Educational Software
Last Post: 19th September 2008, 09:28 PM
By movie_surprime11 in forum General Chat
Last Post: 2nd October 2007, 02:40 PM
By faza in forum Wireless Networks
Last Post: 1st February 2007, 02:16 PM
Last Post: 30th June 2006, 07:33 PM
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)