<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/9/2015 1:47 PM, Karl Newman wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOOwNt+Rji8dbwua4uM0oZn9_LBuf-cbVZb+fxLx=U8-RNNbKQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:20 PM,
Mike's JdJ <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:stepsisters@comcast.net" target="_blank">stepsisters@comcast.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
On 02/09/2015 12:53 AM, Bill Meek wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 02/08/2015 10:48 PM, Stephen Worthington wrote:<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Here's a script using Python bindings that can probably
be adapted<br>
to print what was requested (for the 1st part.)<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://pastebin.com/wfpBfQ19" target="_blank">http://pastebin.com/wfpBfQ19</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks to Mike, Hika, Stephen, and Bill for the responses.<br>
<br>
<br>
I ran Bill's report and it had the path/filename in it. I
took the output and imported into LibreOffice Calc. I
chose fields for the disc name and the timestamp portion
of the file name. I then sorted on disc and timestamp.
This gives me a list of titles chronologically per disc.
Multi-step, but this is a one-time need.<br>
<br>
My goal is to use my newly-developed skills in editing and
transcoding and go after my two 1.8 TeraByte discs that
are 98% full. My other two 1.8 TB discs are at 66% and
80% full. The DBA in me says to start with the oldest
file in the fullest disc first, then reduce the size of
the next-oldest file, and so on. With 1,883 recordings,
this will take a while.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
The general sense on this list is that it's cheaper to add
storage than to spend the electricity to transcode in
order to save space. Obviously you already have a number
of disks so I'm guessing you have physical space reasons
for wanting to transcode instead of adding drives.<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
This depends on the cost of electricity, the speed of the
transcoding computer and the quality of the output. My experience
with a fast quad core i7 and $0.20 per kwh electricity transcoding
720p recordings from mpeg2 to h264 shows that transcoding is much
cheaper than buying a new disk by an order of magnitude. Of course
deleting old recordings is much cheaper than that.<br>
<br>
Example transcode: 15m to transcode a 4GB 1h mpeg2 to 1GB h264 using
handbrake in an i7 system that uses 70w.<br>
<br>
70*.25/1000 = .0175 kwh at $0.20/kwh = $0.0035 for 3GB gain is
$0.00116/GB saved<br>
<br>
A 2TB drive that costs $70 costs $0.034/GB<br>
<br>
John<br>
</body>
</html>