I've run out of space on my C drive and need to move my library to my E drive. I've read a few related posts on this forum but haven't found an answer. Can anyone suggest how I would do this?
Posted 1 month ago
kayakman, Champion
kayakman, Champion
my suggestion referenced above is TechSmith's best practice recommendation
I use the Library extensively and constantly; I have many sub Libraries; it works great for me, as-is
I don't try to store simple media files within the Library as there is no advantage to doing so vs. using the Windows file system; accordingly, I never have to juggle my library assets endlessly; so no bottlenecks
I use the Library extensively and constantly; I have many sub Libraries; it works great for me, as-is
I don't try to store simple media files within the Library as there is no advantage to doing so vs. using the Windows file system; accordingly, I never have to juggle my library assets endlessly; so no bottlenecks
You don't seem to understand bottlenecks with regards to working with multiple drives as opposed to working with one drive.
Plus, everything you place in the new 2018 library creates a new file.
Essentially giving you duplicate media files of anything placed in it. Which is completely unnecessary. The media bin is linked to content.As should be the library.
According to you then.Why did the reinvent the library?
If they wanted everyone to use the Windows file system instead of the new library? If was a pointless gesture was it not?
Plus, everything you place in the new 2018 library creates a new file.
Essentially giving you duplicate media files of anything placed in it. Which is completely unnecessary. The media bin is linked to content.As should be the library.
According to you then.Why did the reinvent the library?
If they wanted everyone to use the Windows file system instead of the new library? If was a pointless gesture was it not?
kayakman, Champion
not pointless at all
the new Library uses common sense names for sub folders and assets; a huge improvement IMHO
the ability to add new assets directly to a specific sub Library folder is also a huge improvement
in fact, the new Library offers copy/move and other management functionality that I use extensively; much less labor than with previous version
re your comment about multiple drives: my laptop has 2, which I use all the time to accomplish my screencasting work
the primary use for the Library is to store reusable complex assets; these don't take up space like raw media files do; my Library is extensive and somewhat complex; but only consumes 1.5 GB
the new Library uses common sense names for sub folders and assets; a huge improvement IMHO
the ability to add new assets directly to a specific sub Library folder is also a huge improvement
in fact, the new Library offers copy/move and other management functionality that I use extensively; much less labor than with previous version
re your comment about multiple drives: my laptop has 2, which I use all the time to accomplish my screencasting work
the primary use for the Library is to store reusable complex assets; these don't take up space like raw media files do; my Library is extensive and somewhat complex; but only consumes 1.5 GB
I agree that the natural language naming is an improvement. I don't agree that the sub-folders are. That was well intentioned, but not a real improvement in practice, in my humble. While the sub-folders allow you to categorise things more easily, it's massively inefficient to have to keep drilling down to find assets. (The search functionality can alleviate this somewhat... if you can remember the name of the asset that you want.)
Some of my assets are complex but most are repetitive (appearing in different series) in my ill-fated quest to try to retain some level of uniformity of appearance in the face of stretchy-squishy fonts and objects whose pixel size cannot be specified. To that end on the rare occasions that I use C18 I rarely go more than one level down in creating folders in the library, the same way as I do with C9.
For that reason I'm also inclined to agree with Joe about how the library should really contain references. And ideally references to locations chosen by the user... including cloud locations, so that libraries can be shared without zipping like it's 1999. This would allow "look and feel" to be centrally changed without having to go through and redo every asset. Which is also why Themes are a well intentioned but functionally useless change, but that's a whole other discussion.
Some of my assets are complex but most are repetitive (appearing in different series) in my ill-fated quest to try to retain some level of uniformity of appearance in the face of stretchy-squishy fonts and objects whose pixel size cannot be specified. To that end on the rare occasions that I use C18 I rarely go more than one level down in creating folders in the library, the same way as I do with C9.
For that reason I'm also inclined to agree with Joe about how the library should really contain references. And ideally references to locations chosen by the user... including cloud locations, so that libraries can be shared without zipping like it's 1999. This would allow "look and feel" to be centrally changed without having to go through and redo every asset. Which is also why Themes are a well intentioned but functionally useless change, but that's a whole other discussion.
I run SnagIt from my C: drive SSD and have the library on my D: drive HDD. Works a a charm. Moving it might require some dark magic though. I don't know whether there's an official way to do it, but this should work.
- COPY the library folders to the new location (copy, just in case something goes wrong.)
- Completely exit Snagit so it is not running in the background (the Editor too; anything related to Snagit needs to be closed)
- Goto Registry Editor (press start and type regedit)
- Go to HKEY_CURRENT_USER
- Find the Software folder, then TechSmith
- Click on the 18/19 folder then in the right-hand pane scroll down to "DataStoreLocation"
- Delete that entry. Yes, delete it.
- Relaunch Snagit and it will ask you where the Datastore is.
- Select your new drive and folder
I think it's Camtasia being discussed. ;)
Dammit. This is because I have started to get Camtasia mails too, for some reason, and the email notices don't say which product is being referred to
LOL, welcome to the club! (It bites us all sometimes)
Why can't you just:
1 - Back up the Camtasia Studio folder.
2 - Uninstall Camtasia from the C: drive (Consider using a tool like Revo Uninstaller free version for this, to make sure all traces of the old installation are gone).
3 - Reinstall Camtasia on the other drive (E: in The BigE's case).
4 - Copy the backed up files into the appropriate places in the new installation.
I'm asking because this should work, but I've never had to do it, so I cannot say for certain. It may be necessary to import Library assets, but I would expect the project files to work fine. If you get any messages about assets that can't be found, you can browse to the new location and link to them.
1 - Back up the Camtasia Studio folder.
2 - Uninstall Camtasia from the C: drive (Consider using a tool like Revo Uninstaller free version for this, to make sure all traces of the old installation are gone).
3 - Reinstall Camtasia on the other drive (E: in The BigE's case).
4 - Copy the backed up files into the appropriate places in the new installation.
I'm asking because this should work, but I've never had to do it, so I cannot say for certain. It may be necessary to import Library assets, but I would expect the project files to work fine. If you get any messages about assets that can't be found, you can browse to the new location and link to them.
The problem is that the Camtasia Library is not stored in the same folder as the application; nor should it be since there should, in theory, be a separation between data and code. It's stored in the system folder %ProgramData% which usually equates to C:\Program Data.
OK, it should be relatively easy to redirect to a folder on a different drive, using instructions like these:
https://www.dummies.com/computers/operating-systems/windows-10/how-to-change-the-location-of-user-fo...
I recently did this for some folders on my new personal desktop machine, in order to move data from my smallish C: partition to a larger D: partition. I haven't tried it with Camtasia, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, as the redirect is transparent to the application.
Here's what I would do:
- Backup the Techsmith folder in C:\Program Data. A flash drive would work fine for this.
- Copy the TechSmith folder from C:\Program Data to a similarly named folder on the target drive.
- Set up the redirect according to the instructions at the link. Make sure you only redirect the TechSmith folder, not the whole Program Data folder.
- Rename the folder on the C: drive to "TechSmith.old" or something like that. It won't work any longer, but it will be really easy to restore it if the redirect doesn't work for some reason.
- Open Camtasia and test it with several projects to make sure the redirect is working properly. Only after thorough testing, it would be safe to delete the folder on the C: drive. You still have the backup, just in case.
https://www.dummies.com/computers/operating-systems/windows-10/how-to-change-the-location-of-user-fo...
I recently did this for some folders on my new personal desktop machine, in order to move data from my smallish C: partition to a larger D: partition. I haven't tried it with Camtasia, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, as the redirect is transparent to the application.
Here's what I would do:
- Backup the Techsmith folder in C:\Program Data. A flash drive would work fine for this.
- Copy the TechSmith folder from C:\Program Data to a similarly named folder on the target drive.
- Set up the redirect according to the instructions at the link. Make sure you only redirect the TechSmith folder, not the whole Program Data folder.
- Rename the folder on the C: drive to "TechSmith.old" or something like that. It won't work any longer, but it will be really easy to restore it if the redirect doesn't work for some reason.
- Open Camtasia and test it with several projects to make sure the redirect is working properly. Only after thorough testing, it would be safe to delete the folder on the C: drive. You still have the backup, just in case.
(Edited)
That's a hack for moving "Windows" folders to another drive.
That won't work for Program folders from other manufactures to another drive.
Because Camtasia will simply regenerate another library folder in the default location on startup. Because you moved the original folder.
Heres Camtasia 8 with the Camtasia 2.0 Library in tact.
I deleted the 2.0 library folder as if I moved it "Same thing really" Closed and reopened Camtasia.
As you can see the library is empty and the folder is regenerated in Windows file explorer.
So that's where new library assets will be saved to and your moved assets? Will be essentially AWOL and unusable.At least you cannot access them from the library.So there not a library item any longer.
I don't use Camtasia 8's library so I didn't mind deleting it for this purpose.Besides, a repair install could fix it if need be.Which won't be necessary.
That won't work for Program folders from other manufactures to another drive.
Because Camtasia will simply regenerate another library folder in the default location on startup. Because you moved the original folder.
Heres Camtasia 8 with the Camtasia 2.0 Library in tact.
I deleted the 2.0 library folder as if I moved it "Same thing really" Closed and reopened Camtasia.
As you can see the library is empty and the folder is regenerated in Windows file explorer.
So that's where new library assets will be saved to and your moved assets? Will be essentially AWOL and unusable.At least you cannot access them from the library.So there not a library item any longer.
I don't use Camtasia 8's library so I didn't mind deleting it for this purpose.Besides, a repair install could fix it if need be.Which won't be necessary.
(Edited)
Here's the deal.
For the most efficient editing possible. You want the Operating System and your
Programs on the C-Drive.
Then, you want your Project and Media files on another drive. That would
include Camtasia's Library, if you could move it.
Temporary recording files are a bit of a toss-up. Provided you’re going to
record yourself using Camtasia. For myself, I always send them to a third drive.
So theres no conflict possible.
I use Premiere Pro and After Effects. So my Media Cache & Scratch files are
sent to the third drive. These are pre-rendered video files for timeline playback
and optimizing performance within those programs. That’s where
I render my videos to as well.
It's always best if you don't have to share available read and write resources with other functions. Especially when your dealing with large video files.
I just recently upgraded all my drives to 1TB Samsung 860 EVO SSD’s.
So my Operating System and all my programs reside on my C drive. I have a lot of Programs.
My Media files reside on my Media drive.
I have the third for Rendering, Adobe products, etc.
2 of my recently removed 7200 rpm internal hard drives now reside in docking bays. Plugged into USB 3.0 ports. I can access them to move files around when needed. Storage/Download/Etc.
And this one fact will never change. One of the ways to achieve efficient video editing.
Is never store your source media on the same drive as your operating system. This includes the Library.
Regards, Joe
kayakman, Champion
I believe that TechSmith highly recommends that project media files be located on your system drive for both editing and production
I do this myself using my SSD system drive
I don't seem to experience problems with efficient video editing
when finished with a project and any associated Library assets, the projects are exported as zips and saved on OneDrive; no longer needed Library assets are exported as libzips and also stored on OneDrive; so, no wasted storage on my system drive, and the Library folder stays small and compact
this protocol works great and has served me well for many years
there are many ways to skin this cat ...
I do this myself using my SSD system drive
I don't seem to experience problems with efficient video editing
when finished with a project and any associated Library assets, the projects are exported as zips and saved on OneDrive; no longer needed Library assets are exported as libzips and also stored on OneDrive; so, no wasted storage on my system drive, and the Library folder stays small and compact
this protocol works great and has served me well for many years
there are many ways to skin this cat ...
Joe, Kayakman -
"I believe that TechSmith highly recommends that project media files be located on your system drive for both editing and production".
NO, I hope NOT, that would be a digital sin. In fact they recommend the fastest drive(s) you have, period.
Joe:
"For the most efficient editing possible. You want the Operating System and your Programs on the C-Drive."
NEVER, NEVER, NEVER. That may not be the least efficient, but its close. Who ever led you to believe that?
#2: HDDs or SSDs, separating read and write drives has ALWAYS been the best accepted doctine. Find a TS techie that doesn't belive that, he will/should be fired immediately.
Let me know your motherboard and CPU chip, I'll find what the manufactures say, OK?
Both of you:
The greatest system you will ever own - will have enough RAM to support a xx sized RAMDISK that wil make all your digital dreams come true! You may not believe that and I don't want to argue. I appreciate every thing you guys do to make my Camtasia and Snagit experience a great one. but to pan a ramdrive is like denying the existance of dirt.
I will produce (over Christmas time) a "RamDrive" video, if you want to help, I'd love both of you to participate. I have a great message, but I'm not a good messenger. You've seen/heard my videos, I have "essential tremor", it effects my hand movements and voice. If you really want to help the TS community, lets do this - together!
If you have enough RAM, 8 or more GB, I'll even buy the licenses. If you end up loving RamDisk, you'll owe me a beer when you next visit Colorado Springs, CO. (which I no longer recommend.)
"I believe that TechSmith highly recommends that project media files be located on your system drive for both editing and production".
NO, I hope NOT, that would be a digital sin. In fact they recommend the fastest drive(s) you have, period.
Joe:
"For the most efficient editing possible. You want the Operating System and your Programs on the C-Drive."
NEVER, NEVER, NEVER. That may not be the least efficient, but its close. Who ever led you to believe that?
#2: HDDs or SSDs, separating read and write drives has ALWAYS been the best accepted doctine. Find a TS techie that doesn't belive that, he will/should be fired immediately.
Let me know your motherboard and CPU chip, I'll find what the manufactures say, OK?
Both of you:
The greatest system you will ever own - will have enough RAM to support a xx sized RAMDISK that wil make all your digital dreams come true! You may not believe that and I don't want to argue. I appreciate every thing you guys do to make my Camtasia and Snagit experience a great one. but to pan a ramdrive is like denying the existance of dirt.
I will produce (over Christmas time) a "RamDrive" video, if you want to help, I'd love both of you to participate. I have a great message, but I'm not a good messenger. You've seen/heard my videos, I have "essential tremor", it effects my hand movements and voice. If you really want to help the TS community, lets do this - together!
If you have enough RAM, 8 or more GB, I'll even buy the licenses. If you end up loving RamDisk, you'll owe me a beer when you next visit Colorado Springs, CO. (which I no longer recommend.)
(Edited)
Well Ed,
I don’t know what makes you think you should be installing programs on a separate drive when most of them have multiple default folders that must be installed on the C drive.
I highly doubt there’s anything efficient about having part of the program on one drive and the rest on the C drive.
If the CPU can access all of Camtasia’s program files locally from the C Drive. Unencumbered by media files being moved in and out of the timeline. The program should run very efficiently.
That’s the whole purpose in storing media files on a separate drive. And running the program on the C drive.
If the key to making a program run more efficiently was to install it to any drive but the C drive.
Then why doesn’t everybody under the sun recommend installing your programs to another drive whenever possible?
Shouldn’t that be a standard pop up and part of the installation instructions? And since they are not part of the installation instructions, and it makes so much sense to do so. Why is it then?
Complete incompetence on behalf of every software manufacturer on the market?
Regards, Joe
Joe -
File Names are for you and I and . . an OS's look-up. It operates the same as DNS servers which translates a named URL to a numbered IP address. Windows file system, translates a file name to a physical location "pointer" composed of a drive#, platter, track & sector even for SSDs! which then converts those HDD type numbers to a memory pointer. (I think the Win 10 NTFS allows it to talk to SSD drives directly.)
Windows and its file system, NTFS, will always perform better if it can access programs & data from multiple locations, simultaneously. Data farms would bring the internet to a halt if they didn't disburse their files across hundreds or even thousands of drives. And to say that as a PC owner, you don't have access to that way of doing business, is non-sense! You may not be able to stripe one files across 2 or more drives, but you can place 2 essential files on two different drives and with a little Windows and app program help, access both simultaneously.
Not to long ago, there weren't any SSDs, so the only way to achieve much greater speeds were RAID sets. In 1990 I had a SCSI striped set with 9 drives - striped with parity. Although each drive could read and write in the 80MB/sec, the set gave me 720 MB/sec and was fault tolerant. One of 9 goes bad, replace it and the RAID software and the other 8 drives restored the bad drive in about 40 minutes.
Today, most RAID do exactly the same thing. Put 64 - 1TB SSDs in a RAID, you have access to 64 TB addressable with one drive letter! Now put a 64 GB, 4K movie on that drive letter, you'd end up with about 1 GB on each the the drives, in disassociated clusters that the RAID controller manages.
On mainframes, its called "load sharing" but its about the same thing. In Honeywell's GCOS
systems, we wrote an algorithm (1981) that placed the kernal on drive 0, but the remainder of the OS including 4 copies of Time Sharing, to disburse the OS across all 16 drives. The system went from slow to where each of the 220 users, thought they had the system to themselves. My expertise in Honeywell got me to NORAD (Colorado Springs) in 1985.
Whether you believe or not, if Windows works good on one drive, it'll fly if disbursed across many. The down side, it requires an expensive hardware RAID controller. I recently bought 2 - 240-GB SSDs for $56. (and I have), if I can get another 8 for $ 224. (total 10: 9 for the RAID, 1 spare). Its almost a given that servers have these types of capabilities, but using a server mentality can take one a long way to digital nirvana.
Another way to achieve these results is RamDisk - about as fast as a 20-SSD drive RAID, but at a fraction of the cost (and a fraction of the size).
Why doesn't everyone think the way I do? They don't have the experiences I've had, they've never worked on a data farm, or informed themselves about the magic of RAID, in others words, they can't see beyond their own key boards.
File Names are for you and I and . . an OS's look-up. It operates the same as DNS servers which translates a named URL to a numbered IP address. Windows file system, translates a file name to a physical location "pointer" composed of a drive#, platter, track & sector even for SSDs! which then converts those HDD type numbers to a memory pointer. (I think the Win 10 NTFS allows it to talk to SSD drives directly.)
Windows and its file system, NTFS, will always perform better if it can access programs & data from multiple locations, simultaneously. Data farms would bring the internet to a halt if they didn't disburse their files across hundreds or even thousands of drives. And to say that as a PC owner, you don't have access to that way of doing business, is non-sense! You may not be able to stripe one files across 2 or more drives, but you can place 2 essential files on two different drives and with a little Windows and app program help, access both simultaneously.
Not to long ago, there weren't any SSDs, so the only way to achieve much greater speeds were RAID sets. In 1990 I had a SCSI striped set with 9 drives - striped with parity. Although each drive could read and write in the 80MB/sec, the set gave me 720 MB/sec and was fault tolerant. One of 9 goes bad, replace it and the RAID software and the other 8 drives restored the bad drive in about 40 minutes.
Today, most RAID do exactly the same thing. Put 64 - 1TB SSDs in a RAID, you have access to 64 TB addressable with one drive letter! Now put a 64 GB, 4K movie on that drive letter, you'd end up with about 1 GB on each the the drives, in disassociated clusters that the RAID controller manages.
On mainframes, its called "load sharing" but its about the same thing. In Honeywell's GCOS
systems, we wrote an algorithm (1981) that placed the kernal on drive 0, but the remainder of the OS including 4 copies of Time Sharing, to disburse the OS across all 16 drives. The system went from slow to where each of the 220 users, thought they had the system to themselves. My expertise in Honeywell got me to NORAD (Colorado Springs) in 1985.
Whether you believe or not, if Windows works good on one drive, it'll fly if disbursed across many. The down side, it requires an expensive hardware RAID controller. I recently bought 2 - 240-GB SSDs for $56. (and I have), if I can get another 8 for $ 224. (total 10: 9 for the RAID, 1 spare). Its almost a given that servers have these types of capabilities, but using a server mentality can take one a long way to digital nirvana.
Another way to achieve these results is RamDisk - about as fast as a 20-SSD drive RAID, but at a fraction of the cost (and a fraction of the size).
Why doesn't everyone think the way I do? They don't have the experiences I've had, they've never worked on a data farm, or informed themselves about the magic of RAID, in others words, they can't see beyond their own key boards.
I know what Raid arrays are and how they work. I don't edit video at that level. Don't need an array.
To suggest the Windows operating needs to be placed in an Array system to me is frankly, ridiculous.
I'd love to see an technical article on the subject, because I think it's a pointless gesture and not recommenced by anyone.I've never heard of it anyway.
Microsoft recommends installing all your programs on the C drive unless it's full.
At least that what John Ruby a Microsoft Forum Moderator had to say about it in 2014 in response to a question posed in the forum.
I can't find any more recent subject matter from a Microsoft authorized figure.
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows8_1-performance/is-it-better-to-install-all...
It goes
MS
Mehdi Sadughi
Is it better to install all of the programs on local disk C or should I install some on other drives?
To suggest the Windows operating needs to be placed in an Array system to me is frankly, ridiculous.
I'd love to see an technical article on the subject, because I think it's a pointless gesture and not recommenced by anyone.I've never heard of it anyway.
Microsoft recommends installing all your programs on the C drive unless it's full.
At least that what John Ruby a Microsoft Forum Moderator had to say about it in 2014 in response to a question posed in the forum.
I can't find any more recent subject matter from a Microsoft authorized figure.
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows8_1-performance/is-it-better-to-install-all...
It goes
MS
Mehdi Sadughi
Is it better to install all of the programs on local disk C or should I install some on other drives?
Hi there. I recently bought a new laptop computer and I’m wondering if it’s better to install programs on local disk C or D? For ages, I installed programs on local disk D, one reason was the lack local C drive storage, and the other reason was to help windows work better. As my new laptop computers provide more storage and also higher configuration, is it still a good idea to follow the old habit?
Another issue; I have a plan to make regular backups from my system for the case of emergency conditions, in this case, as I installed some programs on local D drive, is it possible to make a backup of them(program files and program files (x86) on drive D)?
What do you recommend me?! Should I uninstall the installed programs on D and install them again on local C drive? Which strategy works better for my windows efficiency?
Some people argue that if you have enough space on local C drive, you’d better to install all of the programs on C.
Here is some information from my laptop computer.
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3537U CPU @ 2.00GHz Sony Corporation, 12Gb Ram, GF Nvidia 735, 1tb hybrid H.D.D, windows 8.1
My Local drives spaces: (C=146 Gb, D=150 Gb, E=200 Gb, F=400 Gb), 82 Gb of my local disk C is free now.
Hi Mehdi,
Windows installs the programs in Program Files folder in the Windows default drive. This place is good enough for the programs. Only when the default drive has no space left for installing programs, you can install in a second drive or partition. There is no additional advantage in installing the programs in another drive or partition. In case you reformatted the system drive, you had to install those programs all over again because many of their files were lodged in Windows mostly System32 folder and Windows registry.
Video editing in general is all handled pretty much the same way. It would be great if TechSmith would adapt Media Cache & Scratch files for smooth timeline playback.
I doubt they will and a third drive is still good for rendering and recording purposes as I stated above.In my opinion.
Now I'm just me and following Adobe's playbook. Who know far more about editing video than anyone in this forum, or anyone that works at TechSmith for that matter.
Now, this is not an official Adobe video.But these are some people that did extensive benchmark testing of Premiere Pro using 3 SSD's back in the Fall of 2016.
Here's their recommendation on how you set up your drives for the the best results. Perhaps you'd like to dispute their findings as well? Here's the article https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CC-2015-4-Storage-Optimization-854/
This Video. Which basally back ups what I've been reading for years. Just puts it in perspective from people that have deep understanding on the subject.
If you think this same arrangement wouldn't work well with Camtasia. I'm at a loss at to understand why.
Because I assure you,TechSmith didn't reinvent the wheel when they created Camtasia.It creates video using the same basic principals all editing programs use.
What's good for the Goose, is good for the Gander.
I doubt they will and a third drive is still good for rendering and recording purposes as I stated above.In my opinion.
Now I'm just me and following Adobe's playbook. Who know far more about editing video than anyone in this forum, or anyone that works at TechSmith for that matter.
Now, this is not an official Adobe video.But these are some people that did extensive benchmark testing of Premiere Pro using 3 SSD's back in the Fall of 2016.
Here's their recommendation on how you set up your drives for the the best results. Perhaps you'd like to dispute their findings as well? Here's the article https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Premiere-Pro-CC-2015-4-Storage-Optimization-854/
This Video. Which basally back ups what I've been reading for years. Just puts it in perspective from people that have deep understanding on the subject.
If you think this same arrangement wouldn't work well with Camtasia. I'm at a loss at to understand why.
Because I assure you,TechSmith didn't reinvent the wheel when they created Camtasia.It creates video using the same basic principals all editing programs use.
What's good for the Goose, is good for the Gander.
(Edited)
It seems that the biggest bang for the buck is moving the cache off of the primary drive. Does Camtasia use a cache file/folder that could be relocated? It's not obvious (to me, at least) from looking at the C:\Program Data\TechSmith folder.
I see references in this thread that say things must be on the C drive. Is this just a case similar to asking for a Kleenex when all you really want is a tissue?
I mean, it seems to me there is nothing magickal about the drive letter being used. From what I understand, it's all about the drive being wired internally as part of the operating system, no? So the fastest access you can get is when moving data through the local circuitry of the motherboard and controllers.
So you could have a single large physical drive that has been partitioned into logical drive letters identified as C, D, and E and as long as the storage is using one of these assigned drive letters, shouldn't the speed be equally as fast for each?
Cheers... Rick :)
I mean, it seems to me there is nothing magickal about the drive letter being used. From what I understand, it's all about the drive being wired internally as part of the operating system, no? So the fastest access you can get is when moving data through the local circuitry of the motherboard and controllers.
So you could have a single large physical drive that has been partitioned into logical drive letters identified as C, D, and E and as long as the storage is using one of these assigned drive letters, shouldn't the speed be equally as fast for each?
Cheers... Rick :)
It appears from the article that there is some "magic" related to having multiple drives, which wouldn't be the same as multiple partitions on the same drive. I suspect that it has to do with the ability to access multiple drives simultaneously, whereas multiple locations on the same drive must be accessed sequentially. This would be true whether your dealing with hard drives or SSDs, though I would expect that it's more of an issue with the former, due to the mechanical limitations of moving the heads around.
(Edited)
So I would like to put some closure on this topic.
I got TechSmith’s tech support involved yesterday.
I pointed the technician to this forum thread. So the technician is fully apprised as to everything going on here.
Although redundant, I went into great detail of how I felt about utilizing system drives and following Adobe’s lead.
With all the back-and-forth on this subject. And so many topics being batted around on the subject. It’s best that I generalize the final conclusions by the technician.
Rather than sticking the name of the technician in the middle of these discussions. I’m going to keep the name of the technician anonymous, because that’s really not important. It’s a well-known name that most forum members would recognize.
Consider these generalized guidelines. For someone like myself running three SSD’s, which was my discussion. And if you look closely enough at the advice, you will see that it would apply to someone running 2 SSD’s as well.
The first sentence of the response was as follows........ To put it simply, I agree with you 100 percent.
So, Camtasia should be installed on the C drive. Because installing it on another drive can potentially lead to many issues.
All projects and imported media should be stored on another drive. Not the C drive.
Changing where you store the temporary recording files is optional.
TechSmith doesn’t do the extensive testing that Adobe does. So they don’t have any hard numbers to back up this information because it isn’t something they’ve officially tested. However, from their personal experience working with thousands of customers. This is the best way to go.
And if you want to reject TechSmith’s advice, along with Adobe’s and Puget Systems. I don’t know what else to tell you. I don’t know what other evidence you need to see?
To date, nobody’s presented me with any evidence to back them up. Or contradict any of my findings. At this time, I’m done trying to present/prove my position.
Hopefully, I’ve done enough to help those that need a definitive answer to this question.
Regards, Joe
> So, Camtasia should be installed on the C drive. Because
installing it on another drive can potentially lead to many issues.
Indeed. Just as a closing aside on this as well, I recently helped out someone who had a problem with the latest version of Dragon Naturally Speaking, a relatively niche program but not one that I'd regard as small. In its field it probably has a similar user base to Camtasia.
Some of the functions weren't working for no obvious reason.
It turns out that the installation had been done to the D:\ drive. It shouldn't be an issue; the installer even explicitly gives you the option of doing that.
However when it was moved back to the C:\ drive, the functionality issues disappeared.
I got it bounced back to Nuance Support who confirmed the issue but waved it away as "We recommend installing to C:\". (Yeah? Where? Show me where there is any statement to that effect in the documentation. )
My bet is that either someone got lazy and hard coded library references to the assumed location (bad) or, (less bad but still unsafe), they looked up the Program Files paths using environment variables on the assumption that the installation would be there and nowhere else.
Of course even installing to Program Files in C:\ is not without risk. My C:\ drive kept coming close to the limit and I could not for the life of me figure out where the space was going. In theory I should have had at least a couple of hundred gig free. In reality it was down to a handful. I had system and hidden files set to "Show" in Explorer but I could not figure out where the space was going to. I even uninstalled some applications just to keep the system up.
What was it? The System temp path of C:\Windows\Temp. It does not count its files toward the space used until you go in and explicitly give yourself permissions to it. Then all of a sudden, boom, hundreds of gigs were revealed. Of what? Of error logs. One of Windows 10's stupid, useless, accursed "apps" that nobody asked for and hardly anyone uses on a PC (specifically the weather one) kept trying to update itself and failing. And it generated xml logs. Boy did it generate xml logs. In some cases hundreds of megs per minute. Who writes code like that??
Anyway, moral of the story... I agree completely that ideally it's better to split programs and data, and keep big ol' data files well away from C:\ if possible in a multi-drive system. (Which is also one of many reasons why I think that library locations should be user-settable for both CS and SN.) If C:\ chokes for whatever reason, so does your system.
Indeed. Just as a closing aside on this as well, I recently helped out someone who had a problem with the latest version of Dragon Naturally Speaking, a relatively niche program but not one that I'd regard as small. In its field it probably has a similar user base to Camtasia.
Some of the functions weren't working for no obvious reason.
It turns out that the installation had been done to the D:\ drive. It shouldn't be an issue; the installer even explicitly gives you the option of doing that.
However when it was moved back to the C:\ drive, the functionality issues disappeared.
I got it bounced back to Nuance Support who confirmed the issue but waved it away as "We recommend installing to C:\". (Yeah? Where? Show me where there is any statement to that effect in the documentation. )
My bet is that either someone got lazy and hard coded library references to the assumed location (bad) or, (less bad but still unsafe), they looked up the Program Files paths using environment variables on the assumption that the installation would be there and nowhere else.
Of course even installing to Program Files in C:\ is not without risk. My C:\ drive kept coming close to the limit and I could not for the life of me figure out where the space was going. In theory I should have had at least a couple of hundred gig free. In reality it was down to a handful. I had system and hidden files set to "Show" in Explorer but I could not figure out where the space was going to. I even uninstalled some applications just to keep the system up.
What was it? The System temp path of C:\Windows\Temp. It does not count its files toward the space used until you go in and explicitly give yourself permissions to it. Then all of a sudden, boom, hundreds of gigs were revealed. Of what? Of error logs. One of Windows 10's stupid, useless, accursed "apps" that nobody asked for and hardly anyone uses on a PC (specifically the weather one) kept trying to update itself and failing. And it generated xml logs. Boy did it generate xml logs. In some cases hundreds of megs per minute. Who writes code like that??
Anyway, moral of the story... I agree completely that ideally it's better to split programs and data, and keep big ol' data files well away from C:\ if possible in a multi-drive system. (Which is also one of many reasons why I think that library locations should be user-settable for both CS and SN.) If C:\ chokes for whatever reason, so does your system.
OK, so how do you move projects and media to another drive?
kayakman, Champion
the traditional approach is to export the projects as zips; when importing them again into Camtasia, set the destination folder to wherever
FYI, exporting as zip de-couples projects from the Library because Library content becomes part of the zip
FYI, exporting as zip de-couples projects from the Library because Library content becomes part of the zip
(Edited)
kayakman, Champion
