I've just changed our backup strategy on one of our machines from Time Machine and Backups for FCPX to just Time Machine for the system files and am thinking of using either ChronoSync or Carbon Copy Cloner plus Backups for FCPX for the production drives. I was wondering if there was any advantage to using Carbon Copy Cloner or ChronoSync. From just playing with their demos for a few days they both seem to have their pluses and minuses but wonder about real world experience backing up the FCPX, Motion, Logic, Aperture and Lightroom files that we us in projects.
Never used ChronoSync but have used CCC for years and highly recommend it.
Does take some getting used to the interface and settings, but once you do it is easy to clone drives and make incremental back-ups.
Be aware that if you do incremental backups that at some point it will start erasing older versions so having drives with extra room is good insurance. This is true of Time Machine as well. With CCC and incremental Back-ups you can set whether or not to keep deleted files until the back-up drive is full (default setting I believe) or to remove files not on source.
Good tutorials at CCC website.
Hope this helps, Greg
RRKPL wrote: I've just changed our backup strategy on one of our machines from Time Machine and Backups for FCPX to just Time Machine for the system files and am thinking of using either ChronoSync or Carbon Copy Cloner plus Backups for FCPX for the production drives. I was wondering if there was any advantage to using Carbon Copy Cloner or ChronoSync. From just playing with their demos for a few days they both seem to have their pluses and minuses but wonder about real world experience backing up the FCPX, Motion, Logic, Aperture and Lightroom files that we us in projects.
Old thread but maybe someone else has the same question.
I have used both and I strongly recommend ChronoSync.
One Carbon Copy Cloner is slow very slow and as the App title stats it is a cloner.
Carbon Copy Cloner is not really useful to keep track of changes in a file.
ChronoSync on the other hand is an all-in-one app with tools for synchronizing, backups, bootable backups and cloud storage backups.
Chronosyc allows a more fine-tuned backup and versioning. You can tell it to backup individual folders just once in a day (say the FCPX Cache folder) while versioning the most active, working folder, Projects files, every X minutes. Best of all, you will never feel the pressure on your mac. Since you can dissect your backups to your like, Chronosync doesn’t eat up your RAM.
Thanks for the detail - I'd mostly used Chronosync over the years but was looking to give CCC a try but after a few days of use, found that Chronosync was "lighter" on the OS and had other little things like transfer speed which is valuable to know among other things.
Glad I found this thread, its my task for today to decide between the two, or others...
This video suggests that ChronoSync is 'package aware' which is good for FCPX Libraries it seems. Not sure if CCC does this, or if indeed it works well? Anybody with any thoughts?
I've used CCC for many years, and it is package aware, bullet proof, solid, reliable, proven track record. I've never used Chronosync because it costs more and has IMHO an unreasonably complex structure (which package do you really need). I strongly recommend CCC (I'm also a retired IT manager). Chronosync doesn't impress me.
I have also used CCC for many years mostly for backing up various assets folders as well as cloning system disks. I have tried to used it for backing up FCP libraries but have never really gotten it to work properly. When cloning the library it seems to scatter subfolders within the library and doesn't really duplicate the library package (purple icon). Maybe I am doing something wrong but I would certainly love to hear how this can be accomplished so I could begin using it for incremental backups of long documentary projects.
It's been backing up my FCPX Libraries just fine since FCPX was released. I'm simply backing up whole drives, not being selective. Works just fine, backups run 2am every night without fail, takes about 15 minutes to finish all three drives it backs up. macOS 11.2.3 and CCC 5.1.25, no issues at all. Have you contacted their tech support?
I guess that will be my next step. I can backup drives and I've even tried putting my libraries in a folder, but when CCC backs that up, the Library package is not duplicated as a self contained library - the contents of the library package is copied but not the root library. Using current version on current Big Sur, and also on Mojave. I've had this issue with all OS versions for about 5 years now. I'll post any comments I get from their tech support in this thread.
UPDATE - I was about to launch a support ticket thru CCC and decided I would try one more time to create a task that would copy FCP libraries. This time it worked! I tried the same thing I tried numerous times in the past - Created a folder (FCP Library Backups) for the destination, then created a test folder (Test) where I placed a couple FCP libraries with a few projects, some quick edits, plugins applied to a few clips, etc. Ran the task and now observed the complete library file (purple icon) for each library. I opened the libraries and they had all the content intact including all edits and video inspector adjustments. So, I stand corrected - it works. Have no idea why, in the past, the destination folder showed the FCP package contents of the library only and not the purple library icon. Tested this on an iMac Pro running Big Sur 11.2.3 and latest CCC. I'll give it a shot on our next documentary (with appropriate backups in place first) to see if it successfully manages all the versioning, roles, audio mixes and edits.
It's working ok for me, I have 12 Libraries in one Folder that copy to a USB 3.1 drive each day.
I can browse that folder, see all of the Libraries as normal and they all open. That is expected.
Whats interesting is if one render file changes in the Library does CCC recognise this, and does it copy the whole Library across (I think we want it to?) or just the changed file. Best to do the cloning with FCPX shut.
honeybadger wrote: ..Whats interesting is if one render file changes in the Library does CCC recognise this, and does it copy the whole Library across (I think we want it to?) or just the changed file. Best to do the cloning with FCPX shut.
In general you don't want render files placed within the library, much less back them up. They are potentially large, discardable items. For reasons of performance and ease of library backup, it's best to have the render cache placed external to the library. That's done using the library inspector via Storage Locations>Modify Settings>Cache.
A similar procedure can be used to keep proxies outside the library: Storage Locations>Modify Settings>Media. If regular media is imported using "Leave Files in Place", only generated proxies and optimized media will be placed in the designated storage locations. That keeps the library itself small and easy to back up. This procedure is discussed in Ripple Training's media management tutorial.
Re copying the library, that should ideally be done while FCP is shut down. Unix-heritage file systems do not have mandatory file locking only advisory locking. That's why you never get a "file in use" error on MacOS like on Windows. However this allows copying files & folder trees while they may be changing. A library looks like a monolithic entity but internally it's a very complex folder tree. If open it could easy be changing due to background tasks or some other reason -- while you are copying it.
FCP itself knows when it's safe to make library backups, so the small backups in /Movies/Final Cut Backups are securely done and consistent with current database state. If you want a separate physical backup, those are small and quick to backup.
As I work on large projects I periodically use Finder to duplicate the current library bundle and back that up to external storage. I rename each one and therefore keep a history of library state at various points. I do this because the FCP auto-backups (good as they are) aren't adjustable in terms of frequency.
One more suggestion...Get Backup Pro 3. It's got a corny name, but I've used it for a few years (after playing with the trial version for a while). It's very highly configurable and support is super-quick. It also costs less than CCC.
I wrote to CCC to ask, here is there reply (with some sales guff removed):
"CCC treats packages like folders automatically. If a file within the package changes, CCC copies over the modified file when you run the backup task again. At the end of the task, the source and destination should be identical. CCC isn't going to recopy a whole bundle file, though, just because a single file within it changed. That's comparable to the "dissect" feature in Chronosync." and
"CCC is deigned specifically for making backups, and that's why it's a lot simpler and more straightforward. Chronosync offers two-way syncing, which is nice functionality, but it muddies the water and that's why it's so much more complicated to set up a basic backup task. CCC's default settings are appropriate for making backups of FCP libraries."
For Backup ??? ChronoSync without any hesitation , not for a second,
Carbon Copy Cloner is a "cloning app", it copies, that's his job. Chrono Sync is the backup app, that's his job, WAY better than CCC fot that with all the dedicated option.
People use CCC for that because they got it for free and they keep using it. They don't know anything else. But anybody with experience of Chrono Sync choose it any day. (Any hour, any minute, any second)
I'm a retired IT engineer and have paid for and have used CCC for many years. It is a back-up app just like Chronosync. I've no clue where you got that bad information Stu. Plus insulting us doesn't help.
- CCC is backup software. Sure, 20 years ago we started as a plain "cloning" utility, and we've kept that in the name, because, you know, "name recognition". But over the past decade we've invested heavily in our product, establishing it as not only a utility that will make copies, but a utility that offers a comprehensive backup strategy. We design CCC to be a replacement for Time Machine, i.e. support for older versions of files, and management of those "snapshots" similar to, but beyond what Time Machine offers.
- CCC has never been "free". We started 20 years ago with a "donationware" model, but when we decided to build a company, hire software and support engineers, etc., we transitioned to a commercial model. We offer a 30-day trial (no limitations whatsoever), but aside from that, we hope that folks will use CCC as part of their production backup strategy and purchase a license.