VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 28 of 28
Thread
  1. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    OK. I'm building a system and haven't bought my capture card yet. I'm still a little confused after much reading about capture devices.

    I understand that the Hauppauge 350 would be a good device, but there might be some sync. issues.

    I'm also reading that one of the Canopus devices might be better in regards to sync. problems.

    I believe both do a good job hardware encoding MPEG2. My main goal is to transfer SVHS and VHS tapes to DVD, although, I'll be moving some DV footage from my JVC camcorder too.

    Can you guys kind of give me the straight highs and lows on each of the devices mentioned above, please?

    I'd really rather not purchase an additional $500 TBC if it's not needed. My JVC VCR has one, but if that's the only way around the problem, I guess I'll regroup on finances.

    Thanks in advance.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member FulciLives's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA in the USA
    Search Comp PM
    The Hauppauge WinTV PVR 350 is excellent. The Hauppauge WinTV PVR 250 is also excellent if you don't need the outputs that the 350 model has ... get the 250 model.

    Either way these are HARDWARE MPEG capture devices They do hardware encoding direct to MPEG-1 or MPEG-2

    Anytime you do this there is a potentional of A/V sync issues with the capture file once you start to process it "post capture". There is a program called VideoRedo that is made to "fix" such "timing" errors so that "post capture" processing does not cause loss of A/V sync. Consider buying VideoRedo a must if you go with the Hauppauge. The "magic" function in VideoRedo is called, "QuickStream Fix"

    The Canopus ADVC-110 is very popular. It is an external "box" that converts to DV AVI format. Although you can use it to go direct to MPEG-2 this is really a poor method. The box only does DV AVI and if you set it up to go direct to MPEG-2 then the MPEG encoding is done via software by the computer. A poor method.

    Instead you need to capture to DV AVI format. Then you use a software encoder after the capture to convert to MPEG-2 format.

    You indicated that your camcorder is DV format. If so then all you need is a FIREWIRE connector on the computer (FIREWIRE is also known as IEEE 1394 and also called "i-link" sometimes). This will transfer the DV to the computer as DV AVI format. No capture card is needed.

    - John "FulciLives" Coleman
    "The eyes are the first thing that you have to destroy ... because they have seen too many bad things" - Lucio Fulci
    EXPLORE THE FILMS OF LUCIO FULCI - THE MAESTRO OF GORE
    Quote Quote  
  3. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    I have a PVR-250 and it has worked great for my SVHS / VHS captures! I did have sync issues, so an external frame synchronizer (TBC) was necessary for me.

    However, since MV should not be an issue with the 350, I would recommend using a DVD Recorder as a frame synchronizer instead of an external TBC. It may cost less and do more.

    The Toshiba DVD Recorders in particular provide excellent TBC performance. My HDD unit also provides Proc Amp controls in passthru. It makes a great external TBC / Frame Synchronizer / Proc Amp. It is also a great DVD Recorder.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    As you can see, there are many methods and a few that are semi reliable with VHS, a worse case to capture.

    1. Hauppauge PVR250/350 encodes to DVD MPeg2 on the card.

    2. Canopus ADVC-100/110 encodes to DV format and is carefull to keep audio in sync but needs a second software pass to convert DV.AVI VHS captures to DVD MPeg2*

    3. Standalone DVD Recorders that encode DVD MPeg2 and record on the fly with variable results from VHS. Research each model number for issues.


    * I can realtime software encode cable box TV input through the ADVC to MPeg2 with average results but I wouldn't do this for important VHS transfers. VHS is much more difficult to encode.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  5. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Does your Camcorder have Analog In?
    If so, you could capture SVHS / VHS through the Camcorder to the PC via 1394.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by edDV
    As you can see, there are many methods and a few that are semi reliable with VHS, a worse case to capture.
    The PVR-250 and the Toshiba both do a great job of capturing SVHS / VHS for me.
    I almost always sample at 720 x 480 and adjust the bitrate accordingly.

    There have been several VHS home videos with carnaval scenes, etc. that looked bad at any sample rate / bitrate. But for the vast majority, the captures have been excellent; in some ways better than the source, particularly for SVHS. Certainly my first choice for viewing.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by davideck
    The Toshiba DVD Recorders in particular provide excellent TBC performance. My HDD unit also provides Proc Amp controls in passthru. It makes a great external TBC / Frame Synchronizer / Proc Amp. It is also a great DVD Recorder.
    The Toshiba D-R4 also provides Proc Amp (picture adjustment) controls in pass through... I use one for this purpose myself sometimes because the PQ is so good on these units. It seems to have the same TBC / Frame Synchronizer capabilities as their HDD model, too. It can also be used to compensate for NTSC black level prior to conversion to digital (stretches 7.5 IRE down to 0 IRE). To do this, set the D-R4's input black level to "Standard" and the output black level to "Enhanced". Then make sure your capturing device is set to 0 IRE input black level. You can pick up a used or open box D-R4 on eBay for cheap these days.

    The XS34 (the hard drive model) has the addition of adjustable input video noise reduction, which also works on pass through. The D-R4 doesn't have the noise reduction feature on the input side (only MPEG noise suppression for DVD playback).
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    I surely appreciate all the feedback. This helps me greatly.

    davideck,
    I'm going to have to look at my camcorder and all the attachments to see if I have video in. Truthfully, I believe I do via composite (and maybe S-Video), but I need to make sure. If I end up needing a TBC, what would you recommend? I had not considered an external DVD recorder either. More food for thought

    Any other recommendations for TBC or DVD recorders are welcome as well.

    John,
    If I decide on the Hauppauge, I will buy VideoRedo. I have to say, in an effort to try and do this right the first time, I'm now considering Canopus more. I don't mind taking the time needed to reencode to MPEG2 from AVI if I can go through the process without A.V sync problems.

    edDV,
    * I can realtime software encode cable box TV input through the ADVC to MPeg2 with average results but I wouldn't do this for important VHS transfers. VHS is much more difficult to encode.
    Point taken. I'll not be using that approach with my precious Wild, Wild West collection.

    gshelley61
    I'll definitely broaden my research to include the Toshiba models you talk about. Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Mod Neophyte Super Moderator redwudz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    One other nice thing about DV is that it is very nice to edit with. Every frame is a key frame so frame accurate cutting is easy. There are also plenty of filters available for DV/AVI that are not readily available for MPEG. I use VirtualDub Mod for DV editing, then frameserve the edited video to TMPGEnc encoder. This eliminates the creation of an intermediate edited file and saves drive space. DV uses about 13GB per hour of video of your hard drive space, so having a lot of hard drive space is very desirable. AVIsynth is also a excellent program for filtering, etc., with DV.

    I've had a ADVC-100 for several years and never any sync problems with the audio. They are pricey, but I spent more on several temperamental capture cards that never seemed to work right before I got the ADVC. If your camcorder has pass through, it will do the about same thing as the ADVC units, and save you a few dollars.

    I've used a Hauppauge 250 and they do an excellent job and save a lot of time. But you do have to be more careful when editing to avoid problems.

    Both units are good choices, IMO.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Guys, again, I sincerely appreciate your input one and all. For someone like me, who has relatively recently stumbled upon this site and is seriously building a system to capture with, I believe this thread has enough updated, viable information to warrant a sticky. Of course that's totally up to the mods, but this has been one damned helpful thread for me.

    Please indulge me in answering a couple more questions.

    I've been researching today and have about decided that the one device that will cover all my needs (wants ) the best would be a Canopus ADVC 300. It appears to even have an LTBC built in. It's a little pricey, but doable.

    Now for the questions: Is the LTBC enough to stabilize my older VHS tapes? Also, will it get rid of MV like some of the stand-alone TBCs?

    Thanks again.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dadrab
    Is the LTBC enough to stabilize my older VHS tapes?
    You mentioned that your JVC VCR has a built in TBC. Does this not provide stable playback of your VHS tapes?
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Actually, yes it does. I've never had a playback problem.

    I guess I was wondering more about MV issues.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Western Ma. United States
    Search Comp PM
    The Hauppauge WinTV PVR 350 if you plan to convert your VHS film collection,and want to keep the line 21 closed captions. Of course you must keep them interlaced. Mine look great on a 25in. CRT and my new 32in. LCD. But then my old eyes arn't as they once were.
    The Second Amendment:
    AMERICA'S ORIGINAL
    HOMELAND SECURITY
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by dadrab
    Actually, yes it does. I've never had a playback problem.
    I guess I was wondering more about MV issues.
    You should use a MV remover, instead of waltz around it.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by SingSing
    You should use a MV remover, instead of waltz around it.
    Please elaborate.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dadrab
    I've been researching today and have about decided that the one device that will cover all my needs (wants ) the best would be a Canopus ADVC 300. It appears to even have an LTBC built in. It's a little pricey, but doable.
    It sounds to me like you already have all of the hardware that you need to capture DV, except for maybe a 1394 card. If nothing else, you can try out miniDV captures to develop a process for capturing, editing, authoring, and burning.

    If your Camcorder has Analog In, then it may also have an excellent TBC. My JVC DVL915 Camcorder is the best TBC that I own.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    cleveland, oh
    Search Comp PM
    I have used several Hauppauge capture cards and never had a bit of trouble with any.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member FulciLives's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA in the USA
    Search Comp PM
    The ADVC-300 seems to be a bit of "overkill" in that the additional features really do very little.

    The so called built-in TBC is a line TBC. It doesn't do much. The TBC built-in to the JVC is a Line TBC but works much better.

    The proc amp controls are nice (setting the contrast and brightness and saturation) but very tricky as you can't rely on your computer monitor when making such adjustments since video looks drastically different on a computer monitor than on a TV.

    Overall I would definately get the ADVC-110 instead ... if you decide to go that way.

    However if your camcorder has analog in and can pass-through the signal "live" then that is all you need for DV capture of analog footage.

    However you will probably need to adjust the levels later on since the camcorder analog in probably does 0.0 IRE BLACK instead of 7.5 IRE BLACK and all analog NTSC (other than Japanese NTSC) is 7.5 IRE BLACK. I will let edDV chime in on that as he is good at explaining it.

    Another thing to remember ... the ADVC units may not copy material that is copy protected. The camcorder may act the same way. The Hauppauge units however do not care as they totally ignore copy protection and will copy anything.

    Also it is possible that very poor quality sources may still need a Full Frame TBC. The cheapest one on the market is the AVT-8710 which goes for about $190 US Dollars + shipping.

    - John "FulciLives" Coleman
    "The eyes are the first thing that you have to destroy ... because they have seen too many bad things" - Lucio Fulci
    EXPLORE THE FILMS OF LUCIO FULCI - THE MAESTRO OF GORE
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by dadrab
    Originally Posted by SingSing
    You should use a MV remover, instead of waltz around it.
    Please elaborate.
    See https://www.videohelp.com/forum/archive/t243476.html about http://www.dimax.com.ua/common/default.shtml
    Quote Quote  
  20. I've tried Hauppauge/advc300/MVR1000(canopus) all good in their way,and it is very hard to beat a good source vcr, and dvd recorder. a TBC is not always necessary and can even add bad stuff, I use a TBC 1000,very good and have avt8710 which are wonderful.

    I also tried ATI as Lordsmurf likes them so much, couldn;t work with it, a TV@anywhere (Crap).

    my old uk pansonic vcr is still very good at pal, but then many of my vhs were recorded on it,

    For the price of a advc300 you can get 2 maybe even 3 dvd recorders, I know its apain transferring the discs to a computer for editing but you can leave them recording away while you have your dinner or are even asleep.

    Capture cards seem to make the image look plasticky(How DO you fix that?) and as has been mentioned, if you plan to play the resulting dvd on a tv why are you monitoring it on a computer monitor.
    PAL/NTSC problem solver.
    USED TO BE A UK Equipment owner., NOW FINISHED WITH VHS CONVERSIONS-THANKS
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Alrighty then. More food for thought.

    So, it seems that if my camcorder is passthrough compatible, I'll have the AVI portion (with possible TBC) knocked. I still can't check the camcorder because it's with my better half and son #1 at a swim meet right now, but it'll be home tonight. I'll check it then.

    So, that leaves me with either doing all my stuff in AVI and recoding, or giving myself an option and building in the Hauppauge 350 (ignores the MV) for personal back-ups.

    The rest of the discussion centers around working with different configurations, finding out what works for me and what doesn't.

    I can live with that.

    For the price of a advc300 you can get 2 maybe even 3 dvd recorders, I know its apain transferring the discs to a computer for editing but you can leave them recording away while you have your dinner or are even asleep.
    ...and I have no problem doing that. I'll do what it takes to get the quality.

    if you plan to play the resulting dvd on a tv why are you monitoring it on a computer monitor.
    Don't get too far ahead of me. I'm fully aware that any monitoring I do on a computer screen is not going to look like the finished product on DVD being viewed on a TV.

    Which segways to another question: Since LCD TVs incorporate the same technology as computer monitors, will interlaced video that looks great on my TV now look crappy when I upgrade to an LCD HDTV? Hummmmm?

    This is must reading. Thanks very much.

    The ADVC-300 seems to be a bit of "overkill" in that the additional features really do very little.
    John,
    After more research, I tend to agree.

    I've also been researching the AVT-8710. It seems to be a pretty good unit and reasonably priced. Thanks.

    Any additional firsthand feedback on this would be appreciated

    However you will probably need to adjust the levels later on since the camcorder analog in probably does 0.0 IRE BLACK instead of 7.5 IRE BLACK and all analog NTSC (other than Japanese NTSC) is 7.5 IRE BLACK. I will let edDV chime in on that as he is good at explaining it.
    edDV,
    If you could chime in on this one, I'd be most grateful as I don't have any idea what the Hell all this is about.

    It sounds to me like you already have all of the hardware that you need to capture DV, except for maybe a 1394 card.
    davideck,
    I'vd got six-pin firewire built into my Epox board. I believe I'm covered.

    Thanks again for all the awesome responses. You folks are killer.
    Quote Quote  
  22. I have a number of capture devices. My primary capture device was a Pinnacle DC10+ until I moved to a Hauppauge WinTV card since I needed a tuner. I used both to capture tapes successfully.

    Then moved to a PVR250 for my PVR and that works well for what it does, which is faithfully capture cable TV when I tell it to.

    I recently purchased a refurbished NTSC D8 camcorder since I had a body of Hi8 tapes I wanted to play but made the mistake of not getting a model with video passthrough capability. So I can't use that to capture video in DV format, only transfer a recording made on the machine.

    Finally decided to get a ADVC110. A camcorder in actuality won't do what I want to do since I have both PAL and NTSC needs and I don't think there is a digital camcorder out there that can take both PAL and NTSC video signals and convert to DV (I am prepared to be corrected here since if there is, I might sell the Canopus and upgrade my camcorder).
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member zoobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Search Comp PM
    Canopus is fine and highly recommended
    You can even sell it when you don't need it anymore
    But use top-notch wires
    Quote Quote  
  24. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dadrab
    So, that leaves me with either doing all my stuff in AVI and recoding, or giving myself an option and building in the Hauppauge 350 (ignores the MV) for personal back-ups.

    The rest of the discussion centers around working with different configurations, finding out what works for me and what doesn't.
    Capturing to MPEG in real time versus capturing to DV and then encoding are two very different processes. Broadly speaking, MPEG is fast while DV is flexible.

    Do you plan on editing?
    Quote Quote  
  25. Member dadrab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    State of Denial, U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Do you plan on editing?
    Yes, I will be doing some editing.

    From what I understand, heavy editing should be done in AVI format. MPEG2 editing is OK for light stuff like cutting out commercials. I'll tell you this, the majority of what I'll be doing would be considered light editing.

    Whizbang special transition effects are not a top priority for me right now. Of course, as I get a little practical experience, I might go in for some more demanding transitions. I also understand that these are better performed in AVI.

    As lchiu7 said, the Haupauge cards have TV tuners on them. That's another stroke in the plus column for that card where I'm concerned. I can see myself recording some TV here and there. At that point, I'll probably put some of those editing tools to work, but if I record from television, I'll be using the hardware encoding on the PVR350.

    By the by, did anyone see this?
    Which segways to another question: Since LCD TVs incorporate the same technology as computer monitors, will interlaced video that looks great on my TV now look crappy when I upgrade to an LCD HDTV? Hummmmm?
    I'm still curious as to the answer on this one.

    Thanks again one and all.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Preservationist davideck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dadrab
    By the by, did anyone see this?
    Which segways to another question: Since LCD TVs incorporate the same technology as computer monitors, will interlaced video that looks great on my TV now look crappy when I upgrade to an LCD HDTV? Hummmmm?
    I'm still curious as to the answer on this one.
    It will depend on the HDTV. The picture quality of interlaced DVDs will be similar to the images from the NTSC tuner.

    If you notice PQ differences between various resolutions/bitrates on your CRT now, then you'll also notice them on an HDTV. Preservation of detail becomes even more important as the screen size increases.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by dadrab
    By the by, did anyone see this?
    Which segways to another question: Since LCD TVs incorporate the same technology as computer monitors, will interlaced video that looks great on my TV now look crappy when I upgrade to an LCD HDTV? Hummmmm?
    I'm still curious as to the answer on this one.
    Like your computer monitor, an LCD HDTV is progressively scanned. Unlike your computer display card, the HDTV will have some form of hardware deinterlacing. Better models will have "cinema" deinterlacers which means they do inverse telecine on the fly when the 2:3 sequence is detected. Performance varies but the better ones will get a true progressive result (i.e. 23.976fps with frames repeated 323232 to 59.94fps progressive refresh).

    Noisy VHS, NTSC broadcasts and home made DVDs will cause the IVTC cadence detection circuits to struggle and cause some display errors. Non film 29.97 fps interlace video will be hardware adaptively deinterlaced. Cheap sets may just do a field blend. Better sets will do a combination bob or weave or other based on realtime pixel block motion analysis.

    Hardware deinterlacers are getting better with each generation and "cinema" processing is being found in lower and lower cost HDTV sets and progressive DVD players.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by davideck
    I have a PVR-250 and it has worked great for my SVHS / VHS captures! I did have sync issues, so an external frame synchronizer (TBC) was necessary for me.

    However, since MV should not be an issue with the 350, I would recommend using a DVD Recorder as a frame synchronizer instead of an external TBC. It may cost less and do more.

    The Toshiba DVD Recorders in particular provide excellent TBC performance. My HDD unit also provides Proc Amp controls in passthru. It makes a great external TBC / Frame Synchronizer / Proc Amp. It is also a great DVD Recorder.
    Can synb problems occur with any capture card at ramdom? what cause it?
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!