VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 29 of 29
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    I've just built a new PC with the following specs:

    - Processor: Intel Core i7 4770k Haswell quad core
    - Motherboard: ASUS Z87 Deluxe Quad (this board has 2 Thunderbolt ports)
    - Graphics card: EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Superclocked
    - RAM: G. Skill Ripjaws 32 GB (4x8GB) 240-pin DDR3 SDRAM 1866
    - SSD: Samsung 840 Evo 750 GB
    - HDD: WD Black Series 4 TB
    - Blu Ray: LC 14x SATA blu ray burner

    I'm looking to get back into video capture. I have several hundred VHS tapes from the 1980s that I wanted to basically treat as a "hobby" and start transferring to AVI. Many years ago, I bought the old Canopus ADVC300 (I believe Canopus is not even around anymore and is owned by Grass Valley) and there seem to be many new devices out there, between the new Grass Valley models and Blackmagic Design.

    Considering I'm looking to do the following:

    - Capture video directly from VHS tapes - most of which I'd describe to be a 7/10-9/10 in quality,
    - Capture video from VHS tapes that have some elements like jumpy video, or video that [when previously captured] wound up having a second or more of delay between audio & video
    - This video will primarily be prepped for web video, and I'd ultimately want to put it on BluRay.

    ...what's the best device for me to look at? I'd be willing to spend around $400 max, but it would be great if there's something suitable for what I'm doing that is in the $200 range.

    I'm sure some might ask why I don't just use the ADVC300 - I figure it's already old technology and I want the newest thing out there, preferably something with Thunderbolt. I've been doing research on many of these new capture devices, and it seems like half the reviews for them are positive, and the other half negative - I'm not sure what side is more believable.

    Thanks
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member hech54's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2001
    Location: Yank in Europe
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage View Post
    I'm sure some might ask why I don't just use the ADVC300 - I figure it's already old technology and I want the newest thing out there
    ....for 80's VHS.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member turk690's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2003
    Location: ON, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    I'd stick with the ADVC300. It's as good as any to capture SD and get DV-AVI files, good, stable, known format, open to recompressing to other formats out there. I also transfer VHS tapes to blu-ray and encode captured DV with presets meant for SD (not HD) with x264, taken from helpful x264 bluray site http://www.x264bluray.com/. Newer capture devices are more meant for direct HD capture and want you to compress on the fly, which make any editing/recompressing after the fact not as flexible as it would have been compared with just starting with DV.
    Stop feeling suicidal just because he unfriended you on fezbuk.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by hech54 View Post
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage View Post
    I'm sure some might ask why I don't just use the ADVC300 - I figure it's already old technology and I want the newest thing out there
    ....for 80's VHS.
    Did you see my comment about Thunderbolt?!
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by turk690 View Post
    I'd stick with the ADVC300. It's as good as any to capture SD and get DV-AVI files, good, stable, known format, open to recompressing to other formats out there. I also transfer VHS tapes to blu-ray and encode captured DV with presets meant for SD (not HD) with x264, taken from helpful x264 bluray site http://www.x264bluray.com/. Newer capture devices are more meant for direct HD capture and want you to compress on the fly, which make any editing/recompressing after the fact not as flexible as it would have been compared with just starting with DV.
    Thanks -- that's good to know!
    Quote Quote  
  6. Mod Neophyte Super Moderator redwudz's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2002
    Location: AZ, USA
    Search Comp PM
    More important than what capture device is which playback device are you using? What VHS deck? Brand and model?

    Do you have a TBC to stabilize the VHS video output?

    Composite or S-Video outputs?

    I would agree with using DV. It's easy to work with for filtering and sync adjustments.
    I still use VirtualDub for that, but using AVISynth is probably a better choice, just a bit more of a learning curve.
    Lot of filters available for VD. I use WinDV for transfer from My ADVC-100.

    I also use Audacity for audio filtering. Just open the file in VD, demux the audio. Then drop it into Audacity, filter, then mux back with the video in VD.
    I just leave VD open for that. You can frameserve the DV file out of VD to a MPEG encoder for authoring to DVD. Or convert it to a more compact
    format like H.264. I mostly use VidCoder for that. I also convert to AC3 audio with Audacity, but that's your choice.

    Alternately, you could use a video capture card, capture using Lagarith or HuffyUV codecs and go from there. You would still need the same VHS setup.
    You will have very good quality most of the time, but huge files. If you have 'several hundred VHS tapes' as I did, DV was a lot easier.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date: Feb 2008
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage View Post

    I'm sure some might ask why I don't just use the ADVC300 - I figure it's already old technology and I want the newest thing out there, preferably something with Thunderbolt. I've been doing research on many of these new capture devices, and it seems like half the reviews for them are positive, and the other half negative - I'm not sure what side is more believable.
    You would be better off using the ADVC300 and putting a firewire card in an empty slot of your new computer.

    If you really want to spend $400, buy a professional grade VCR that has a TBC and svideo.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    I've just built a new PC with the following specs:

    - Processor: Intel Core i7 4770k Haswell quad core
    - Motherboard: ASUS Z87 Deluxe Quad (this board has 2 Thunderbolt ports)
    - Graphics card: EVGA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Superclocked
    - RAM: G. Skill Ripjaws 32 GB (4x8GB) 240-pin DDR3 SDRAM 1866
    - SSD: Samsung 840 Evo 750 GB
    - HDD: WD Black Series 4 TB
    - Blu Ray: LC 14x SATA blu ray burner
    A better computer will not ensure better quality in this day and age with VHS capture, when computers as ancient as 8 years old can be adequate for this task. Better quality starts with a good VCR, for better playback during capture, more than anything.

    However, your advantage here would shine if you wish to plunge into the world of post-processing, and the CPU intensive tasks required for this. You will have shorter times.

    And also capture to SSD if you can, and if it's an internal slave drive, since this is less likely to drop frames.

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    - Capture video directly from VHS tapes - most of which I'd describe to be a 7/10-9/10 in quality,
    Keep in mind, they may be of that quality in the relative light of VHS quality, but in the modern age, this drops drastically. VHS video, no matter how good it was, will not look that great in digital on modern displays/wares.

    I'm not saying this to be negative. Just keep expectations reasonable.

    However, if you wish to learn a few post-processing techniques, this could close the gap from horrid to acceptable to decent quality on the big screen today.

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    - Capture video from VHS tapes that have some elements like jumpy video, or video that [when previously captured] wound up having a second or more of delay between audio & video
    Not sure what you mean by "jumpy", but correction of such would either be with a TBC or with editing, if anything. Depends. Can you be a bit more descriptive? (Or even a sample would help.)

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    - This video will primarily be prepped for web video, and I'd ultimately want to put it on BluRay.
    Yes, for VHS use the SD specs recommended by Turk690. Blu-ray does support it. HD would need more processing, would require much more bandwidth (painful with Web), and would not look any better. In fact it could be counter productive and look worse. HD would be pure overkill for VHS compared to SD (blu-ray/Wed or even with DvD).

    If you need more info on the blu-ray SD spec, and a bit more detail, here's a thread here.

    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/339799-Encoding-SD-video-with-H-264-to-be-100-Blu-ray-compliant

    At the time things were different with the spec and playback wares and encoders so I will need to edit out alot of that extra stuff since things changed - but please tune in in a few weeks when you're ready to encode that DV to x264 SD for blu-ray.

    (Regardless, you should keep your capture Source format, at least after edits, whether it's DV or lossless, or whatnot.)

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    ...what's the best device for me to look at? I'd be willing to spend around $400 max, but it would be great if there's something suitable for what I'm doing that is in the $200 range.
    If you didn't have a device already I myself would recommend either an ATI 600 USB, ezcap.tv (the real one) or a Hauppauge USB-Live2 - all valid, and good quality with USB 2.0, all well below $200. I would capture to lossless with the larger storage available today.

    However, since you already have an ADVC - I too will echo Turk690 and say keep it. The DV video it outputs will be considerably smaller, great for editors and post processing, and will not be more than just a few (MINOR) percentage points weaker in quality compared to the much bigger lossless formats. (Lossless formats IMO are for the purists, or the nitpicky like me. )

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    I'm sure some might ask why I don't just use the ADVC300 - I figure it's already old technology and I want the newest thing out there, preferably something with Thunderbolt. I've been doing research on many of these new capture devices, and it seems like half the reviews for them are positive, and the other half negative - I'm not sure what side is more believable.
    The tech for capture devices for SD or VHS hasn't changed in years, and have pretty much diverged into the Law of Diminishing Returns here, so "old technology" is still current technology here. It's the HD capture devices that are moving forward (and would need hardware comparible to yours to run optimally) and it appears that they have a complete disregard for SD and VHS. In fact purchasing a more expensive high quality unit from BlackMagic or Matrox would be complete overkill for VHS and worse in quality likely. Even an employee of BlackMagic told me directly a while ago that he would recommend the ADVC for VHS capture.

    As for which side is believable, much of the debate has to do with the way DV is decoded. Just choose software that doesn't have that effect.

    More info here:
    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/335134-So-is-any-DV-codec-better-than-MainConcept-a...=1#post2080000

    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/289684-DV-capture-quality-sucks?p=1758114&viewfull=1#post1758114
    Last edited by PuzZLeR; 18th Apr 2014 at 12:51.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage View Post
    Originally Posted by hech54 View Post
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage View Post
    I'm sure some might ask why I don't just use the ADVC300 - I figure it's already old technology and I want the newest thing out there
    ....for 80's VHS.
    Did you see my comment about Thunderbolt?!
    Yes, however there are few devices of any kind on the Windows PC side with a Thunderbolt interface. Are you running OSX? As I recall, the Blackmagic consumer product with a Thunderbolt interface is for OSX only. Blackmagic's product line is also not primarily designed for SD capture, and are particularly poor choices for capturing VHS. If someone wanted to use them for VHS in spite of that, a good full-frame TBC becomes required, not optional equipment, and even then they are not always able to successfully capture from a VHS source.

    Stick with your present firewire device or a get simple USB capture device if you want to try capturing using a losslessly encoded format. The ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB, Hauppauge USB Live 2, and ezcap.tv 116 (not a cheap crap EasyCap device) and Startech SVID2USB2 have all received positive comments from various members of this forum doing VHS captures in losslessly compressed formats.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Thanks to everyone here for these great responses -- I'll hold on to all of this info!

    The new PC should definitely help with post-processing, my older PC was near death as it was, but it wasn't able to handle working with large AVIs. I typically build a new PC every 5 years, and was overdue.

    As for TBC...doesn't the ADVC300 have one built in? In regard to the VCR, it's just an old consumer one. I guess I should consider getting a professional one - any recommendations on a make/model and where to pick it up (aside from ebay)?
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage View Post
    As for TBC...doesn't the ADVC300 have one built in?
    A member here who should know (lordsmurf) since he does VHS restoration in a professional capacity says that the ADVC300's built-in TBC is essentially worthless. See http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/299286-Canopus-ADVC300-TBC-question

    I should have been more specific. For VHS capture BlackMagic's products need a good full-frame TBC in the chain.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    The new PC should definitely help with post-processing, my older PC was near death as it was, but it wasn't able to handle working with large AVIs. I typically build a new PC every 5 years, and was overdue.
    Yes, it will help in handling those heavy AVIs, and working with DV/lossless gives you more flexibility with post-processing. Also, you don't have to wait, for example, 40-50 hours for a 2 hour capture to be done. (Really - this can be the case for a half-decade old computer!)

    That post-processing we've always wanted to do is finally a realistic plan today.

    You would do yourself a favor to look into Neat Video - awesome stuff.

    Also, AviSynth can do lots: Removing crosstalk for composite captures, removing random spots with median techniques, tweaking/stabilizing color, etc - lots more.

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    As for TBC...doesn't the ADVC300 have one built in?
    The term "TBC" is very loosely used. Internal TBCs tend to stabilize jitter and adjust chroma etc, but a full frame external TBC (such as an AVT-8710) will clean the signal coming from VHS (when internal ones won't). Even with the best computer specs, and the best internal "TBC", you can still drop many frames without a full-frame external unit in passthrough.

    VHS is a very harsh signal, and can easily throw off a capture card or computer into dropping frames. There's also the matter of MacroVision and "false positives". A full-frame external TBC can be the only cure here, not what your capture device says they have.

    Originally Posted by Pixelrage
    In regard to the VCR, it's just an old consumer one. I guess I should consider getting a professional one - any recommendations on a make/model and where to pick it up (aside from ebay)?
    I would recommend LordSmurf's Buyer's Guide if this was, like, over 3-4 years ago, but in 2014 you will be dealing with many aging and failing units, and "new ones" that were sitting in a warehouse for years can be problematic from inactivity and/or overpriced. You are rolling a die on this one.

    If you can get a good working, clean, 4-head, HiFi stand-alone (no combo DvD) VCR (and another one or two in the mix since each tape could play better in one or the other) and become adept with post-processing you may be better off right now.

    The good news about 2014 though is that computer resources have grown, CPU/RAM is more powerful, storage is much bigger for those huge AVIs, etc - it's the Age of Post Processing with VHS capture - and many of the features these "super" VCRs have can now be more-or-less equaled (or bettered significantly) with post-processing now.

    I'm probably going to get shot for this but: post-processing today is better than ever, and it closes the gap considerably in quality for captures between a "commonplace" VCR and a "super" VCR.
    Last edited by PuzZLeR; 18th Apr 2014 at 16:23.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Novice
    Join Date: Apr 2014
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Hello, I'm new here. I'm also looking into converting my VHS camcorder tapes (1997-2005), but what I don't understand is why are there recommendations for purchasing capture hardware that are under $100? I don't want to be disappointed with worse video quality in comparison to what can be seen when hooked up to a T.V., so are the recommendations listed above able to output uncompressed video that's near identical to the original quality? Thanks!
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member turk690's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2003
    Location: ON, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Duder_Me View Post
    ...but what I don't understand is why are there recommendations for purchasing capture hardware that are under $100?
    What particular hardware are you talking about and who recommended them?
    Stop feeling suicidal just because he unfriended you on fezbuk.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Novice
    Join Date: Apr 2014
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by turk690 View Post
    Originally Posted by Duder_Me View Post
    ...but what I don't understand is why are there recommendations for purchasing capture hardware that are under $100?
    What particular hardware are you talking about and who recommended them?
    The people who responded to the OP in this thread have recommended the ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB, Hauppauge USB Live 2, ezcap.tv 116, and Startech SVID2USB2. Are there any devices out there that capture far more superior and near original/uncompressed video quality or will any one of these devices get that job done? I understand that a FireWire capture card might do a better job than USB or maybe just a regular PCI capture card, but if I have to go that route, I have to use my old Dell Dimension 4700 desktop with PCI expansion slots, since my laptop doesn't have a FireWire port.

    Some background information: I want to capture some 8mm VHS tapes from 1997-2005. To capture the tapes, I have a Sony Handycam camcorder from the mid 90s. I can't find it right now, so that's all I can go from there.

    Also, I might want to capture commercial VHS tape footage from my 2001 Sharp VC-A410U. It's a simple VCR that I'm used to, but I understand that based on the Amazon description, it enhances the quality of the VHS on playback. It's far from what anyone else on here would recommend, but I'm perfectly fine with it. I also have an old Sony VCR that's wider in dimensions that's stuffed away somewhere, maybe even a JVC as well, but I have no idea what happened to that unit. Those latter two units are from the late 90s.

    I have about 5 or so commercial tapes that I want to capture. I understand there may be some copy protection getting in the way, so what's an affordable and quality TBC device that will do the job?

    As for capture software, which is the best one, and what are the exact settings that I should use for capturing uncompressed? HDD space isn't an issue. I may have to convert them to a compressed format later on for portable viewing, but unless I manage to obtain a external HDD with substantial storage space, I may not have to convert at all.

    If what I'm asking for requires me to spend $500+ in total, I'm fine with that, it's just that I would only be able to get around to working on the conversion late in the year. If it's a $150-200 or less solution, then I can get to work on conversion soon, but I guess waiting a couple more months wouldn't hurt.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Duder_Me View Post
    Originally Posted by turk690 View Post
    Originally Posted by Duder_Me View Post
    ...but what I don't understand is why are there recommendations for purchasing capture hardware that are under $100?
    What particular hardware are you talking about and who recommended them?
    The people who responded to the OP in this thread have recommended the ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB, Hauppauge USB Live 2, ezcap.tv 116, and Startech SVID2USB2. Are there any devices out there that capture far more superior and near original/uncompressed video quality or will any one of these devices get that job done? I understand that a FireWire capture card might do a better job than USB or maybe just a regular PCI capture card, but if I have to go that route, I have to use my old Dell Dimension 4700 desktop with PCI expansion slots, since my laptop doesn't have a FireWire port.

    Some background information: I want to capture some 8mm VHS tapes from 1997-2005. To capture the tapes, I have a Sony Handycam camcorder from the mid 90s. I can't find it right now, so that's all I can go from there.
    Lots of people use firewire devices with good results, but they only output video using DV compression and so do not offer the opportunity to capture using other video formats. The sub-$100 USB devices all output uncompressed video, and no there is nothing better for use with a computer made in the last 6 years or so when capturing analog tapes in an uncompressed or losslessly compressed digital format.

    Most people here with SD capture experience would tell you not bother with uncompressed capture. It is not worth the extra hard drive space. Use lossless compression instead.

    ...and before we go any further with your questions, the OP started this thread to address his questions. You should start your own thread instead of hijacking someone else's thread.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 18th Apr 2014 at 23:45.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Novice
    Join Date: Apr 2014
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    Originally Posted by Duder_Me View Post
    Lots of people use firewire devices with good results, but they only output video using DV compression and so do not offer the opportunity to capture using other video formats. The sub-$100 USB devices all output uncompressed video, and no there is nothing better for use with a computer made in the last 6 years or so when capturing analog tapes in an uncompressed or losslessly compressed digital format.

    Most people here with SD capture experience would tell you not bother with uncompressed capture. It is not worth the extra hard drive space. Use lossless compression instead.

    ...and before we go any further with your questions, the OP started this thread to address his questions. You should start your own thread instead of hijacking someone else's thread.
    Thank you for clarifying. Also, I'm sorry about not starting a new thread. Originally I was just going to ask why the sub-$100 devices were recommended, but I thought I should also clarify what my uses were going to be for the capturing device in order to get a more relevant answer.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Hello all,
    I am also looking to do the same - home videos from the 80's on some VHS and 8mm taken with my Sony CCD-TRV41 (which unfortunately is not operational currently). I have a JVC S9600U which provides great playback quality for the VHS tapes. But I don't currently have an input device for my PC. I'll probably want to do some video editing on the PC and the only software I currently have is Corel VideoStudio X2 which was not very friendly on my older machines (haven't loaded it on the new one yet). I should say that I have a DVR with an HDD that I've recorded a number of shows on and would eventually like to get them over to the PC as well. I was thinking an HDMI input capture device for that but not sure if that's overkill (for example the Avermedia ExtremeCap U3). Suggestions welcome.
    Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by b1lanc View Post
    Hello all,
    I am also looking to do the same - home videos from the 80's on some VHS and 8mm taken with my Sony CCD-TRV41 (which unfortunately is not operational currently). I have a JVC S9600U which provides great playback quality for the VHS tapes. But I don't currently have an input device for my PC. I'll probably want to do some video editing on the PC and the only software I currently have is Corel VideoStudio X2 which was not very friendly on my older machines (haven't loaded it on the new one yet). I should say that I have a DVR with an HDD that I've recorded a number of shows on and would eventually like to get them over to the PC as well. I was thinking an HDMI input capture device for that but not sure if that's overkill (for example the Avermedia ExtremeCap U3). Suggestions welcome.
    Thanks.
    Did you not bother to read this thread? An HDMI capture is not a merely overkill for analog SD and VHS capture, it likely won't even work as well for that as the sub $100 devices.

    Don't get a USB 3.0 capture device unless your PC meets all its technical requirements, including having one of the specific USB controllers needed. Otherwise you are wasting your money buying one for HDMI capture as well.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Yes I did read the thread - did you not read my questions? I have an old usb Startech video capture device which at it's best, would or would not work with Corel on any given occasion. Sometimes Corel would detect it, sometimes it would not.

    The HDMI capture is for 1080p recordings not VHS. Two different issues but both need a capture device.

    Point being, I would prefer not to buy two devices, one for the VHS, and one for HDMI and I have checked out the specifications for the ExtremeCap U3 and do have the supported USB 3.0 controller. I can buy an ExtremeCap and a Hauppauge PVR 2 for around $70. Seems pointless to buy two devices especially when the Hauppauge takes in HDMI, component, and S-Video.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2006
    Location: United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by b1lanc View Post
    Yes I did read the thread - did you not read my questions? I have an old usb Startech video capture device which at it's best, would or would not work with Corel on any given occasion. Sometimes Corel would detect it, sometimes it would not.

    The HDMI capture is for 1080p recordings not VHS. Two different issues but both need a capture device.

    Point being, I would prefer not to buy two devices, one for the VHS, and one for HDMI and I have checked out the specifications for the ExtremeCap U3 and do have the supported USB 3.0 controller. I can buy an ExtremeCap and a Hauppauge PVR 2 for around $70. Seems pointless to buy two devices especially when the Hauppauge takes in HDMI, component, and S-Video.
    Different kinds of devices and software are appropriate for standard definition capture (especially VHS) and high definition capture from a PVR. The HD-PVR 2 is fine for capturing HD video via HDMI or component video from an HD DVR, but it is not good for VHS capture either. Like almost all HD capture devices it has difficulty with SD analog signals from VHS. It would need a full-frame TBC in the chain to be able to stay locked onto the signal. I guess that for some unknown reason the idea of needing to spend an extra $200+ for a full-frame TBC (as mentioned earlier in this thread) bothers you less than spending under $100 for one of the USB capture devices mentioned in this thread. Although a full-frame TBC may be needed for SD capture devices to succeed with some difficult tapes, one isn't always going to be necessary. PS Corel Video Studio is not what most people use for VHS capture, or even editing the captured video and audio. Virtualdub tends to be favored for that. To be honest, I rarely see a favorable comment about any Corel products here.

    However, if you aren't willing to listen to advice that doesn't confirm that what you want to do is a good idea for making VHS captures, then don't ask for any advice here. Just go buy whatever you like, and struggle with getting it to work on your own. The VHS capture experts here won't be able to help you overcome the built-in limitations of the hardware you bought.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 24th Apr 2014 at 20:03.
    Quote Quote  
  22. The ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB is about the best you'll find in the consumer space. You might have problems getting it to run on current Windows systems. And I don't know how well it handles sync timing errors common in VHS.

    A comparison of several capture devices:
    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/329016-2001-2010-my-capture-cards-comparison-screen...ti+600+theater

    The more important issue with VHS is the deck used to play the tape. You want line time base corrector to reduce horizontal jitter, flagging, etc. If your tapes aren't in very good shape you want an external full frame TBC to provide a constant signal. You want a deck that doesn't have a strong sharpening filter that creates halos.

    In lieu of the line and full frame TBC you can use an old Panasonic DVD recorder in pass-through mode to clean up the timing.
    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/319420-Who-uses-a-DVD-recorder-as-a-line-TBC-and-what-do-you-use
    Last edited by jagabo; 24th Apr 2014 at 20:51.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    The ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB is about the best you'll find in the consumer space. You might have problems getting it to run on current Windows systems. And I don't know how well it handles sync timing errors common in VHS.

    A comparison of several capture devices:
    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/329016-2001-2010-my-capture-cards-comparison-screen...ti+600+theater

    The more important issue with VHS is the deck used to play the tape. You want line time base corrector to reduce horizontal jitter, flagging, etc. If your tapes aren't in very good shape you want an external full frame TBC to provide a constant signal. You want a deck that doesn't have a strong sharpening filter that creates halos.

    In lieu of the line and full frame TBC you can use an old Panasonic DVD recorder in pass-through mode to clean up the timing.
    http://forum.videohelp.com/threads/319420-Who-uses-a-DVD-recorder-as-a-line-TBC-and-what-do-you-use
    Thank you. The JVC 9600 has a built in TBC and I also have a Grex in-line. Older posts (way older - 2001) in this forum indicate that the JVC Digipure technology is full frame but there seems to be some question. I have to say the output quality of my old tapes is outstanding playing them on the widescreen TV. The tapes are from the early 80's and first generation GE Camcorder (big camera and two part VCR). Because I was cheap, dumb, and tapes were pricy back then, I recorded at max length. When I played them back on my Sharp and Samsung VCRs, they were very grainy pictures and tracking was all over the map. Have to say resounding yes on with the JVC. Absolutely no jitter, smoothed out the grainy display, and no tracking issues (the original VCR recorder/camera was not good at tracking - same tape track was way different each time I started to record on the same tape).

    Thanks for the links above as they are very informative. There is a thread that folks are getting the ATI to work on Win 8 using the older Vista drivers.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Originally Posted by b1lanc View Post
    The JVC 9600 has a built in TBC and I also have a Grex in-line. Older posts (way older - 2001) in this forum indicate that the JVC Digipure technology is full frame but there seems to be some question.
    Yes, indications are that it has a full frame TBC with a 4 MB frame buffer. Assuming that your video is as clean as VHS gets, and that your current capture device is decent, a better capture device probably won't do much for you. VHS has such low resolution that sharper capture isn't going to help. It's so noisy that a little less noise in the capture device isn't going to help. If your current driver and capture software has all the features you need a different capture device isn't going to help -- and may make things worse as features tend to get dropped rather than new features added (because the influx of $35 capture devices took all the profit out of the market, no manufacturer will spend money on the driver/software anymore).

    Originally Posted by b1lanc View Post
    There is a thread that folks are getting the ATI to work on Win 8 using the older Vista drivers.
    Yes, I've seen some of those threads. One thing to watch out for: you often lose some features with newer drivers -- like proc amp controls, control of the sharpening feature, noise reduction, etc.
    Last edited by jagabo; 25th Apr 2014 at 10:55.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    The ATI TV Wonder HD 600 USB is about the best you'll find in the consumer space. You might have problems getting it to run on current Windows systems. And I don't know how well it handles sync timing errors common in VHS.
    I agree the ATI 600 USB is an arguable best choice for analog/VHS and SD captures.

    If the sync issues you're referring to is A/V sync, meh, nothing an editor can't easily handle. With the ATI 600 it's not any worse than most any other capture device, and it's mostly a linear shift throughout anyway, if at all.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by b1lanc
    Thank you. The JVC 9600 has a built in TBC and I also have a Grex in-line. Older posts (way older - 2001) in this forum indicate that the JVC Digipure technology is full frame but there seems to be some question. I have to say the output quality of my old tapes is outstanding playing them on the widescreen TV. The tapes are from the early 80's and first generation GE Camcorder (big camera and two part VCR). Because I was cheap, dumb, and tapes were pricy back then, I recorded at max length. When I played them back on my Sharp and Samsung VCRs, they were very grainy pictures and tracking was all over the map. Have to say resounding yes on with the JVC. Absolutely no jitter, smoothed out the grainy display, and no tracking issues (the original VCR recorder/camera was not good at tracking - same tape track was way different each time I started to record on the same tape).
    My recent posts are veering more and more towards being NOT so impressed with these so-called "super" VCRs. I have three of them and am using them less and less in this Age of Post Processing for VHS captures.

    I have one of these JVC models people talk about, and yes, for nice clear tapes (such as commercial/professional) it can be unbeatable in quality. But the VCR's filters simply don't impress me on many older, more difficult, tapes, such as with EP/SLP recordings/2nd generation/TV recordings on cheap tapes, etc. The noisy/dirty video that comes from them can look horrible when filtered with these JVC units (smeary, plasticky and jitter worse than ever as the internal TBC is thrown off).

    Depending on tape, such a JVC model can be the worst choice you can make.

    Also if you're getting a good clear picture - look again. It may be a smoothing effect that not only eliminates much noise, but removes lots of detail along with it to give it that texture of a clean output.
    Last edited by PuzZLeR; 25th Apr 2014 at 12:49. Reason: Grammar Only
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Originally Posted by PuzZLeR View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    I don't know how well it handles sync timing errors common in VHS.
    If the sync issues you're referring to is A/V sync, meh
    No, I mean problems like false macrovision detection (and resulting corrupt picture) and lockups from time base errors. For example, the original Hauppauge HD PVR can capture analog SD but the device often locks up and requires a power cycle if there's a glitch in the tape -- or if you FF or RW.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Member PuzZLeR's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2006
    Location: Toronto Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    Originally Posted by PuzZLeR View Post
    Originally Posted by jagabo View Post
    I don't know how well it handles sync timing errors common in VHS.
    If the sync issues you're referring to is A/V sync, meh
    No, I mean problems like false macrovision detection (and resulting corrupt picture) and lockups from time base errors. For example, the original Hauppauge HD PVR can capture analog SD but the device often locks up and requires a power cycle if there's a glitch in the tape -- or if you FF or RW.
    Yes indeed, there are such errors on the ATI 600 USB from some tapes (not all, but enough). It won't need a restart but it will drop many frames on a difficult tape, and almost always drops at least a dozen more especially if there's a "harsh chasm" (that snow-noise between recordings).

    Forwarding and rewinding doesn't work well - either in capturing or in previewing, but doesn't throw it off when normal playback is resumed. Also, any false positive I would get with the 600 would also be similar with other capture devices like it regardless.

    But I don't expect the 600 to handle that when I believe such meltdowns are more rule than exception with most capture devices when handling the harsh signal from VHS. When using a proper TBC in the chain, which one should for such difficult tapes, such problems are eliminated or greatly minimized. (I use the AVT-8710 in tandem).

    On clean signals, such as those from high quality analog TV, the ATI performs rather flawlessly in stand-alone, with no external help in the chain.

    If anybody needs me to run a particular test I'd be happy to do so.
    I hate VHS. I always did.
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by PuzZLeR View Post
    My recent posts are veering more and more towards being NOT so impressed with these so-called "super" VCRs. I have three of them and am using them less and less in this Age of Post Processing for VHS captures.

    I have one of these JVC models people talk about, and yes, for nice clear tapes (such as commercial/professional) it can be unbeatable in quality. But the VCR's filters simply don't impress me on many older, more difficult, tapes, such as with EP/SLP recordings/2nd generation/TV recordings on cheap tapes, etc. The noisy/dirty video that comes from them can look horrible when filtered with these JVC units (smeary, plasticky and jitter worse than ever as the internal TBC is thrown off).

    Depending on tape, such a JVC model can be the worst choice you can make.

    Also if you're getting a good clear picture - look again. It may be a smoothing effect that not only eliminates much noise, but removes lots of detail along with it to give it that texture of a clean output.
    Interesting you should mention this. I just tried playing some additional tapes, some I recorded over the air and some commercially recorded. The results were spotty. A movie I recorded over the air in the late 80's played well on the Samsung and Sharp through the Grex, but there was a great deal of tracking issues on the JVC and it appeared more grainy. Then again, an old rental movie that was unviewable (being very faded) was very clear and colorful on the JVC but bright and faded on the Samsung and Sharp. EP tapes seemed to be worse on the JVC except for the home recorded, some of which were SP and some of which were EP.
    Quote Quote