Canopus ADVC-100 supporters - make your voice heard !!!

[lordsmurf]

Let me start off by saying I do like and respect the Canopus ADVC for what it can do (quality DV AVI with audio/video sync). However, these past few weeks I've seen far too many posts and had far too many e-mails asking about the quality of the ADVC and comparing it to an ATI AIW and others.

I want to point out a few facts about it, as well as pose a few questions. If I'm wrong anywhere, let me know (I'm not perfect - if I was, I'd be rich). While I have looked into this device many times, I don't own one, nor do I have the money to buy one for testing.

I've had discussion with many members (infamous and not) here about this device, some supporters, some haters.

-------------------------

FACT #1 - The Canopus ADVC is NOT a capture card. It is a capture DEVICE. The capturing is done in the device itself, and the finished data is transferred to your computer by the firewire card. It is no more a capture CARD than a stand-alone DVD recorder.

FACT #2 - You have no options. This is a DV AVI device, and will ONLY transfer DV AVI to your computer. No other capturing formats (HuffYUV, MJPEG, MPEG, Divx, you-name-it) are allowed or even available.

FACT #3 - It will only accept s-video and composite input. It has NO coax availability and NO tuner. It 's only purpose is to grab DV AVI. It can do NOTHING more.

FACT #4 - If you want to capture MPEG format, look elsewhere. As stated above, this will only grab DV AVI. All DVD-desired work must be encoded AGAIN before it is in the proper video format for DVD. This is probably not a choice for the casual user looking to merely convert VHS.

OBSERVATION #1 - It seems that audio/video sync is the main reason people like this device. While that can be a problem, it's normally the fault of the computer system. Since you are removing the uncooperative computer from the capture situation, it comes as NO SURPRISE that this is a "fix" to that situation. Many capture card users (like myself) have no sync issues.

OBSERVATION #2 - Dropped frames is another gripe that ADVC users had with other cards. Again, that was the system or a cheap card. Once again, by spending real money on a decent capturing setup AND removing the uncooperative computer from the scenario, it comes as NO SURPRISE that the users suddenly had a better experience. Many capture card users (like myself) have no dropped frames issues.

OBSERVATION #3 - Many users prefer the external device out of fear of opening up the system and sticking in a new card, which is equally easy. (added at the EDIT)

QUESTION #1 - Can you even preview what you are "capturing" with the ADVC? Or are you stuck guessing until the final DV files is one your computer.

QUESTION #2 - BJ_M has stated that MainConcept 1.4 works well with external cards. Does the ADVC take advantage of the MPEG capture function? Or, as I believe, is it stuck doing PURE DV and NOTHING more? If it DOES use MainConcept 1.4 for MPEG capture, has it been successful?

OPINION #1 - While the Canopus DV capture may be better than the AVI from another card like an ATI, that is still hotly debated between members. A quick forum search turned up some ugly debates (and I know/knew some of the people on both sides of the debate). This leads me to the next opinion...

OPINION #2 - Even if the ADVC is slightly better than another card when acquiring AVI data, is it REALLY worth $250 as compared to a cheap $50 card that can do just fine? Or should you spend $250 on DV only when you can grab a full ATI AIW card with numerous options at the same price? I'd say "no" - the ADVC is NOT worth that much money. The quality difference (if one exists) is surely not worth such a huge leap in pricing. I've had it mentioned to me before that the price was likely based off the Canopus name, and not the product itself.

---------------------

Now compare this to what can be done with other cards. I'd buy any other card any day of the week. Why spend $250 if a $50 card can do the same. Or spend the $250 and get a true capture card FULL of features (like an ATI All In Wonder or another one).

So when do I think a Canopus ADVC should be considered? Well, go off observation #1 and #2. If you fit in that situation. Or if you want to ADD a Canopus ADVC to an existing capture card system (to use potentially higher-quality DV for editing-only purposes).

EDIT: Also, since this device allows for easy portability and high compatibility among varied systems (since no computer is required except to dump DV data on the hard drive via transfer software), that would be a good reason.

Alright, I think I've put it on the line. Canopus owners... supporters... haters... give me a response. I'd like to cure the Canopus rumors and describe and show this thing for what it really is: an expensive DV AVI capture device.

[Will Hay]

Firstly, great post.
The intent is clear but delivered in a format so as to prevent flaming
Now, the debate
I'm a big, big ATI fan and I've only owned one.
I have a cheap Radeon 64mb DDR ViVo and in the ten months I've used it I've had times back in the value it cost me.
As you know smurfy I'm considering the ADVC-100, I've been banging on about it for a fortnight now.
The reason is simple.
I can't trust that, what with my limited knowledge of computers (despite building my own that's the limit of my ability) I'll be able to invest in another ATI (AIW, yes?) that will give my the trouble-free operation I envisage with the ADVC-100.
Another reason is I love firewire. It's soooooooo simple, flawless in fact.
There's no "should I use MMC 7.1", it just sounds effortless although I acknowledge there's been a couple of posts recently reporting problems.
I only need to convet VHS footage, possibly some analogue camocrder stuff from time to time (friends and family) and want to ensure I don't suffer sync issues as a result of bad tapes.
I can live with frame loss providing the cause is the source.
I syffer around ten frames lost now over a thirty minute period, stunning if you ask me, but I don't feel the ATI is 'up to it' when faced with poor quality source material.
I can't afford the ADVC-100, I'm hoodwinking my wife and having a pal in Sebastopol, Calif order it for me and ship it over (packaging removed, named as used goods) to save a little money.
Trust me, if I could achieve what I wanted I'd stick with ATI.
Maybe it's niavity, maybe it's laziness/the easy option, but there you are, I've opened my soul for all to see...
...hate me for it
Will

[pb]

Fact 1 - Yes

Fact 2 - Yes, apart from PAL/NTSC and some other dip switch settings for uminance levels(?), and AV/DV in select

Fact 3 - Yes, in OR out

Fact 4 - Yes, as its intended for.

Observation 1 - Yes, and to convert analogue to didgital and vice versa, its primary function.

Observation 2 - Yes, why bother with capture cards and driver/hardware issues.

Q1 - preview is entirely dependent on the capturing application you use. I use Vegas 4, and have a preview, as do most other editing/capture apps.

Q2 - MC 1.4, I don't know, but the web site claims capturing from digital sources,a nd as they make the encoder for a few editing apps I would think so. I have used IuVCR to capture from the ADVC 100, and Ulead Video Studio can use it to capture straight to mpeg 2.

The device is intended as a prosumer analogue to digital converter which it does well. Its flexible in that it has no driver requirements outside of the OS recognising 1394 devices, and as such appears as a AVDV device in Windows etc, allowing it to be used on any PC you might have. It can be used to preview video in applications that allow this feature e.g. Vegas, so that you can see in real or near real time on an external monitor/TV the effects etc as you edit. It imposes no intensive cpu loading when capturing, making it suitable for lower spec PC's.

[Bondiablo]

I think you may want to change just two words in your post, FACT & OBSERVATION.

The ADVC is certainly much closer to a capture card than a stand alone DVD recorder. Although it's almost as simple to use and at least as reliable as recording to a stand alone it's function is definitely that of a capture card. Really you have whatever options you want. If your software accepts DV input you can capture to any format your software will output, though trying to capture to Huffy or uncompressed AVI would be rather pointless, you can capture straight to MPEG. How is that any different than most capture cards, except the ones that do true hardware encoding? But, by your logic the cards that do true hardware encoding would be no more a capture card than a stand alone DVD recorder. :P Yes, the ADVC is meant to capture to DV AVI and that is how it works best but of course once you have your DV AVI on your computer you have all the options to manipulate and convert your video that you have with any card plus it's in an excellent format for doing these things. It's true that the ADVC-100 doesn't have it's own tuner but it accepts DV input as well as S-video and composite audio/video and it's purpose is to grab any DV or analog source (including broadcasts) and convert it to DV AVI on your computer. In the case of the 100 it can also send your edited footage back to tape. What more do you want it to do, make you a snack will it's working? As for your observations, you seem to admit that the ADVC solves the biggest problems people have with analog captures but then totally discount the value of this fact.

To answer your questions: Yes, you can preview your captures and in the case of the 100 you can do so even if your software doesn't support it by connecting the analog outputs to a separate TV monitor. I don't know if it works with MainConcept, as I said above your software must accept DV input but if it does you can capture to whatever formats the software allows. If it accepts input from a DV cam it will work with the ADVC. I don't think anyone ever said the quality was better than AVI just that it's easier and more reliable, you can however certainly get better quality using the ADVC than you can capturing straight to MPEG with an analog card. The quality of the ADVC is really about the same as capturing to uncompressed AVI and maybe Huffy but it isn't plagued by the problems associated with analog captures and the file sizes are a bit more manageable at about 12GB per hour. I've captured up to 3 hours with the ADVC-100 without any problems or a single dropped frame and continued to do other work on the same computer at the same time. Also, though I prefer the quality achieved by using the ADVC as it was intended, I have tried capturing direct to MPEG using PowerVCR II and the quality was better than I expected from this method. Now whether or not it's worth the money is totally up to you. I think it's a pretty versatile little device and well worth what I paid for mine also there are similar devices for less money like the DataVideo DAC-100. I believe the highest praise I can give the ADVC-100 is, it's one of the very few items I've ever purchased that does exactly what it says it does and does it at least as well as all the claims made about it.

[sammie]

Reasonable analysis LordSmurf. To me it came down to this. From what I've been able to read, and in my hands at least, to do capturing right, you really essentially need a dedicated computer that is stripped of virtually everything not needed to capture and encode and that is all it does. Well, I couldn't afford an exta computer so to me the question was $250 vs $1,200. Bottom line is I just plug the AVDC in to my regular box, and never have to worry about a dropped frame or out of sync audio. Is the video perfect? No, but it is at least equivalent to everything I've seen except some of the high end WiNov and Hauppauge cards, and I'm usually very picky about the vid quality.

Yes, it only captures in DV-avi, but many apps allow preview while capturing.

[arcorob]

Lord Smurf,

I think you missed some points entirely and that is form and function. I have BOTH an AIW card and the ADVC as I use them for different reasons. Primarily these days, I have switched over to 90% ADVC.

The ADVC differs primarily in that it is a transfer box. It is not limited or clunky like the AIW and also adheres much better to spec than does AIW (We all know how bad ATI software is). To throw OTHER tools into the mix is unfair as they are not part of ATI AIW or Canopus ADVC.

As to capturing from COAX, I do it all the time. COAX to VCR to ADVC to Computer. My VCR is another hub, always connected to the ADVC and also connected to a DVD player so.....

I can write to VCR tape from computer through ADVC without trying to get my monitor in output mode (a nightmare in ATI AIW) just by telling my software, write to tape. Treats it like a digital video cam and right out in AVI full format.

I can read a VCR tape, I can read from TV (coax through VCR to digital)

All in all, the ADVC is a great transfer box, acting like a traffic cop. The AIW to me was originally a way to get analog data into a computer and had a nice (but underpowered) TV tuner card.

[overloaded_ide]

First, what's the difference between Camcorder DV and Canopus DV?

Does canopus detect VHS protection? I am trying to backup many tapes as well as set up a comercial venture. The tapes often have protections, but of course the comercail venture does not! I have been thinking about a Canopus ADVC myself, but undecided.

I have a Canon ZR60 that converts VHS to DV. It DOES detect copy protection also though. So for work it might be ok, but not for my tape backups.
The video conversion is good, costs $320 mailorder online and and does much more than convert, it also records! I bought mine locally for $500 but don't like it that well, so I am returning it. For $300 it might be worthwhile. It's the recording I'm not happy with.

Point 1, camcorder doesn't cost that much more, but does a ton more.
Someone mentioned wear and tear on one in another post, I don't think anything on this one is in use other than the eye viewfinder and electronics, speaker if volume is turned up. He was wrong about motors and tape loaders ect.., they do not have any use in converting and don't run, at least on this one

Point 2, I never solved the NO audio problem with the DV AVI files either!
Eveything I was told and read so far, says I have audio in the DV AVI file.
I used type 1 and 2 DV. SO firewire DV is not really foolproof either!

I would consider NO audio worse than out of sync audio!
I rarely if ever have out of sync with ATI, maybe once!
I never drop frames!

I did use My DVD program while a freind was here, it grabed the DV file from firewire and the program converted it to Mpeg2, that had audio. But it is the only program so far that has! He left, I don't have the program, I don't like the quality I got with that program anyway, so I am back to no audio again and ATI AIW analog captures which are perfect!

So My DVD proves I had sound and camcorder and firewire was working correctly, so why don't any of the other DV programs have sound? WOuld I have the same problem with DV from the canopus? I think I would.

Point 3, Portable,
If it works well without problems, It would be nice to have one little device easily moved from sytsem to system.
Lots of problems trying to drag an ATI card around town, but one little firewire device would be easy! Portablity is good.
I could take it to the system in town and work in the office, bring it home nights and weekends to work at home. Capture to one system, then start a capture to a second system and work on the files on the first.
One of the reasons I was trying the camcorder as a analog to Dv converter with firewire. So I could move it around.

[painkiller]

I have and use both the Hauppage 350 TV/FM radio capture card as well as the ADVC-100. Both are excellent products.
And the above leading (first) post is quite well done.

As an added piece of info, I tried using Scenalyzer for using/inputting DV video but, no matter what I did, that software didn't work for me.

In its place, I bought the Edit Studio software from Pure Motion.
This is an excellent software package for capturing and editing DV video.
I also chose to get that company's mpeg encoder.
Not sorry I did.

Since I have a vcr ahead of the Hauppage card, on the RF video line, I connected the composite output to the ADVC-100.

So if one goes bad, I can use the other in its place. (And that has happened.)

Since Edit Studio is now up to version 4.03, it has a considerable boost in speed with its encoder and I have transformed an hour of TV programming, minus commercials, boosted volume to VC or DVD in about 2 hours after capture.

Not bad.

And I do still use Vdub and all the rest.

Thought y'all might like to know other options.

[rhegedus]

Good post! Are you txpharoah's twin?

FACT #2 - You have no options. This is a DV AVI device, and will ONLY transfer DV AVI to your computer. No other capturing formats (HuffYUV, MJPEG, MPEG, Divx, you-name-it) are allowed or even available.

Why would you want to capture to another (MPEG 1/2) format first?

I presume most people capture video to burn onto CD or DVD. If you're going to do this then you're going to have to start working out bitrates in order to fill the whole disk - and you can forget about true VBR on the fly!

At least with DV you can do all your editing and effects before encoding to whatever format and then fill your disk exactly.

Yes, I know it all takes time and space - but if you're going to do at all, do it properly.

[Redeye07]

Speaking as a newbie, most of the stuff I read on this site translates to "blah, blah, blah, and blah" and makes my head hurt; it's not easy learning this process.

I wanted a device that was EASY to install and VERY EASY to use.

The ADVC-100 has been absolutely problem-free for me -- plug it in and you're good to go -- no software, no complicated settings, and the macrovision workaround is great, and more importantly to me, it's EASY.

[overloaded_ide]

I've seen alot of people mention firewire devices like a cure all for some things. Not just here, but locally. And being we get so many newbies...

I would like to point out you still need a decent system!
Someone recently bought a firewire card and stuck it in their system near me and connected their DV camcorder to it.
I never saw such a mess!!!

I swear I think they had a Pentium 133 with 8 megs(pc 100) ram and a slow hard drive (very fragmented too)!!
I mean the firewire card installed ok, but was useless. Must have been 15 of 20 frames dropped! If they even captured that many! They called me to help fix it
Though their system was not really that low powered, I was surprised it would even play a DVD!!
It was only about 45 minutes of footage so I did it for them analog on my system.

Point is firewire does not fix a crappy system and does still drop frames.
Once the Tape starts rolling firewire doesn't care if the system records it or not, it just keeps moving! So if the system can't keep up you will still drop frames!
Just like a VCR plays the tape rather the TV is on or off!

[overloaded_ide]

Redeye07

Speaking as a newbie, most of the stuff I read on this site translates to "blah, blah, blah, and blah" and makes my head hurt; it's not easy learning this process.

You are correct! If a person doesn't understand any of this stuff, then it makes no sence, but once you read enough blah, blah, blah, and blah
to start getting an understanding of the proccesses then it starts making more sence and BLah Blah turns into useful information
No it's not easy, but if you want to do something right then it takes time to learn, and patience like anything else.
Otherwise buy 2 vcrs and macro defeater and stick with tapes
DVDs are going to die out like Laser disks anyway!

The ADVC-100 has been absolutely problem-free for me -- plug it in and you're good to go -- no software, no complicated settings, and the macrovision workaround is great, and more importantly to me, it's EASY

Hmm no software, no settings? Are we talking about making a DVD on a computer or a settop recorder?? How do you capture DV video by firewire and make a DVD without software??? That I would really like to know, it would help me alot!! :P

I am glad you found a good way to do what you want though!
For me though, so far I still need software and various settings to get the results I want

[macm]

I want to point out a few facts about it, as well as pose a few questions. If I'm wrong anywhere, let me know (I'm not perfect - if I was, I'd be rich). While I have looked into this device many times, I don't own one, nor do I have the money to buy one for testing.

Hi Lordsmurf, just to remind you, even those not perfect anyway, are RICH!!! what about BILL $$$$$$$$ GATE$?? He, or what he pretend to do, is far from any perfection, and he is far from a poor guy.

[Robert Simandl]

Here's another question...

I've read enough to get the idea that I can hook the ADVC-100 to my Athlon 800mHz system and capture DV with no significant problems.

Can I use something like Ulead VideoStudio to capture direct to MPEG-2 from the ADVC-100, or will that tax my 800mHz CPU too much?

Thanks,

[painkiller]

If it helps anyone, .....

Once I installed the firwire card and hooked up the ADVC-100 to it, then plugged in the cables from the vcr to that - any software that I had installed that reads the input from a DV device worked.

I have installed, und have used, Ulead, Pinnalce, Pure Motion software to capture video.

(Movie Factory 2, Edition, Edit Studio, AVIO.)

Any software that is advertised to use DV equipment will see and capture video from the ADVC-100.

Although, to be completely honest, I have never gotten Scenalyzer to work - in my case. That one remains a mystery to me - despite the many people (here) that claim it is an easy and cheap solution for DV capturing.
(I'm sure it is, would have loved to have known it for sure though.)

[painkiller]

Forgot. One more thing.

DV (digital video) captures do not "go directly to mpeg" - they are extremely large avi files referred to as either Type 1, or Type 2, digital video files. In my case, a one hour capture runs around 12 meg or so. (Off hand, I don' recall the rate of capture. But this is the main reason you need very large dives if you intend to collect and process hours of video.)

After you capture it, you edit it, trim it, crop it, enhance/fix the volume (sound), correct the color (if you feel it needs it). Then you can either save it as another DV file (type 1 or 2 avi), or encode it to another format such as mpeg1 for a vcd, mpeg2 for dvd, or what-have you.

Hope that helps.

[i_am_dave]

Man, what a good topic! I've had my ADVC-100 for almost a year now.
It is connected via my VCR in most cases. This is how I transfer tapes, and this is how I encode from coax.
I use it with Video Studio when pulling from tape and with iuVCR when I want to schedule a capture when I'm not at home or in bed.
No complaints from me.
It is well worth the money I paid. And besides, it is portable!

[Metaluna]

The way I look at it, the ADVC-100 is like the Toyota Camry of capture devices. It's not the cheapest or the best performing, but it's reliable, easy to use, and gets the job done very well in most cases. Furthermore, it's common enough to be widely "supported" and easy to find parts for (the analogy being the DV and 1394 standards). Can you beat it in performance? Yes. You can get a sports car or 4x4 or whatever that matches your specific needs better, but generally these will require a little more knowledge and effort to get them to perform at their best.

I have both an AIW 9x00 (two actually...long story) and an ADVC-100. Though I slightly prefer the quality of the AIW's capture and MPEG2 encoding, I often find myself falling back to the Canopus just because it's so reliable, and because the DV format is so easy to work with (yes, I know you don't have to capture to MPEG2 on the AIW, and I plan to experiment with some other codecs like huffyuv and MJPEG soon). Also I find that the AIW drops frames more easily than the Canopus on some tapes. On the other hand, following Lord Smurf's tips on avoiding dropped frames, last night I was able to capture 4 straight hours of video from one particular EP-mode VHS tape without a single frame drop on an AIW 9000 w/MMC8.7. That is pretty impressive considering how much more stuff the PC is doing (MPEG2 encoding, etc.) than with an ADVC-100. This was on a 2GHz AMD system that I use as my dedicated capture/editing/encoding box.

[dun4cheap]

I myself have been considering getting the ADVC50 or 100. More than likely I will go with the 100. I have been an ATI fan for many years. But the fact is AIW and PCI Wonder is not a viable solution. These are the reasons why.


FACT1: To many factors are involved to ensure a lossless quality capture with an AIW or PCI Wonder card.

Points: Audio Sync, DC Interference, Driver Bottle Knecks, Sound Card delays, bus delays, resoursce conflicts.

FACT2: I like to regularly update my video card for gaming purposes and
I am flat out tiered of having to pay an extra $100 for the AIW.

FACT3: The separate ATI Tuner cards are great TV cards, but to add a third possible bottlekneck and expect lossless capture is crazy. Sound, Video and Capture card.

FACT4: ATI software, I don't know about you, but it gets old having to ask everyone which MMC is best today for capturing purposes. Or that the SB Audigy has delay problems.


Bottom line here, is what do you consider to be quality components to ensure a system that has no delay? ATI package states that the AIW card will work with I believe a pentium III 500. So is it wrong to assume that a p4 1.6 or celleron 1.7 with avg equipment will work flawlessly?

The bottom line here is flexibility at an overall lower cost and headache. One time purchase of $250 for an ADVC100. Its portable, gives you virtually the highest quality video, before editing and encoding to a medium of your choice. Less devices in the middle which have potential to cause bottleknecks. AUDIO CARD, VIDEO CARD, Capture Card are elliminated as primary factors. Less over taxxing of the cpu processor using busmastering which is a typical standard on 99% of personal computers, so data is transferred almost directly from the bus to the IDE interface.

Keep in mind these are the facts that have convinced me this is the better solution. I want to get more serious into video editing while being able to upgrade my video card only next year.

ramble over.

[trhouse]

I have also been considering the ADVC-100. It seems like a quality product with many good reviews. The reasons I have not acquired one are as follows. The price of other capturing methods is dropping so fast that I suspect standalones with built-in timebase correctors will be at the price of the ADVC-100 ($250) within a year. The Panasonic DMR-30K which has this feature is already available for $346 at the link below,

http://shop.store.yahoo.com/hypaudio/dmre30k.html

The Canopus solution is likely to remain a good, solid prosumer product but I do not think that the rest of the market is headed in its direction. There seems to be a lot more development in the products that capture to compliant dvd standards. More competition there also keeps prices down and will likely narrow the quality difference.

If a good product were needed today, the Canopus is a good choice, but I think a year will see some significant changes in this market.

[Redeye07]

Hmm no software, no settings? Are we talking about making a DVD on a computer or a settop recorder?? How do you capture DV video by firewire and make a DVD without software??? That I would really like to know, it would help me alot!!

I meant no INSTALLATION software. And, by the way, that's the one bad point about the ADVC-100 -- it comes with absolutely no software of any kind. Fortunately, it worked with the capturing software I already had.

Oh, before someone corrects my dumb newbie a$$ -- yes, I know it doesn't really capture, it's a hardware converter. :P

[Michelle]

I'm using the Data Video DAC-100 which is similar to the Canopus. The Dac-100 is in the livingroom and is connected by a 70 foot Firewire cable to a computer in another room. If I used a capture card I would need three very long cables for audio, s-video and composite video. I'm glad I got the DAC-100. The video quality is excellent and it is very easy to use.

[Metaluna]

The Canopus solution is likely to remain a good, solid prosumer product but I do not think that the rest of the market is headed in its direction. There seems to be a lot more development in the products that capture to compliant dvd standards. More competition there also keeps prices down and will likely narrow the quality difference.

If a good product were needed today, the Canopus is a good choice, but I think a year will see some significant changes in this market.

Canopus itself has a product that is similar to the ADVC-100 (external box, locked audio, etc.) that does hardware MPEG1/2 encoding. Also it uses a USB interface instead of 1394, and has a built-in TBC and CNR. It costs around $500 though. I agree that on-the-fly MPEG2 capturing is the trend, though if you're talking about "prosumer" equipment, there will always be a need for capturing in editable formats like DV or huffyuv.

[FulciLives]

Well I must admit that I've never used the Canopus ADVC-100 or the very smiliar DataVideo DAC-100

At one time I was interested in buying one or the other. Then I came across some info that changed my mind.

Please everyone take a look at this picture:



First of all let me acknowldge that this image is from the following website: http://www.geocities.com/fredthompson6/
Please also note that the image I am posting is slightly smaller in size and slightly more compressed than the one presented on Fred Thompson's site.

Now what are we looking at in this picture? On the LEFT hand side we have a blown up capture from the STAR WARS LD that was done using a FlyVideo PCI capture card using HuffyUV and on the RIGHT hand side we have another capture of the same source from a DV capture.

This illustrates some of the problems with the DV codec. It uses 4:1:1 color sampling instead of 4:2:2 which is possible with HuffyUV and/or the PICVideo MJPEG codec etc. Also DV video often will have a "sawtooth" look on diagonal lines. So you have this odd sawtooth thing going on along with often times improper color problems such as the color RED often times being oversaturated.

This is what has kept me away from the Canopus ADVC-100

Currently I'm using an AverTV Stereo PCI capture card and using the PICVideo MJPEG codec on the 19 out of 20 quality setting. This has been working well for me EXCEPT I do occassionally get audio sync problems.

This of course brings us back to why so many use the ADVC-100 ... the audio sync problems (or rather lack thereof).

I've tried a multitude of steps in order to curb or eliminate audio sync. But I still have problems. It is the single computer related problem I have not been able to "fix" in my 31 years. I think audio sync has less to do with user error than hardware conflicts and I mean uncontrollable hardware conflicts. Either your system syncs or it doesn't. Yes there are things you can do to try and get rid of it like degragging the HDD and blah blah blah but yet it is always a constant problem for me as sometimes it is there and sometimes it isn't.

I'm almost near the point where I want to throw in the towel and get the CANOPUS ADVC-100 (or the DataVideo DAC-100).

I'm basically holding out on the fact that I hope to have a new computer by the end of the year and I will see then how my audio sync problems go. Right now I have a slow computer so I'm hoping that that is the real cause of my audio sync problems. Although I can capture NO PROBLEM at all WITHOUT dropped frames. You would think that if a computer was fast enough to do that it would be OK with audio sync. Not the case with me ... at least not 100% of the time.

So I guess the point boils down to this ... are the VISUAL defects inherent in the DV codec bad enough that it somehow otherwise negates getting NO FRAME DROP captures with PERFECT audio sync.

I'm guessing that since so many people are happy with the ADVC-100 that the defects in the DV codec are maybe not all that bad when viewed on a normal size TV at normal viewing distances.

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who is UNHAPPY with the image quality from captures done with the Canopus ADVC-100 ... and I'm talking about image problems that have to do with the DV codec ... such as the "sawtooth" problem or the "color rendition" problem.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[The village idiot]

Once the Tape starts rolling firewire doesn't care if the system records it or not, it just keeps moving! So if the system can't keep up you will still drop frames!

Thought that was important enough to make a highlight!

A decent analog capture device that can operate with a codec that is less compressed than DV should look better! Most of these devices use the same front end converter, after that, uncompressed video streams to a DV compressor chip (like the DiVio) or an Mpeg chip or maybe just out onto the PCI buss.

The reasons to go with a DV converter are pretty simple, you dont want to mess around with a card that you may have problems with. You have a low power computer so you can't use a "normal" capture card (I use my Pentium 266Mhz laptop all the time, just no preview on that machine. If you send the DV to an external firewire hard drive, you might be able to use a P166, with no preview, a 733 or higher needed for good preview). Another reason would be if you need to edit the video, so you don't want to use mpeg hardware, also DV is less taxing than lesser compressed other codecs. Since it does not have a tuner, that does limit how you record broadcast shows, if you have a modern cable box, you could get video from it, but they won't change the channels for you in the middle of the night. To solve that need, I have a Pinnacle Bungee DVD that seems to work well for cable captures, they only need to be chopped to rid me of the commercials.

DV is not the Panacea that everyone thinks it is. It has quality limits, and other querks, but it is user friendly and high enough quality that a DVD made from a good source is difficult to tell the difference, if you compare the Huffy barely compressed video to raw DV, there will be a noticable difference. But after you compress it to normal DVD, the difference is not too much. As far as opinion 2, that is up to each person. You might better ask, will you need to take your captures on the road? If the answer is yes, then an external DV device is the best for the above laptop statements, you could also invest nearly the same and get a high quality external mpeg device, but then you lose the editing factor, and you can't transfer lessor compressed video from an external device with out something like SCSI, and now we are talking Avid level of expense.

Lord Smurf, I think you hit every point directly on the head, if you consider what type of person is using the equipment.

[redwudz]

I got the ADVC-100 primarily for transfering a huge pile of old VHS tapes to DVD. Most of them were recorded in LP format. The ADVC-100 never drops frames, even when the tracking noise goes up and down the screen. The audio is always in sync. I had a AIW card, it worked good sometimes, not all the them. I had a (Sorry) Dazzle card that never worked good. I wanted something easy and the ADVC-100 is that. Maybe the quality is not as good as a high end capture system, but the quality of my VHS isn't that good either. I take the DV file, run it through TMPGEnc encoder, then through TMPGEnc Author and I'm done. No stress, No strain. I don't regret for a minute the price I paid because my frustration with other methods cost me more than the price of the box.

[lordsmurf]

From what I've been able to read, and in my hands at least, to do capturing right, you really essentially need a dedicated computer that is stripped of virtually everything not needed to capture and encode and that is all it does.

Yeah, I hear that too, but I surely don't practice it.

My primary system does heavy web design, audio and photo work too. I use it to play games (mostly emulators) and have no problems with it being a multi-function machine. It's connected to the Internet 24/7 and I only release the IP at capture.

It is not limited or clunky like the AIW and also adheres much better to spec than does AIW (We all know how bad ATI software is).

Well, almost all problems were fixed earlier this year with the MMC 8.x.

But the older 7.x software did have its fair share of issues. I hated all the problem 7.x gave me, especially 7.1, 7.2 and 7.5.

To throw OTHER tools into the mix is unfair as they are not part of ATI AIW or Canopus ADVC.

Well, you kind of have to. A card is only as good as the capture software.

As to capturing from COAX, I do it all the time. COAX to VCR to ADVC to Computer. My VCR is another hub, always connected to the ADVC and also connected to a DVD player so.....

I mainly meant this from a tuner perspective. Personally, I use a satellite connection, so the tuner is useless to me too. But the coax is nice (and my experience has shown VCR tuners to be less than perfect, having tried it both ways several times).

First, what's the difference between Camcorder DV and Canopus DV?

This was one of my thoughts too.

Point 3, Portable,If it works well without problems, It would be nice to have one little device easily moved from sytsem to system.

Good one!

Good post! Are you txpharoah's twin?

Maybe in about 10-15 years, he's a bit older than I am.

He's somebody I used to talk with a lot via e-mail, but I haven't heard much from him in months. He stills owes me about 10 blank DVD-R's. We have similar journalism backgrounds and viewpoints on video.

Why would you want to capture to another (MPEG 1/2) format first? I presume most people capture video to burn onto CD or DVD. If you're going to do this then you're going to have to start working out bitrates in order to fill the whole disk - and you can forget about true VBR on the fly!

I capture VBR all the time with my ATI card, and have no problems filling the disc or coming close. (Actually, filling the disc isn't important as long as quality looks good and I meet my mark on time.) I put about 7 cartoons episodes on a disc, filling up between 3.7 and 4.2 GB depending on how the encodes went (some can be smaller than others). If I had to capture AVI first, I'd never get anything done. I'm crunched for time as it is.

Speaking as a newbie, most of the stuff I read on this site translates to "blah, blah, blah, and blah" and makes my head hurt; it's not easy learning this process. I wanted a device that was EASY to install and VERY EASY to use.

Definitely an important consideration.

But this device is no more flawless or flawful than anything else. And it still comes with its share of new vocabulary. There is no "do it" button when you cature DV and want to transfer to DVD by way of encoding and authoring.

ADDED OBSERVATION: Most users prefer the external device out of fear of opening up the system and sticking in a new card, which is equally easy.

I myself have been considering getting the ADVC50 or 100. More than likely I will go with the 100. I have been an ATI fan for many years. But the fact is AIW and PCI Wonder is not a viable solution. These are the reasons why.

FACT1: To many factors are involved to ensure a lossless quality capture with an AIW or PCI Wonder card. (Points: Audio Sync, DC Interference, Driver Bottle Knecks, Sound Card delays, bus delays, resoursce conflicts.)

FACT2: I like to regularly update my video card for gaming purposes and I am flat out tiered of having to pay an extra $100 for the AIW.

FACT3: The separate ATI Tuner cards are great TV cards, but to add a third possible bottlekneck and expect lossless capture is crazy. Sound, Video and Capture card.

FACT4: ATI software, I don't know about you, but it gets old having to ask everyone which MMC is best today for capturing purposes. Or that the SB Audigy has delay problems.

Very fair from an ATI vs Canopus standpoint. I want to respond to your four points though.

1- Absolutely. But when it comes to playing the games you mention, I'm sure that it takes a fair amount of rigging to get game play and controls as you want them. And the ADVC still has to have software setup too.

2- True. No way around that. If video games and always having the newest graphics cards are your priority, then the ATI AIW may become annoying.

3- I'm guessing you are speaking of the non-AIW cards, some of which have known issues due to not having the Theatre chipsets.

4- That's a fact of computer life. Something new always comes. Just look at anti-virus and Windows updates. The newest ATI MMC is normally best. The only problem in recent times was 8.6 had a timer bug. But everything since 7.7 has been pretty near flawless.

--------

The Village Idiot and FulciLives... great posts. What you wrote in response is an excellent read.

--------

QUESTIONS REMAIN:

1. It was mentioned once or twice that the Canopus DV stream can be converted on-the-fly by the input computer system, thus giving the effect of MPEG or other AVi codec-based captures. Which software?

2. Heard nothing on MainConcept 1.4 front... neither here nor there... so I'm guessing it's a dud as I expected.

Thanks to everyone that is responding. This will hopefully shed light on the flaws and advantages of this single Canopus DV device (and its -50 and -1394 brothers).

[wwaag]

lordsmurf

Re: remaining questions.

I use an ADVC-100 regularly with Scenalyzer--mostly for satellite captures. I also have MC 1.4. It will do real-time MPEG encoding of the DV input. Also has an optional "buffer" setting to prevent dropped frames. I have also used a couple of others (Win DVR and PowerII VCR, I think--been a few months ago). I only downloaded them, tried a few times, was completely unhappy the quality of the resulting MPEG files, so deleted them. For me, the same is true of the MC1.4 capture utility. Although it "works", the quality of the encode isn't that great in my view. I prefer CCE 2-pass VBR over MC regardless. Might be worthwhile to try the MC capture utility with VHS tapes though since they're pretty low quality to start with.

Back to your questions. Yes, they do work with the ADVC-100.

wwaag

[dun4cheap]

I have definately seen some great posts and information posted on this subject.

For software, I have arcsoft Showbiz, video studio, and pinnacle studio 8. All of these capture DV from firewire without problem. They all offer mpeg1/2 compression in real time, but I prefer using DV. My reasoning for this is highest quality for editing, then encoding with the tools of choice. Plus I like to keep my original sources for the future. Technology is always changing.

It is also important to know that most of this software has been bundled with hardware purchases. IE Pinnacle studio was bundled with my AIW9000, VidoeStudio came with my ATI Wonder firewire card, Arcsoft came with my Sony Dru500a.

It is interesting though that nobody here has posted any definitive answers as to a working hardware solution to guarantee a Lossless capture experience with an ATI AIW card. I am not sure anyone could their is to much involved. Mother Board Timing, cache, memory speed and delays, pci bus timing, ide timing. Its no wonder most people experience some sort of problems relying on so many resources.

Lets evaluate dependancy:

ADVC Canopus:

1. ADVC Canopus 100
2. FireWire Card that can sustain 400K transfer (I have not seen many problems with firewire yet)
3. Software to transfer firewire traffic to IDE Busmastering


AIW or Capture Card

1. MotherBoard Timing and Cache
2. Capture Device Bus Timing
3. Sound Card and Timinig Issue
4. PCI Bus speed and Timing (Maybe Included in MB Timing)
5. Over Taxing Processor (Process is required to encode/AVI/MPG)
6. Shut down additional applications not to Increase already over taxing processor


Now in all honsety, I have not tested the ADVC 100 yet, I have captured from my Panasonic DV camcorder with firewire on numerous occassions and under many scenarios, while burning a dvd, surfing the net and I have never experienced dropped frames. If you try that while capturing on your AIW or Capture card you had just as well scrap your project. While I don't blame this on the AIW card or capture card its strictly due to strained resources. I am sure if they put an AIW card in box by itslef and designed it with an anolog to DV converter it would work as well, but until the day it no longer requires additional hardware to do the job I don't think its going to be a viable solution.

[lordsmurf]

It is interesting though that nobody here has posted any definitive answers as to a working hardware solution to guarantee ...

This is a problem much larger than just an capture cards, and spans across many avenues of anything computer-related. Scanning, networking, etc. Recent posts have shown that even Canopus cards are not immune.

Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever have a definitive perfect system any more than the world can agree on which is the one true religion.