which resolution to capture old home movies?

[zakman]

Hi

I have some old vacation movies on 8 mm tape which I want to capture using my Hauppauge WinTV-PVR-250 card. Eventually I want to burn it to DVD. Should I capture at VHS quality (352 by 480), or DVD quality (720 by 480). Also, any suggestions for bitrate? The movies are mostly standard kid stuff with pictures of Mickey etc. Also, any suggestions on bitrate would be appreciated.

[housepig]

you'll get a lot of back and forth on this, but I always capture at the output resolution that I'm aiming for - ie. 720x480 for DVD.

bitrate, I use as much as I can fit on the disc for the program time, up to about 7,500K, usually no less than 4,000K (unless it's stuff that looks like hell anyway and I'm trying to pack a disc full).

[winifreid]

It depends upon what you want to do with the files. Do you intend to edit (add titles and text....) and filter? If so, you should capture in avi (like picvideo or huffyuv). And I would recommend capturing at 352x480 for 2 reasons: file size and processing time. Full resolution will take almost twice the HD space and will take almost twice the time to edit and filter. I doubt you will see much quality difference. But if you are one who want the absolute best, even if you can't see it and have lots of time, then capture at full resolution.

[wwjd]

I have converted many old home VHS movies. I do as housepig does,
full D1 (DVD at 720x480) because I have a large screen TV. In my opinion
half D1 (352x480) looks quite a bit more pixelated.

My suggestion is to try both resolutions and view them on the largest TV you think you will be viewing them on.

[Nelson37]

There is one very important fact you need to understand about deciding what resolution to capture at. YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT CHOICE.

Virtually all capture cards capture at a FIXED RESOLUTION.

Your only "choice" is to decide what resolution your capture is RESIZED TO, by whatever method your card/software uses. You also have no choice as to certain "noise" or "smoothing" filters which may be automatically applied by your card/software.

The fixed res is usually close to 640x480. The filters seem to kick in at a horizontal res of around 360 or less, on some cards.

To avoid excessive resizing, and possible undesirable filter application, 640x480 would usually be the best choice, depending on your cards specs.
For real-time MPEG to be used without re-encoding, 720 (704) x 480 is the most logical selection.

[Sillyname]

Are we talking 8mm video or film?
If video, then capture at VHS level.
If film, go with 720x480.

[edDV]

He said tape in the first post.

Nelson37 got it right assuming image quality is your goal.
For DVD destination capture to 720 or 704x480.

If your goal is to capture at 352x480, find a card that supports direct (unfiltered) capture at that resolution and handles both fields properly. Hard to find a capture device that does both. There are tons of Dazzle type devices that capture 320x240 (single field).

The most common BrookTree/Conexant based cards (Bt848/849/878/879) capture to native 640x480. 720x480 / 720x576 support may be provided on some models depending on how the driver is written but Brooktree documentation does not specify 352x480 native.

[lordsmurf]

352x480

[Bodyslide]

I aslo capture at 352x480.

[TheFamilyMan]

In my experience with home video footage, I've found that the best results when encoding were with using a variable bit rate (VBR) with a max of at least 8000. Hand held camcorder footage suffers from excessive motion which really eats bit rate in a hurry; for me, lower bit rate encodes looked pretty bad. I used 352x480 when capturing my 8mm footage and it looks great on my 27" set, which is a top of the line mitsubishi (but rather old now). Also consider using software video noise filters, they help a lot with the quality of the encoding. The best advise is to have patience, experiment with small clips and see what works best for you with your equipment. This is where DVDRWs become most welcome. Good Luck.

[The_Doman]

Just go for the best possible..

720/704x576(480)

[davideck]

I recommend 720 x 480

I have done A/B experiments to compare 352 x 480 vs. 720 x 480 with my PVR-250 on various sources including Betamax, SVHS, and VHS in both 6 hour and 2 hour modes.

In every case, for a given bitrate, 720 x 480 preserved more detail. You may notice more blocking at low bitrates, but as long as you stay at or above 4500 kbs or so (2 hours per DVD), I think you will find that 720 x 480 provides better overall picture quality.

Other capture cards may perform differently.

[Sillyname]

I recommend 720 x 480

I have done A/B experiments to compare 352 x 480 vs. 720 x 480 with my PVR-250 on various sources including Betamax, SVHS, and VHS in both 6 hour and 2 hour modes.

In every case, for a given bitrate, 720 x 480 preserved more detail. You may notice more blocking at low bitrates, but as long as you stay at or above 4500 kbs or so (2 hours per DVD), I think you will find that 720 x 480 provides better overall picture quality.

Other capture cards may perform differently.

All he's capturing is 8mm, though. Going any higher than VHS quality will just be creating extra data. If anything the detail will be enhanced by capturing at the correct resolution. Above that can result in a blurred image sometimes. I realize SVHS and Betamax will be better @ 720x480 but not 8mm and VHS.

[lordsmurf]

720 also suffers aliasing a lot, when coming from lower res sources.

[The_Doman]

If anything the detail will be enhanced by capturing at the correct resolution.

We are dealing with an ANALOG signal. There is no real correct/fixed resolution. Just capture the maximum of the signal if you are able to do so.

[Sillyname]

720 also suffers aliasing a lot, when coming from lower res sources.

The only detail it enhances are the scanlines.

[edDV]

I recommend 720 x 480

I have done A/B experiments to compare 352 x 480 vs. 720 x 480 with my PVR-250 on various sources including Betamax, SVHS, and VHS in both 6 hour and 2 hour modes.

In every case, for a given bitrate, 720 x 480 preserved more detail. You may notice more blocking at low bitrates, but as long as you stay at or above 4500 kbs or so (2 hours per DVD), I think you will find that 720 x 480 provides better overall picture quality.

Other capture cards may perform differently.

All he's capturing is 8mm, though. Going any higher than VHS quality will just be creating extra data. If anything the detail will be enhanced by capturing at the correct resolution. Above that can result in a blurred image sometimes. I realize SVHS and Betamax will be better @ 720x480 but not 8mm and VHS.

You are assuming an ideal capture card and many expensive ones will meet the ITU-R BT.601 standard but many cheap ones don't and the writer of the driver tends to be a computer nerd who only understands square pixels and 640x480. Many of these driver writers take liberty or are lazy. Brooktree hardware also defaults to 640x480, A lazy driver writer caps at 640 x 480 and interpolates up to 720x480, or filters down to 352x480. The quality of the filter can vary but these guys score no points writing drivers that take high CPU cycles.

So this arguement boils down to the capability and driver quality for your particular capture card.

[Sillyname]

I recommend 720 x 480

I have done A/B experiments to compare 352 x 480 vs. 720 x 480 with my PVR-250 on various sources including Betamax, SVHS, and VHS in both 6 hour and 2 hour modes.

In every case, for a given bitrate, 720 x 480 preserved more detail. You may notice more blocking at low bitrates, but as long as you stay at or above 4500 kbs or so (2 hours per DVD), I think you will find that 720 x 480 provides better overall picture quality.

Other capture cards may perform differently.

All he's capturing is 8mm, though. Going any higher than VHS quality will just be creating extra data. If anything the detail will be enhanced by capturing at the correct resolution. Above that can result in a blurred image sometimes. I realize SVHS and Betamax will be better @ 720x480 but not 8mm and VHS.

You are assuming an ideal capture card and many expensive ones will meet the ITU-R BT.601 standard but many cheap ones don't and the writer of the driver tends to be a computer nerd who only understands square pixels and 640x480. Many of these driver writers take liberty or are lazy. Brooktree hardware also defaults to 640x480, A lazy driver writer caps at 640 x 480 and interpolates up to 720x480, or filters down to 352x480. The quality of the filter can vary but these guys score no points writing drivers that take high CPU cycles.

So this arguement boils down to the capability and driver quality for your particular capture card.

Correct. I guess it would be nice to know what he was using as a capture device.

Edit: Wait! I see he is using a WinTV. It's drivers are pretty good, so I don't think he will be having that problem.

[davideck]

720 also suffers aliasing a lot, when coming from lower res sources.

What exactly are you referring to?
Aliasing is the result of undersampling and is prevented by oversampling.

[Sillyname]

720 also suffers aliasing a lot, when coming from lower res sources.

What exactly are you referring to?
Aliasing is the result of undersampling and is prevented by oversampling.

Aliasing is not cured by oversampling, in general.

[davideck]

720 also suffers aliasing a lot, when coming from lower res sources.

What exactly are you referring to?
Aliasing is the result of undersampling and is prevented by oversampling.

Aliasing is not cured by oversampling, in general.

I suggest that you do a web search on the "Nyquist theorem"

[Sillyname]

720 also suffers aliasing a lot, when coming from lower res sources.

What exactly are you referring to?
Aliasing is the result of undersampling and is prevented by oversampling.

Aliasing is not cured by oversampling, in general.

I suggest that you do a web search on the "Nyquist theorem"

I know that the outline of objects is oversampled but not the entire picture. If you simply upconvert a lower rez video, all you're basically gonna get is the same thing, just more pixels representing it. I'm only halfway arguing with you.
I'm halfway agreeing, too!

[edDV]

The PVR-250 should work ok capturing at 352x480 but I don't see the advantage since it is a hardware MPeg2 encoder. I wonder if can capture 720x480 and output a 352x480 MPeg2 in real time?

It would be a good card to test 720x480 vs. 352x480 capture by comparing the MPeg2 out for both cases.

[vhelp]

First, always capture at the capture card/devices highest resolution..,
which is usually 720 pix.. unless:

* your capture card is limited, incapable of caping at certain resolutions
* can't capture w/ ZERO frame drops.
* want to fit on one disk, the whole source
* don't care about quality too much
* you don't give darn about anything, or anything suggested
* etc.

Another First, I would ask, what your TV is, cause that's really important.
And also, how big. Do you plan on viewing only on a small one, or
are you aiming for a bigger one very soon. If you are only going to
be viewing on a small tv
.
.. Anything under 27" to 32" and 4:3AR is considered small
.
Your TV is a very important factor here. Please don't take it for
granted. Its vital to your final end product. In the end, (if you don't
have a large screen tv) but will be getting a bigger set soon, and you
create the project for a 352 x 480 pixel resolution, you might not be as
happy.. (specially the 16:9 ones) you'll probably even more regret it.

In short, about the capturing specs and things ...

Somewhere in the chaning of events, the captured data is being sampled
across the timeline. Look at it like this then..

Below is just my own interpretation of the theories I've come across in my
reading and research, and backed up by practicle results and good pare
of eyes

--> 352 vs. 720 ...

If you have a 352 mm ruler, and you sampled it at a give frequence of
16 bits per mm/ms, and take that sample ruler and dump it into a BITMAP
grid of 352 pixel lines..
.
then what do you think a 720 mm ruler, using the same sampling specs as
was used for the 352 mm would be ??
.
.. just as in everyday life, there are standards and limitations, and
.. a given capture device is subject to these and many more rules.
.
The answer is, more detail. It's not resolution. The bottom line here
is detail. 720 would have more sampling than the 352, and consume
more detail.
.
course, you could put the above in more defined and technicle words than
I just did, but it's all the same (in my head) and my eyes
always tell me the truth.

-->

If you use a set capture device (ie, a hardware mpeg card) then you
are limited to that's cards 352 or 720 internal features. Where am I
getting at w/ hardware cards ?? I'm getting at here..
.
If you hardware mpeg card is better at 352 pix, (and not 720 pix) then
you are short-changing yourself, because there is no point in fitzing
it around to make it better. The hardware mpeg route is the final
destination. Better make sure that it performs flawless in all resolutions
(or samplings)

Still, the end goal in mostly DVD projects, is getting as close to DVD
as possible. That usually means greatest detail/quality. 720 pix means
by nature, greater detail. Weather the source is a crummy 8mm or vhs
or laserdisc or antenna / cable source, etc etc, the end result is
more is better. 720 pix is always better than 352 pix, if not, then
your capture device is limited. And, even if it's better at 352, you
are not doing yourself any better, by interpolating it to 704/720 pix
if your final destination is a larger screen TV set. You'll be very
disapointed with the final results (and your hard waisted work) than
if your source was 720 to start with.
.
The hint answer to this is very simple. Encode a 352 and 720 pixel
source and view it on your pc monitor at full screen. Why full screen ??
.
.. if I have answer that, than you're waisting my time here
.
I tell you, one of them will look blurry. NOW. Take that same 352 pix
source mpeg, with your 720 pix mpeg, and author them both as one VOB
file, and finally burn it to DVD RW disk. Now play it and watch the
VOB file play the merged 352 pix and 720 pix mpeg's, on a large screen
TV set, and you tell me, which one will reproduce:

* greater detail
* sharper image

.. For this test to work w/ reason, best to use higher bitrate for the
.. 720 pix mpeg (ie, 9000 cbr)

352 pix capturing ...

Now, capturing directly into 352 pix and then encoding to mpeg as 352
pix is not really a good idea. Unless you are new to all this stuff,
and it will not matter much (until you develop the eye for detail,
ver time) and soon discover that your 352 pix mpeg (VOB) is not what
you thought it was.

.. A newbie (w/out the eye) will not be able to tell the difference
.. when they view these 352 pix video's. But, sooner or later, they will
.. have learnt the process, and developed the eye and will be
.. back here preating the truth. 720 pix is better approach.

But, for those who don't care, or have the means/equipment etc or just
don't give a rats x.x.x then, I would suggest sticking with the 352 pix
and enjoying them for the time being

-vhelp 3112

[ronnylov]

It's not only the TV size that matters if 352 pix looks pixelated or not, the DVD player does also matter. My old Nintaus player shows the pixels at lower resolutions much more than my new Pioneer player. The pioneer player has some kind of filter that smooths out the pixels when playing lower resolutions. On my Pioneer even VCD can look smooth (but the resolution is still lower of course, it's just not as pixelated as my older player).

Anyway, using full D1 resolution with a bitrate of 8000 kbit/s does not look worse (bot not really better either) than using half D1 at the same bitrate when the source is VHS so I will keep using maximum resolution for my old camcorder conversions to DVD. I want it to look good regardless of player and TV size.

[SatStorm]

You do direct mpeg 2 with your Hauppague PVR...
Capture at 704 x 480 / 576. This seems to be the "native" format for latest Hauppauge cards.

We need a new tool to capture with those cards: A tool that seperates what you capture and on what you encode. You know, like how mainconcept does the capture. I saw huge differences that way with my captures!

[gshelley61]

I use a DVD recorder. 1 hour (XP) 704x480 mode per DVD when the source is home video. This is to preserve maximum detail and to ensure a bitrate high enough to avoid encoding artifacts (like macroblocking) due to the nearly constant motion inherent with hand held camcorder footage. Excellent results, easy and fast to do. Resulting MPEG2 (VOB) files can be edited (simple cutting and joining) and re-authored without re-encoding, too. There is plenty of software available for that purpose.

[lordsmurf]

So this arguement boils down to the capability and driver quality for your particular capture card.

100% agree.

Theory dictates 352x480 is perfect for VHS captures, and many cards can do this in practice. Generally the better ones, often the more expensive ones. Your Best Buy $25-50 special usually does not. It requires a max res (or special res) capture to properly capture in good quality.

With space provides, I'll do 704x480 just to fill the disc.

The aliasing of 720x material has something to do with the way the pixels are sized for playback, and some other oddities of internal resize during capture. I cannot really explain this one as much as I can give visual examples. Aliasing is NOT an error of up/down-sizing, but rather resizing in general. Any direction. You see this on MANY cards, including even the ones that do 704x/352x perfectly. Quite a few DV devices have this too.

[zakman]

Thanks all.
So, given that I have a Hauppauge WinTV-PVR-250 capture card, and I am capturing 8mm video, is there any advantage of capturing at 720 by 480, or shall I capture at 352 by 480?

BTW, I am doing this for archiving purposes, so it doesn't matter what DVD player or TV I have today, since I want it to play on future hardware too.

[lordsmurf]

352