Huffyuv or uncompressed AVI ??

[Mysticav]

Supost I have a plenty of HD space. Do I have to use Huffyuv comppression ? or simply capture to AVI uncompressed ?

does Huffyuv or any other similar codec give a better quality to the capture ?

[edDV]

What will you be capturing from and what is the capture device?

[lpn1160]

Which capture format should I choose if I'm going to use video compression?

Ultimately, you will need to choose a format which is compatible with the codec, but if you have a choice, always choose YUY2, UYVY, or YVYU over RGB24. Here's why:

TV cards generally use one of two chips, either the Zoran ZR36120 (FlyVideo-derived devices), or the Brooktree/Conexant BT8x8 series (everyone else). If you look at the datasheets for these chips you will find that they either accept YUV 4:2:2 data from the decoder or produce it internally. Guess how they produce RGB24 data when you ask for it? You guessed it, the YUV 4:2:2 data is upsampled to RGB24. This means that the extra color resolution that RGB24 gives is entirely fabricated.

Choosing YUY2/UYVY/YVYU over RGB24 typically gives you a sizable speed increase, and gives you better compression with Huffyuv.

RGB16 introduces horrible banding and signal loss, while RGB32 just adds an extra 8-bits of junk to RGB24. There is no point in using either.

[edDV]

We are talking NTSC or PAL inputs here. All the data is already contained in the YUV space. Why would anyone want RGB24?

This Canopus white paper gives a layman's intro to YUV vs RGB color space.

The Operating Color Space (YUV vs RGB)
http://www.canopus.us/US/pdf/Storm_comparison.pdf

[Xylob the Destroyer]

i do all my captures as uncompressed YUY2 avi
if/when i edit, i convert to Huffyuv, sometimes....
but i have plenty of hd space

[edDV]

any conversion from YUV space to RGB and back risks quality loss.

[Mysticav]

Well, let me expand my question:

I will capture froma DV device, via Firewire.... The video is not compressed..let say, it's raw.

i know that Huffyuv helps you to 'semi-compress' the video, so you dont have to save a very huge uncompressed AVi file...

In my case, The space is no problem...My intention is to record in plain AVI...in order to keep the best quality possible. Edit the AVI with video edition software, then export to MPEG-2... so only to proccess...

Uncompressed AVI --> MPEG-2 or any other... maybe DIVX, or MPEG-1...

My question is ? does Huffyuv helps to increase the quality, or to give you a final reduced exported MPEG-2 ?

[edDV]

Well, let me expand my question:

I will capture froma DV device, via Firewire.... The video is not compressed..let say, it's raw.

....

My question is ? does Huffyuv helps to increase the quality, or to give you a final reduced exported MPEG-2 ?

DV video is compressed 2 ways. First RGB is matrixed and sampled to 4:1:1 YUV in the camera for a 50% color space compression. This is done in such a way that the human eye will not notice although a computer algorithm may.

Then the signal is further compressed 5:1 through in frame and frame-by-frame bandwitdth distribution depending on motion. Unlike MPeg2, all fields are maintained for easy editing.

So this is your "raw DV" 25Mbps video. You cannot improve the signal by placing it into a wider bandwidth YUV space. If you convert it to RGB, you will impare the signal quality (see article above).

I'll leave it to others to show how and where Huffyuv may be applicable.

[Abond]

@Mysticav
If the space is not problem stay with uncompressed avi. Huffyuv will add nothing to the quality.

[SLK001]

Huffyuv is lossless, so it will also NOT decrease the quality. It is a codec designed for capturing prior to encoding to a different format, and is not really for playback (it is relatively slow on decompressing).

If you have the space, say with raw AVI. Also, if you want to view your video in the raw form, stay with raw AVI.

[HaloMontages]

I have a simliar or almost a different question than what he has described here. Basically, I capture stuff like me playing Halo in MPEG 2 format. I would capture in RAW avi but within the recording options of my capture card, based on how much HD space I have left, I would have no room left after 6 mins of capturing.

So anyway, what I have recently been doing is just recording in MPEG 2 (640x480) and then using virtual dub and then picking out the cool parts and exporting to uncompressesd AVI files until I started using Huffyuv (whch makes me look like an idiot lol because I should have been using Huffyuv exporting in the first place to save on space.) Then I import the avi "cool" clips into Adobe Premier Pro and finally export the finished product into a WMV 9 file that I then upload to the net for people to download.

Is the way I currently am doing things going to result in poor quality because of how many times I convert the files or am I currently doing it about the best that I can?

I can't figure out a way to get my caputer card to capture the stuff as huffyuv avi files otherwise I could skip the mpeg to avi step. Even when I select Huffyuv as the codec I want to captuer in it still says I only have 6 mins of space which of course isn't the case.

Anyway I have an ATI Wonder TV pro (or something like that) in case you guys want to know what kind of cap card I have.

[HaloMontages]

hmmmm... nothing eh? heh. ok.

[reboot]

A couple of things to remember.
Capturing raw avi requires the hard drive to do a LOT of work. Some cannot keep up. Using Huffyuv is only one option. I much prefer the picvideo mjpeg, as it offers approximately twice the compression of huffyuv, at the same quality.

Recording to mpeg-2, then converting to avi, then again to wmv is a total waste of time (and quality).
Capture directly to wmv in windows movie maker, or if that's not possible, cap to avi.

[MpegEncoder]

I will capture froma DV device, via Firewire.... The video is not compressed..let say, it's raw.

If this is the case, there's absolutely no reason to "capture" to anything other than DV.

Do your editing and conversion from there.

[FulciLives]

I will capture froma DV device, via Firewire.... The video is not compressed..let say, it's raw.

If this is the case, there's absolutely no reason to "capture" to anything other than DV.

Do your editing and conversion from there.

Exactly correct.

You can "capture" your DV to the computer but all you are really doing is a data transfer since the DV is already in a 100% digital form.

After you do this "capture" you will have a DV AVI file.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[SLK001]

I much prefer the picvideo mjpeg, as it offers approximately twice the compression of huffyuv, at the same quality.

Well, not exactly. The Huffyuv codec is lossless, while the MJPEG codec is NOT. That means that there WILL be quality loss. It may not be really noticeable to the human eye, but the loss in quality will still be there.

[kenmasters83]

lol............


i watch tv all the time and i can tell you with a fact picvideo is not even able to get close to huffyuv even using picvideo at a quality setting of 20..

mainconcept pvr is on par with huffyuv and it captures mpeg's...

[HaloMontages]

Well the way I capture from my capture card is directly to MPEG-2 Then I convert the MPEG 2 to .avi (using huffyuv lossless) from Virtual Dub. Then I can have my .avi files to mess with in premier pro.

Does it really lose that much quality? Because I could capture in raw .avi from my capture card, but it takes up so much space that I would only be able to play like one game of halo then quickly go through and edit out the parts I don't need to make more space on my Hard Drive.

[edDV]

Well the way I capture from my capture card is directly to MPEG-2 Then I convert the MPEG 2 to .avi (using huffyuv lossless) from Virtual Dub. Then I can have my .avi files to mess with in premier pro.

Does it really lose that much quality?

yes, assuming the source is high quality, bridging through MPeg2 (unless all fields are saved) will reduce quality significantly.

capture and editing strategy depend on the source.

[trock]

I'm sure many will disagree but when I compared the final output of the same footage raw and using Huffy and then 2-pass encoded by TMPGEnc, while they were very close indeed I could see a slight difference between the footage that started out as raw and the footage that was Huffy and I preferred the raw. It seemed to encode with a slightly higher quality for whatever reason.

[edDV]

Huffyuv should be essentially lossless, but routing through MPeg is another thing entirely.

To see a difference RAW vs. huffyuv would take an extremely high quality source and a very good display.

[trock]

Agreed. My point is that you have to consider your delivery medium when choosing your capture method.