VideoHelp Forum




+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    I have been using a Canopus ADVC100 for my hi-8 stuff for years....now my dad is getting in on the act as he won an ADVC100 off of ebay. He posed a good question to me and I am going to ask here.

    Is it better to use the ADVC100 to stream the DV to your computer in 720x480 size (DV is 500 or so lines) or is it better to resize during MPEG2 encoding using CCE or Mainconcept. Anyone compare the 2 methods? It is faster NOT to have to resize of course. I love the ADVC 100 but have never tried these 2 methods....anyone?
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  2. I don't understand your question. You have no choice over what frame size the ADVC100 captures. You have to encode to MPEG2 if you want to make a DVD. You want to resize down to 352x480 or 352x240 for DVD? The former is OK if you need to fit more than 2 hours on a DVD. The latter is not advisable.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Mod Neophyte redwudz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    USA
    Search Comp PM
    Why would you resize and what are you resizeing to? DV is interlaced and resizing could cause problems with the interlace if not done properly.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    never mind....I looked at his email again. When I capture from my hi-8 camcorder I do not have 720x480, hence I capture via the ADVC100 to upsize on the go as I do not have that resolution. He asked if he needed to do that. Of course, since he is shooting DV, he does not as his DV is already 720x480 so there is no need for the ADVC100.

    So it was just an email mess-up...thanks.

    However, would there be a reason to go though the ADVC100 his case anyway...I guess be bought it for nothing LOL? I don't recall if it "cleans" anything like its replacement does.

    thanks
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  5. He would not want to use the ADVC100. When he "captures" from his DV camcorder (assuming he's using a firewire cable) he is basically getting a bit-for-bit copy of what's on the tape. If he were to feed the camcorder's analog output to the ADVC100 and capture from that he would be degrading the image by the digital (tape) to analog (input to ADVC100) to digital (by the ADVC100) conversion.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Rancid User ron spencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ish-ka-bibble
    Search Comp PM
    yes that is right....but you can feed digitally from the DV camcorder into the ADVC 100 (not analog) and then via firewire from the ADVC100 to the computer. So this is all digital....I am just wondering now if the ADVC100 does any type of "video cleaning" or enhancement this way....
    'Do I look absolutely divine and regal, and yet at the same time very pretty and rather accessible?' - Queenie
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member crjackson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by ron spencer
    yes that is right....but you can feed digitally from the DV camcorder into the ADVC 100 (not analog) and then via firewire from the ADVC100 to the computer. So this is all digital....I am just wondering now if the ADVC100 does any type of "video cleaning" or enhancement this way....
    There is no enhancement. It would only be a firewire pass through port and serve no purpose that I know of.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

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