Captured AVI file too large

[drgt]

Hi

In trying to capture from VCR, I run a 10 minute trial and the resulting file was, I believe, too large (700 mb).
I used Virtualdub with xvid for video and mp3 for audio (although I think the target file was created with uncompressed audio - I do know why: I did not choose show all formats on the right. By the way, which format should I choose?

Judging from movie rips, it is possible to get a 2 hour movie into a 700 mb file with very good quality. Consequently, my 10 minute test should be at about 60 mb with good quality.

This tape I am trying to import is 6 hours long. I do not want to convert it to DVD at the moment; just to avi for watching on the pc.

Generally speaking what is a good file size / quality compromize?

I would appreciate some input from you experts.

See below the settings I used:

The resulting file:
731.401.748 bytes 720 x 480

The settings:
See attached

Thanks

[jagabo]

Using Target Quantizer mode in Xvid will get you variable sizes depending on the video being compressed. If you want a fixed size use Single Pass Target Bitrate mode. Xvid isn't really a good choice for video capture. It's too CPU intensive for good compression in realtime.

In the MP3 encoder turn off Show All Formats. Then pick the bitrate you want to use.

[drgt]

Ok. If not Xvid, what should I use?

Again what is a good file size / quality compromize?

[jagabo]

Generally, you capture with a fast, lossless codec like HuffYUV or a low compression codec like DV or MJPEG. Then you perform a slow compression with a codec like MPEG2, Xvid, or h.264 for your final (small) video file.

[yoda313]

Jagabo is right in the methodology but you won't want to do this for the whole 6 hour tape in one capture unless you have tons of harddrive space.

If you use dv alone that is 13gb/hour. That would be 78gb for your entire 6 hour tape!

Regardless of which lossless or lossy compression codec you use its best to do it in chunks. Assuming there are discernable break points in your 6 hour tape take the smallest chunk you can reasonable capture at with the huge lossless/lossy data rate. Then you can convert that to a smaller codec like mpeg2 or xvid/divx at a bitrate of your choosing.

File size is determined by bitrate x length of video for a given codec. There are plenty of bitrate calculators in the tools section on the left of the screen. Use one to determine your optimum bitrate for your destination.

On a pc your only restriction is harddrive storage space. From there you'll have to determine it based on a cd or dvd or bluray capacity - you can split the file if you want to maintain quality or reencode from the original source to ensure a better fit on the destination media.

[jagabo]

I would also try to avoid compressing the audio while capturing. Capture uncompressed, compress later while you're compressing the video.

[drgt]

I used HuffYUV and uncompressed audio 44100 and the resulting 10 min test was a HUGE 5.5 Gb file! I have 400 GB on one HDD and another 400 Gb on a second HDD. Should I procced or something is wrong? I hope virtualdub and XVid will be able to process this giant.

I prefer to set a timer and let the whole tape run rather than sit there, determine chunks, edit, etc etc..

Just for the final file I would like it to fit on a DL DVD (8gb right?) (assuming the quality is good).

[jagabo]

I used HuffYUV and uncompressed audio 44100 and the resulting 10 min test was a HUGE 5.5 Gb file! I have 400 GB on one HDD and another 400 Gb on a second HDD. Should I procced or something is wrong?

That sounds about right. 30 to 40 GB/hr for SD material. You should capture to a drive that's not your boot drive.

I hope virtualdub and XVid will be able to process this giant.

No problem.

[drgt]

Ooops! The file with HuffYUV and pcm 44100 shows shorter duration than recorded and the audio plays fast .

At the end when I tried to close virtualdub, it crashed. I chose YUY2 data format is that ok?

Virtualdub has so many other "tweaks", I am not familiar with them.........

Should I pick a speed other than 25fps?

[lacywest]

Any chance of getting a hold of a DVD Recorder ... one with a built in Hard Drive. Or use a Panasonic DVD Recorder that records to DVD-RAM and then just transfer the recordings to your PC ... and do the final editing and joining on the PC.

Or another DVD Recorder that records to regular DVD disks ... DVD-R ... DVD-RW ... etc ... etc.

[jagabo]

Ooops! The file with HuffYUV and pcm 44100 shows shorter duration than recorded and the audio plays fast .

That's often the symptom you get with dropped frames.

At the end when I tried to close virtualdub, it crashed. I chose YUY2 data format is that ok?

YUY2 is ok. VirtualDub shouldn't have crashed.

Virtualdub has so many other "tweaks", I am not familiar with them.........

Should I pick a speed other than 25fps?

I don't see where you're located but NTSC video is 29.97 fps and should be captured with a 720x480 frame. PAL video should be captured at 25 fps with a 720x576 frame. Capturing NTSC video at 25 fps might be the cause of your A/V sync error.

Ah, I see in another thread you're capturing PAL60. You want to capture at 29.97 fps. PAL VCRs play NTSC tapes by leaving the signal 59.94 fields per second (29.97 frames per second) but changing the chroma subcarrier to match PAL chroma. They rely on the ability of PAL TVs to multisync to both 50 fields per second and 59.94 fields per second. So the output of the VCR is neither NTSC nor PAL but hybrid. Truely converting an NTSC signal to a PAL signal require much more sophistication than your typical VCR has.

Some other things to try: go to Capture -> Timing... and try the different resync options. Watch the Frames Dropped and Frames Inserted status while capturing. Both should be zero. Try changing the capture resolution to 352x480 (NTSC, or 352x576 PAL). That will cut the CPU and disk load in half and may help eliminate dropped frame problems. Ie, if your caps show no problems at 352x480 but problems at 720x480, then you have insufficient CPU or disk speed.

[yoda313]

Don't use 44100 if you want to make a dvd out of it. It must be 48khz for dvd. You can convert it after the fact but you should capture it in the correct format first to save conversion steps.

[drgt]

ok. At 720 x 576, I do not even get a good live feed. The previous test was done at 720 x 480.

Now for this test:

Done at 640 x 480. For some reason it would not accept 48khz, so I left it at 44100hz. Changed the speed to 29.97. The resulting file reports correct duration. The audio plays normally but after the 1st half starts loosing sync.

Just like an english speaking Japanese movie!!!

It reports frames inserted. Take a look at the screenshot.

The system is core duo at 2.4 with 2gb ram running xp media center sp2. 2 1tb disks.

I want to thank all of you for your input.

Now what? Try smaller frame? PAL type or NTSC? (Because what I just made is PAL with NTSC speed!)

Although I am not there yet, when I process this for the final file I will choose PAL 25fps? I am confused.

Jagabo, what exactly should I tweak in Capture timing?

[jagabo]

ok. At 720 x 576, I do not even get a good live feed. The previous test was done at 720 x 480...

Now what? Try smaller frame? PAL type or NTSC? (Because what I just made is PAL with NTSC speed!)

PAL60 is has NTSC timing but PAL format chroma channels. So you capture with a 720x480 frame, 29.97 fps.

Although I am not there yet, when I process this for the final file I will choose PAL 25fps? I am confused.

No, you make an NTSC DVD.

Jagabo, what exactly should I tweak in Capture timing?

Try all three "resync" options, especially "Do not resync between audio and video streams".

[drgt]

No, you make an NTSC DVD.

Well, I am not interested in making a DVD, just a reasonable size avi for the pc. Should the need arize, because my DVD Player plays avi, mpg, dat, I would like to end up with an avi not larger than a DL DVD can hold.

But like I said, I am a long way from there.

You asked where I am at. I am in Greece, everything is PAL here. I used to live in the states, I should have brought my NTSC VCR with me!!!

Try all three "resync" options, especially "Do not resync between audio and video streams".

Tried all 3 but could not get rid of the "Japanese" effect. Only choice 2 gave me 1 frame inserted.

Anything else before I give up? (By the way all 3 tries were done at 720 x 480, 29.97fps).

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

Ok. I think I goofed before, I was not doing uncompressed audio. I run the test once more with choice 1 in capture timing, it reported 2 frames inserted; the audio is in sync to the end of the 10 min test.

Is this acceptable? If yes, lets try to make this a small avi. What adjustments should I make? (Taking into consideration the above mentioned).

[jagabo]

Ok. I think I goofed before, I was not doing uncompressed audio. I run the test once more with choice 1 in capture timing, it reported 2 frames inserted; the audio is in sync to the end of the 10 min test.

Is this acceptable?

It depends on how much of a perfectionist you are. I don't think 2 frames out of 18,000 (10 minutes) is so bad. Make a longer recording and verify that the audio doesn't get out of sync. Again, try all three resync modes.

If yes, lets try to make this a small avi. What adjustments should I make? (Taking into consideration the above mentioned).

After capturing with HuffYUV and uncompressed audio you can look at reducing the file size. There are many different options. If it's interlaced video you'll probably want to leave it interlaced. If it's telecined film you can get better results by restoring the original film frame and making at 23.976 fps video. The easiest thing is probably to encode it as 720x480, 29.97 fps, interlaced MPEG 2, even though you aren't planning on makeing DVDs. Most players will play interlaced DVD properly on a PC or standalone media player. If you want more smaller files you can reduce the frame size to 352x480 (VHS doesn't really have much more than 352x480 resolution so you're not losing anything by using the smaller frame size). That will ~double the amount of time you can get per GB.

[drgt]

If it's interlaced video you'll probably want to leave it interlaced. If it's telecined film you can get better results by restoring the original film frame and making at 23.976 fps video.

Interlaced? I do not know but probably not. See G-Spot (test.avi). How do I know the original film frame?

The easiest thing is probably to encode it as 720x480, 29.97 fps, interlaced MPEG 2, even though you aren't planning on makeing DVDs. Most players will play interlaced DVD properly on a PC or standalone media player.

MPEG2 you say eh? Won't the mpeg file be larger than an XVid file?
How do I make mpeg file? VirtualDub supports it?

Anyway, I tried the XVid codec at target quantizer 4.0, resizing to 720 x 540 and adding filter "field bob - smooth" (this last one came from http://www.halo3forum.com/montage-video-help/259024-how-i-capture-pal-60-a.html). The resulting file "test_XVid720x540&Smooth.avi" I burned on a cd and plays fine on the dvd player.

See G-Spot Screenshot (test_XVid720x540&Smooth.avi).

So much the above guy as well as this http://www.divx-digest.com/articles/vhs_capture_page1.html (section "THE SUGGESTED SOLUTION") recommend deinterlacing but I did not try it because it was not "Top" choice like the 1st guy said, (see screenshot).

Take also a look at the resize filter choices I used as I do not quite understand the meaning of "Absolute vs Relative", "filter mode", whether "interlaced" should be checked etc.

If you want more smaller files you can reduce the frame size to 352x480 (VHS doesn't really have much more than 352x480 resolution so you're not losing anything by using the smaller frame size). That will ~double the amount of time you can get per GB.

Tell me if you agree with the 2nd guy above in the section "THE VHS RESOLUTION".

Is there any correlation between frame size and aspect ratio? In other words is this thinking right?:
"I have a wide TV so I will make my final resolution a multiple of 16:9, i.e 720 x 405 OR I have a letterbox TV, so I will make it a multiple of 4:3, i.e 720 x 540".

[jagabo]

With codecs that support aspect ratio flags any frame size can be used for any display aspect ratio.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/322346-same-resolution-but-difference-in-display-w-...=1#post1995959

Codecs without aspect ratio flags are usually assumed to be square pixel (PAR = 1:1) by media players -- so the frame size ratio matches the display aspect ratio. Xvid supports both DAR and PAR flags but some players won't respect the flags and assume square pixel.

NTSC VHS has an effective resolution around 352x480. If you want to use Xvid with square pixel encoding I recommend you use 640x480. If you capture at 720x480 use the Precise Bilinear option in VirtualDub's resize filter. Using a sharper filter (like Precise Bicubic or Lanczos3 will only accentuate the VHS noise and require more bitrate).

Deinterlacing is a big subject. VirtualDub's Field Bob - Smooth gives very blurry results when there is significant motion. Yadif (in one of your pictures) is usually much better. If you deinterlace a telecined movie you will end up with a duplicate in every five frames (eg: 1,2,3,4,4,5,6,7,8,8...). This will have a noticeable small jerk several times a second. An inverse telecine will give better results. VirtualDub's IVTC is ok, but not great.

Attached is a short film clip with VirtualDub's IVTC with the Reduce Frame Rate (resulting in 23.977 fps) and another with the Decomb Only option (29.97 fps, duplicate frames). Notice how the latter jerks several times a second.

[drgt]

The content is home made movie parts put together on NTSC VHS from tape cameras (1 used 8mm cassette and another used a small tape (I forget the name) having the same width as a VHS; infact, you could use an adapter to pop it in a VHS VCR). So for the 1st, camera was playing while VCR recorded, and for the latter, VCR to VCR.

So is this telecine? Is it interlaced?

And you recommend deinterlacing using "Yadif" (What about the right side options?) over "Blend Fields"?

I 'll make another run using your resize suggestion. Although the burned test is satisfactory to me, if it results in a smaller file with the same quality, it is preferred.

Thanks again

[jagabo]

The content is home made movie parts put together on NTSC VHS from tape cameras (1 used 8mm cassette and another used a small tape (I forget the name) having the same width as a VHS; infact, you could use an adapter to pop it in a VHS VCR). So for the 1st, camera was playing while VCR recorded, and for the latter, VCR to VCR.

So is this telecine? Is it interlaced?

That is most likely interlaced.

And you recommend deinterlacing using "Yadif" (What about the right side options?) over "Blend Fields"?

I recommend you leave it interlaced and use a compression codec that supports interlaced video well. That would be MPEG 2. Xvid supports interlaced encoding but some players don't handle it properly. MPEG 2 is safer, though you won't get as much compression. Deinterlacing always reduces quality.

I 'll make another run using your resize suggestion. Although the burned test is satisfactory to me, if it results in a smaller file with the same quality, it is preferred.

If you must deinterlace, try the Yadif option in VirtualDub and resize to 640x480. Try Yadif with the double frame rate option -- see if your player supports that (many won't). The single frame rate option is safer but will not play as smoothly.

[drgt]

Xvid supports interlaced encoding but some players don't handle it properly.

Well if the source is interlaced and I did not deinterlace it in processing...does that mean the resulting file is interlaced and my player handles it ok?

MPEG 2 is safer, though you won't get as much compression.

I 'd like the end product to fit on a DL DVD (if I choose to do that). The tape is 6 hours long. With XVid I just might make it.

If you must deinterlace, try the Yadif option in VirtualDub and resize to 640x480. Try Yadif with the double frame rate option...

Top field first or bottom?

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

Some questions in previous post you might have overlooked:

1. How do I make mpeg file?
2. Through VirtualDub?
3. Take also a look at the resize filter choices I used as I do not quite understand the meaning of "Absolute vs Relative", "filter mode", whether "interlaced" should be checked etc.

[jagabo]

Xvid supports interlaced encoding but some players don't handle it properly.

Well if the source is interlaced and I did not deinterlace it in processing...does that mean the resulting file is interlaced and my player handles it ok?

Not really. The problems can vary from the colors being slightly wrong (hard to notice) to very jerky motion (very obvious). Even if your current player handles it correctly, will your next?

MPEG 2 is safer, though you won't get as much compression.

I 'd like the end product to fit on a DL DVD (if I choose to do that). The tape is 6 hours long. With XVid I just might make it.

I'd recommend using 352x480 MPEG2 with a variable bitrate of ~3000 kbps. The image quality should be acceptable.

If you must deinterlace, try the Yadif option in VirtualDub and resize to 640x480. Try Yadif with the double frame rate option...

Top field first or bottom?

It depends on whether your source is TFF or BFF. You can tell with VirtualDub. Apply only the Bob Doubler filter (either TFF or BFF) and step through a motion sequence. If motion is smooth you guessed right. If motion has a two-steps-forward-one-step-back cadence you guessed wrong. If every pair of frames is (nearly) the same you have progressive video. If you see repeats with an aaabbcccddeeeff (3,2 repeats) cadence you have telelcined film.

1. How do I make mpeg file?
2. Through VirtualDub?

VirtualDub can't really make MPG files. I use HcEnc via HcGUI (you'll also need AviSynth, all three are free). There are other GUIs for HcEnc too. Or try Xvid4PSP (which does a lot more than its name implies) or ffmpegGUI. All the commercial editors support MPEG2.

3. Take also a look at the resize filter choices I used as I do not quite understand the meaning of "Absolute vs Relative", "filter mode", whether "interlaced" should be checked etc.

Absolute means "no matter what the source frame size is make the frame THIS size". Relative means "make the frame THIS PERCENT of the source frame size". This can matter when moving filters up or down the list (other filters may also change the frame size) or when using the same filter chain with different source files.

[drgt]

Applied the Bob Doubler filter and previewed. Using TFF and deinterlacing method "Bob", advancing through the frames is smooth. NOT 2 FRAMES ARE THE SAME. (Using BFF, it goes back and forth).

1. So, still try the Yadif, double Top?

FYI, at 720 x 480 (same as source) target was 402,132,572 bytes while increasing to 720 x 540 with the bob smooth filter was 287,524,496 bytes. That's 100 MB less for bigger frame and I can't tell the difference.

I understand the filter order is important.

2. So what is the order? Deinterlace, Resize, Smooth?

3. In filter "Resize" where can I find some explanation of the filter modes? AND the box "interlaced" refers to the source or the target?

[jagabo]

Applied the Bob Doubler filter and previewed. Using TFF and deinterlacing method "Bob", advancing through the frames is smooth. NOT 2 FRAMES ARE THE SAME. (Using BFF, it goes back and forth).

1. So, still try the Yadif, double Top?

If you insist on damaging your video by deinterlacing (as opposed to saving as interlaced video), yes.

Each frame of interlaced video contains two half pictures. One half picture is in all the even scanlines, the other in all the odd scanlines. They are inteded to be viewed separately, in sequence. Here's a crop from an interlaced Frame:


Here's what Field Bob - Smooth does to it (notice the double exposure look):


Deinterlace, Yadif, double rate turns it into two frames:


Unfortunately, Yadif also produces some artifacts on horizontal edges. You'll notice them if you flip through frames in VirtualDub.

FYI, at 720 x 480 (same as source) target was 402,132,572 bytes while increasing to 720 x 540 with the bob smooth filter was 287,524,496 bytes. That's 100 MB less for bigger frame and I can't tell the difference.

Not enough info here. Was the filter chain otherwise the same for both? Removing noise leads to more compression with constant quality encoding.

I understand the filter order is important.

2. So what is the order? Deinterlace, Resize, Smooth?

I'm not sure what Smooth filter you're referring to -- presumably some noise reduction. Deinterlace should definitely come first. Resize and Smooth can probably go in either order. You'd have to test for yourself. If it's a deblocking filter you want to deblock before resizing.

3. In filter "Resize" where can I find some explanation of the filter modes? AND the box "interlaced" refers to the source or the target?

I don't know where you can find an explanation. Basically, bilinear reduces nosie and does not sharpen. Bicubic is sharper but enhances noise (the higher the "A" value the sharper the result) and can create oversharpening artifacts at sharp edges. Lanczos3 is even sharper. I wouldn't use the plain Bilinear or Bicubic in VirtualDub, always use the Precise versions, they generate less artifacts.

The interlaced option refers to the state of the video at that point in the filter chain. If you applied a deinterlace filter before resizing it is not interlaced at that point.

[drgt]

If you insist on damaging your video by deinterlacing (as opposed to saving as interlaced video), yes.

I am in no position to insist. Only experts can do that and surely I am not one!! Just regurgitating the info I quoted in previous post.

As far as your posted examples, I do not see any difference between original and field bob - smooth. They both look double exposed to me. For example, the guy with the beret has "2 noses" in both pictures.

Not enough info here. Was the filter chain otherwise the same for both? Removing noise leads to more compression with constant quality encoding.

On the bigger size no filters were used; just xvid and mp3. On the smaller size, in addition to xvid and mp3, the resize filter was used 1st and the field bob smooth as second.

Noise reduction was not enabled in capture. Should have been?

I'm not sure what Smooth filter you're referring to...

Field Bob - Smooth.

The interlaced option refers to the state of the video at that point in the filter chain. If you applied a deinterlace filter before resizing it is not interlaced at that point.

Hmmm... Certainly did NOT deinterlace before I used the resize filter. That means the box should have been checked. I did not know and proceeded with unchecked.

But why the I/L indicator is not lit in G-Spot?

If you are interested, I have uploaded 1 min of the Huffyuv capture. See what you can do with it.
http://rapidshare.com/files/420929560/Test_1Min.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/420929559/Test_1Min.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/420929244/Test_1Min.part3.rar

[jagabo]

As far as your posted examples, I do not see any difference between original and field bob - smooth. They both look double exposed to me. For example, the guy with the beret has "2 noses" in both pictures.

In the "original" image I posted you are seeing both fields (half images) at the same time. When viewed in a media player (or on TV) you are NOT supposed to see both fields at the same time. You are supposed to see one field at a time. Here are the two fields peeled apart and displayed side by side:



VirtualDub shows you both fields because that's what's in the stored frame. It shows you the true state of the source video frames, not something that's been processed for display.

Not enough info here. Was the filter chain otherwise the same for both? Removing noise leads to more compression with constant quality encoding.

On the bigger size no filters were used; just xvid and mp3. On the smaller size, in addition to xvid and mp3, the resize filter was used 1st and the field bob smooth as second.

Noise reduction was not enabled in capture. Should have been?

Noise reduction is a natural consequence of Field Bob - Smooth or any other filter that blurs.

The interlaced option refers to the state of the video at that point in the filter chain. If you applied a deinterlace filter before resizing it is not interlaced at that point.

Hmmm... Certainly did NOT deinterlace before I used the resize filter. That means the box should have been checked. I did not know and proceeded with unchecked.

If you used Field Bob - Smooth before resizing you deinterlaced.

But why the I/L indicator is not lit in G-Spot?

In what? Your source file or your output file? In any case, GSpot only shows you what's flagged in the video, not whether the frames contain interlaced video. If you made an XVID AVI but didn't enable the interlace option in Xvid GSpot would indicate the video is not interlaced. If you enabled the option GSpot would indicate it's interlaced. There's nothing to stop you from enabling the option, regardless of the true state of the video.

[drgt]

If you used Field Bob - Smooth before resizing you deinterlaced.

No, used Field Bob after resizing, so the "Interlaced" box should have been checked; right?


Noise reduction was not enabled in capture. Should have been?


What is "Smart Rendering" under Video menu?


If you downloaded the sample, you will see some distinct noise line at the bottom. Can that be fixed or should I crop it out?

Thanks

[jagabo]

If you used Field Bob - Smooth before resizing you deinterlaced.

No, used Field Bob after resizing, so the "Interlaced" box should have been checked; right?

Yes. But it's best to deinterlace before resizing.

Noise reduction was not enabled in capture. Should have been?

Only if your video needed it. But keep in mind that denoising takes CPU times and may cause dropped frames which, if I recall correctly, was one of your original problems. Since you are going to "fix" the video later you might as well denoise then.

What is "Smart Rendering" under Video menu?

When editing video compressed with inter-frame codecs (like Xvid, Divx, h.264) Smart rendering will cause VirtualDub to recompress only portions of the video that need reencoding (cut GOPs, filters applied to only parts of the video, etc.). The rest of the video will not be recompressed and hence those parts will lose no quality.

If you downloaded the sample, you will see some distinct noise line at the bottom. Can that be fixed or should I crop it out?

VHS always has that noise at the bottom. Crop it away or mask it with a black bar (Fill filter in VirtualDub).

[jagabo]

It took a long time (delays with rapidshare) but i was finally able to get all of your sample video. First, there is something terribly wrong with your cap. The chroma channels are messed up -- pairs of scanlines have different colors. What capture device are you using? Can you try a different VCR or different capture device?

Here's a 59.94 fps sample I made with a combination of AviSynth and VirtualDub filters. I have to warn you, I used a deinterlacing filter called TempGaussMC_beta1mod() in AviSynth. That filter is very slow. I also used a noise reducer called Neat Video in VirtualDub. That filter is also very slow. You're one minute video took about 40 minutes to filter and encode on the computer I was using (a 2.4 GHz dual core Celeron).

[drgt]

It took a long time (delays with rapidshare) but i was finally able to get all of your sample video. First, there is something terribly wrong with your cap. The chroma channels are messed up -- pairs of scanlines have different colors. What capture device are you using? Can you try a different VCR or different capture device?

I know!!!... That's what happens when you do not have the right equipment! First I should have had a NTSC VCR (since the tape is NTSC). In the absence of one, I am using one that can play NTSC tapes on PAL TV (assumed to be PAL 60).

In addition, I do not have a capture card per se, instead I have:

a. Hauppauge HVR 1300 which can capture BUT NOT PAL 60. (IT has a setting for NTSC_443 but that is not working with this VCR). I did try another "NTSC supportive" VCR; same thing). Note that VirtualDub DOES NOT work with the HVR 1300 because of the hardware processor I think).

b. So I am stuck with using an adaptor off my ATI display card called T200 which supports PAL 60. Granted, nice the feature, BUT its a graphics card, not a capture card.

That' why I posted my other thread https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/326081-Pci-pal-60

Here's a 59.94 fps sample I made with a combination of AviSynth and VirtualDub filters. I have to warn you, I used a deinterlacing filter called TempGaussMC_beta1mod() in AviSynth. That filter is very slow. I also used a noise reducer called Neat Video in VirtualDub. That filter is also very slow. You're one minute video took about 40 minutes to filter and encode on the computer I was using (a 2.4 GHz dual core Celeron).

The work you 've done here is EXCELLENT!!! Show me the steps please!

It did need deinterlacing after all eh?

I too have a a 2.4 GHz dual core, INTEL though, 2 gb RAM...so how much processing time for a 6 hour tape?...

I am looking in e-bay for a NTSC VCR, if I find one I can use the HVR 1300 to do the capture which would be ideal, otherwise I must find a PAL 60 supportive pci (preferred) card.

Thanks so much!!!