low quality Hi8 captures - normal?

[egg]

Hi,

newbie here. Read this site from top to bottom, but not really sure if my problem is 'normal'.

I've a AMD Athlon 700, 384MB RAM.

Trying to capture some Hi8 tapes to PC using virtualdub.

When I use these settings, all is OK:
352x288, PAL, Huffyuy at BEST settings. looks 'ok'.

When I use these settings, it goes horribly wrong.
480x576, PAL, huffyuy or picvideo. The picture is graphically 'corrupted' and VERY slow and jerky. But, no frames were dropped in the capture.

Any ideas? Is my processor too slow to capture video at this resolution?

Does this mean I cannot make SVCDs on my pc from the hi8 tapes?



thnx
egg

[kini mini]

I'm even newer than you are, haven't even bought a capture card yet, but capturing Hi8 tapes is my no.1 priority so I'd like to hear any solutions!

[egg]

yeah... the problem is - I've read sooo much, I'm now confused.

Some people say capture at 352x288, and that's fine. Others say capture at a high res. then reduce size when making the mpeg etc.

Other people with similar machines seem to be able to capture at higher res. than me, so I was wondering what's causing this problem

[egg]

100+ views and no comments? anyone?

should I provide more information for you? I'm still at a loss as to why this problem occurs, and would love to have some advice please.

- why is this happening? any idea?
- what really is the best way (resolution wise) to make a PAL hi8 video

THANKS!

:P

[TheCamel]

Hi egg, I used to have the same probs as you, I have a similar set of hardware as you. This is the best procedure I worked out after much trial & error on CDRWs and extensive reading of the posts on this forum over the last couple of years (thanks guys!)

Capture to 352 x 576 if you can without dropping frames (some dropped frames are ok - I get 0.1% - 0.2% with no probs), this means you capture both fields interlaced, using Huffyuv at best settings. I no longer try to capture over 352 due to dropped frames, but quality doesn't seem to suffer particularly as unlike the vertical axis there are no interlacing issues.

352 x 576 also happens to be a DVD-legal format, so you can move your movies to DVD eventually without re-encoding video (although you will need 48Khz audio for this).

I suggest using Virtual dub as it allows to capture >2Gb (in multi-segment mode) and is the only way I have found of ensuring audio sync lock.

Next step depends on output format - for VCD you need to deinterlace & resize, best is to use Donald Graft's "Smart Deinterlace" filter followed by Chris LaRosa's "2:1 Vertical Reduction" filter to resize smoothly (in this order for best results to ensure deinterlacing has as much res as possible to work with).

For X(S)VCD I personally prefer to leave res at 352 x 576 interlaced, then encode (with TMPGenc) that to MPEG2 VBR 2400 avg / 2500 max and let my DVD player cope with the resizing to give the correct aspect ratio display.

One last thing in my case is that my DVD player thinks that it doesn't play MPEG-2 (& therefore SVCDs) - it is mistaken - I have to fool it by using the VCD header trick http://www.geocities.com/newestmoviesencode/dvdvcd. In my case MPEG-2 is important as it allows me to keep the video interlaced for maximum clarity on my TV.

I hope that all makes sense, any questions just post

[egg]

MANY THANKS for your reply!

I'm gonna buy a s-video cable sometime this week (was using comp.) and then I'll try the 352 x 576 resolution.

I'm sure to have many many questions about encoding.... but I'll take it a step at a time first!

just one question: is 352 x 576 really ok for SVCD, as the resolution is too low. This is the reason I was trying to capture at a high res.

OK, Thanks for the moment!

[D_Knife]

I must COMPLETELY agree WITH TheCamel - 352x576 is a excellent capture format

For X(S)VCD I personally prefer to leave res at 352 x 576 interlaced, then encode (with TMPGenc) that to MPEG2 VBR 2400 avg / 2500 max and let my DVD player cope with the resizing to give the correct aspect ratio display.

This is called CVD - not VCD but CVD - and most SVCD players accept it correctly - even with 48Khz audio
letting your DVD player re-construct a full frame results in stunning looking video - especially with CCE - I prefer that over TMPEGEnc especially in 3 pass VBR mode

basiclly don't be fooled by the size of 352x576 - let your DVD player do the hard work and not you.

[egg]

ok, thanks!

So, that's great when I wanna make a ?VCD. But what if I want to keep a encoded file on my PC for viewing (maybe using TVOut).

Will this format be friendly too me. Or should I make another encode, to a PC friendly format?

[D_Knife]

well I don't make VCD's anymore - I use 352x576 interlaced and play it with my Hollywood Plus card
any software DVD player works with CVD's as well

[SatStorm]

@ egg: I always suggest to newbies to read only the official guides first and then search for alternatives. All forum suggestions are alternatives of the well known info from the guides in the left of your screen!

Anyway, even with a typical RCA composite cable you are able to capture @ any resolution PAL/NTSC resolution. In theory S-Video provides you better qualtiy and Composite is limited to 640 X 480 (that means enough for 352 X 480/576), but in praxis we can't use theory's claims because of limitations / bad today hardware. There are only some luminance differences, easy adjustable with the use of Virtualdub.

About 352 X 576/480 and CVD, more infos here: http://www.vcdhelp.com/forum/userguides/98177.php

Good luck

[egg]

thanks for all the info people. But my original problem stands, and I'm still wondering why.

So, do you think, my problems with capturing at 480x576 are due to lack of decent hardware - or something else?

Either way, I'll try out all your suggestions this weekend, and report back later!

THNX!

[Donovan]

egg,

The reason your picture is slow and jerky is probably down to hardware - I also get slow jerky results with Huffyuy (at best) captured at 720*576 PAL on a P III (1Ghz), 512MB Ram, 7200rpm HDD and 32MB Radeon VE.

However, when I transcode to MPEG-2 (or DV AVI) the motion is smooth...

Donovan