VHS Source: Convert to VCD, SVCD, or CVD?

[spooky130]

I've been reading forum search results for hours today trying to find a consensus on this topic, and failed to do so...so.....

Given a VHS source, and *ONLY* a CD-R (i.e., no ability to use half-DVD, etc.), which is most likely to be the best to convert to, VCD, SVCD, or CVD?

Details specific to my usage:

1) Capture using Leadtek TV2000 XP Deluxe
2) Capture at 720x480, PicVideo MJPEG (Q19)
3) Most VHS tapes are at the 6 (or 8) hour speed recorded from broadcast, some are purchased originals at SP that I want to convert to get a more stable ... not to mention smaller footprint ... copy.

Until recently, I've always assumed that SVCD would be the best: "ok, low-quality source, sure, but why lose *MORE* quality by going to a lower-quality compression?"

More recently, though, I've read arguments that suggest that, due to the lower resolution of VHS source, a VCD copy might still be better than SVCD (on a TV, at least).

Test encode (low-motion---probably a bad choice) between VCD and SVCD proved inconclusive.

Today, I read several posts suggesting CVD at half-D1, thus using a lower resolution more comparable to the source, but MPEG-2 and higher bit rates. Unfortunately, I don't know how to convert to CVD (anyone have a template for TMPGEnc?).

Is there any definite answer to this one? And if the answer is CVD, as I said, does anyone have a TMPGEnc template for CVD that they could send me (or send me a link to)?

Thanks,
--jim

PS: RTFMs quite welcome...but please, post a link to the FM in question! :-)

[Bondiablo]

depends on how much you care about quality, compatiblity & number of discs used.

most to least compatible with players would be VCD - SVCD - xVCD - CVD.

best to worst quality would probably go something like CVD - SVCD - xVCD - VCD.
though the first 3 will likely all be really close.

and number of discs most to least, something like SVCD - CVD - VCD - xVCD

xVCD is the only that will get a full movie on 1 disc with decent quality.

[spooky130]

Primary concern: quality.

I don't mind changing discs in the middle of a movie---if anything, it's a built-in bathroom break, time to grab a new beer, whatever..... Add to that the fact that I can't generally watch TV non-stop for much longer than that, and it works out rather nicely, IMHO.

My DVD player will happily handle SVCD, VCD, and CVD. I have no idea about x(s)vcd.....

Btw, for SVCD, I generally prefer to limit it to about 35--40 minutes/CD, except for NOVA episodes, where I encode the full 55 minutes on one CD.
In other words, I'm used to thinking about 3 discs/average movie.

I meant to mention that in my original post, but forgot. DOH! :-)

[Bondiablo]

In that case I'd use CVD. There's template in recent versions of TMPGEnc Plus. From the project wizard choose Super Video CD and then VBR long sustained format from the drop down.

[spooky130]

Funny...my (very recent, at least w/in the last few months, I think) version of TMPGEnc Plus doesn't have the CVD template. Oh well, after reading your last post, I did another forum search and found instructions for creating one (basically, change the resolution, and then change the audio to 48 kHz instead of 44.1 kHz ... yuck, means I have to convert audio from 44.1 from the capture to 48 before encoding ... oh well).

Thanks! I'll find out tomorrow (after the encoding tonight, while I'm asleep) how it works out. :-)

Later,
--jim

[Bondiablo]

CVD is really just a variation of SVCD. It doesn't actually say CVD anywhere in TMPGEnc but the VBR long sustained format option in the Project Wizards SVCD template is CVD.

[Ejoc]

I have CVD templates for TMPGEnc on my site. Really the only difference is you are changing the 480 width to 352, the rest is the same.

[SatStorm]

CVD's audio, is 44100Khz, not 48000Khz.
If you use 48000Khz, you make something like xCVD (or xSVCD if you prefer...)

The concept of xCVD is "on CD today, on DVD-R tommorow".

Overall, if you are PAL and your source is LP VHS, you have a third alternative: xSVCD like sefy's SxVCD. Search to the tools section for the SxVCD template. Generaly speaking, it is mpeg 2 interlace @ 352 x 288. It is full compatible with DVD Video, but it is -X- for VCD/CVD/SVCD. But it is playable on many standalones and if you know how to capture and filter a LP VHS source, you can succeed intentical the sorce results, in pretty small filesizes.

This trick doesn't work for NTSC

[lordsmurf]

I used to use xCVD with 48hz audio and 3.5 VBR interlaced 352x480 MPEG-2.

Works fine in my Apex. Will be easy to dump to DVD in the future, and it'll have great quality, unlike true-to-book SVCD/CVD (2.52 VBR) or low-res VCD.

[spooky130]

Wow...lots of replies on this one---thanks to all!

Ok, I downloaded Ejoc's CVDCBR template (many thanks!), and used it to convert a VHS cap last night. I'll check it out in a little while, but I'm sure it's OK.

As for the audio sampling rate, a post I found by searching on (as I recall) "tempgenc cvd template" last night listed instructions for making a CVD template, and that post said 48 kHz, so that's what I went by before I saw Ejoc's post (and looked at the template). I'll gladly keep it at 44.1, though, since that's what I'm capturing at. :-)

Finally (I think), any advice (and guides?) on using VirtualDub filters to clean up low-quality (old SLP/EP/whatever...6 hour speed) VHS captures? A lot of mine are quite old, some are copies (where I edited out commercials after recording from the broadcast by copying to another tape), and on some, the color is washed out...... Suggestions/links?

Many thanks again to everyone!
--jim

[spooky130]

When I posted this topic yesterday, I mentioned that I'd seen lots of discussion on this, but no consensus as to what to use for VHS caps (VCD, SVCD, CVD, etc.). (On the other hand, replies here seem to generally agree on CVD....)

Well, after viewing the first bit of a VHS cap from yesterday (converted to CVD overnight), consensus or not, the results speak for themselves: CVD is very clearly the winner over both VCD and SVCD for VHS caps..... The quality (compared to two 4-minute test discs, one VCD and one SVCD, that I did yesterday) is significantly better.

So once again, thanks for the replies so far---you've all helped me make a big leap forward in quality. :-)

Next leap: filtering. Something tells me that one is not going to be as easy. :-(

Later,
--jim

[SaSi]

Filtering: Do you refer to image quality?

If you are encoding with Tmpgenc, then you might want to consider the built in filters (especially if you have a fast (P4/2.4 and above) PC.

Otherwise, you can get equally good results with VirtualDUB as a separate process. Which opens a huge discussion about gradual loss in quality with multiple codec interventions, issues about frame serving, and the whole lot.

After trying several tricks, I ended up with a faster machine and using batch encoding in Tmpgenc.

Now, if you use Tmpgenc, you might want to use the following filters (found in the advanced settings):

Ghost reduction: Works marvels in TV captures. Can totaly cancel out the visible ghost generated by reflections in the TV signal and also offers a blur filtering that virtualy removes scan lines and artifacts.

Noise reduction: If you don't need the above, Noise reduction with the default settings and High Quality mode enabled, gives excellent results. You will need it with LP tapes.

Simple color correction: To correct exposure, oversaturated or faint colors, brightness, etc. Use this filter last. Experiment with several frames to find if you need any corrections. You may need to correct color balance with old VHS tapes.

[spooky130]

By filtering, yes, I do refer to image quality. What I was thinking about was filtering on the high-resolution side with VirtualDub (MJPEG-->MJPEG).

Suggestions?

[Ejoc]

I filter using AVISynth, and Convolution3D works good on cleaning up VHS captures.

[xtreemkareem]

TMPGEnc has filters that work wonders. Don't use HiQuality mode unless you're looking to double you encode times for minimal difference. Don't overdo the filters or you'll introduce noise. And remeber - half the artificacts you see on your PC Monitor won't be on your TV. As for CVD audio? Completely your chice. A 50$ cheapo APEX will playback audio in both 44.1 and 48 KHz so I go 48 just in case one day I want to burn to DVD (not too likely for only one or 2 disc movies but hey, what the heck). Most SVCD compatible players support CVD (especially APEX) and a number of those will support 48 khz audio. If you have no intention of transfering to DVD one day, just go 44.1 khz to be safe. SVCD should look better than VCD... only that funky 2/3 D1 resolution is kinda high for its maximum bitrate = major macroblocking.

[spooky130]

And remeber - half the artificacts you see on your PC Monitor won't be on your TV.

I assume you're talking about interlacing artifacts there? Or are there others that won't show up on the TV?

Frankly, though, artifacts aren't (normally) the big problem with the old VHS caps---washed out color, video noise, etc., are the big ones that I've run into so far.

[xtreemkareem]

Interlacing isn't an artifact. If your capture source is interlace, to maintain interlace quality, encode as interlaced CVD, which is better quality than rgular. If you encode to VCD (NTSC anyways) you can't encode as interlace.... however PAL guys get way with interlcing at PAL VCD resolution... lucky bastards. Interlace only looks funky on a progressive source - in which case you have a few options such as weave, bob, or blend/interpolate. That aside, MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 at lower bitrates definitely display compression noise artifacts simly due to the nature of the algorithm. Their are quantisization and GOP options to help blur these out such as macroblocking artifacts, etc. When capturing from an analog source, by default there will be some noise produced, and some of it may already be from the source. The point being when your final produt is viewed on your monitor, you may see afew annoying looking artifacts and noise, etc., but most should disappear on the TV which is a low res low definition display device. That's why you shouldn't try using a bunch of blur filters else you will get a really blured up look on TV. The TV is sort of like Seurat's pointalism... your eye will naturally rearange all the low res bits to make a decent looking picture... you have to know about seurat to get my jist here but yea... don't overkill on noise reduction/blurring.