space needed for capture to vcd quality

[smorgesbord]

I guess you could say im not even a newbie to this, I'm yet to get a capture card though the user reviews and guides on this site have been very informative.

One factor thats not made very clear to newbies like me tho is the hd space needed to capture video!

Im only looking quality wise to transfer vhs to vcd's, nothing else. ( big Oz collection )

my other q would be could any uk members recommend their card cause the one card Id really like in the reviews I cant find a uk supplier for (Visiontek Xtasy Cinema Everything)!

lastly to those with experience of vhs to vcd transfers, do you thinks its generally worth the bother?

[Barnabas]

If you are going to capture with a device that does realtime encoding, via hardware (or software if your box is up to it), you don't need so much HD space. 1 hour worth of SVCD at 2200 kbps is about 1200 megs worth of HD space. If you are going to capture to AVI with Huffy and then convert, you need TONS of space, about 30 gigs per hour or so, depending what RES you capture in.

Converting VHS tape to VCD, SVCD or DVD can give you some problems. Capturing from VHS tape can create many more frame drops, which can be a big problem. While you can buy a Time Base Corrector to help, they don't come cheap.

For my captures, when I capture from VHS tape, I capture to AVI and then convert. For capturing shows on TV, I use Hardware compression.

Looking at your computer specs, you need more power to do real-time software capturing with any quality. Your 20 gigs is WAY too low for AVI capturing. I have an 80 gig drive I use just for capturing.

If done well, and your VHS tape source is good, you CAN make decent looking VCD's and SVCD's from VHS tape, but it takes some work to get it correct.

[smorgesbord]

thanks for the info, jeez the avi method does seem to take loads of space. Realtime encoding seems to be more practical, but i read somewhere the quality isnt as good with this method - how bad are we talking, watchable/murky mess?

for example, hows the picture when you've been using hardware compression compare to your AVI with Huffy captures?

[Barnabas]

With your computer's power and HD space, you would be best off with a HARDWARE encoding capture card. If you only want to make mpeg-1 VCD's, the ProVideo PV-231 or 233 would work well for you.

If you want to make SVCD or DVD, try a Hauppauge PVR-250 or PVR-USB. The picture quality can be pretty darn good from a hardware card. Low bitrate encoding is where capturing to AVI and then encoding to VCD or SVCD really shines, and you can also do some processing which can't be done in real time. I just bought a video processor on eBay that I plan to use to "tweak" the source BEFORE I capture. It that works out as I hope, I will start doing more real-time capturing and less S-L-O-W encodes.

[smorgesbord]

right! its a lot clearer now ta. but i would ask anyone using hardware encoding, whats you card if your in the uk , its seeming very hard to find a uk supplier of the cards mentioned in the reviews section!

[Barnabas]

You can always look on eBay. Many sellers will do International sales

[smorgesbord]

yeah i know, its just for ease of returning if anything goes amiss!

[Pizza Boy]

I use for capture ATI All-In-Wonder Card 128.
I have captured DV,Satelitte Digital Cable and DVD movies
with this card.
I just press record and when I am finished recording I am left with
a finished product. Nothing more to do, Except burn to disk or u/l
files.
I capture all at Mpeg2 SVCD quality. I set it to clip files at 700mb
to fit on CD-R's. Which is all done while the recording process takes place.
The quality is very good. I have had no complaints when sharing files.
This process does not require lots of Hard drive space.
Generally, I use 2 Gigs for 1 movie = 3 - 700mb files.
It is worth it's price when it comes to video ripping.

Last, If you going to take VHS to disk I would recommend SVCD.
No matter what, A DVD player is going to show any and all imperfections
in video quality. It is best to capture/render as SVCD.

[Deusxmachina]

I'm transferring a bunch of 10-year-old VHS sports stuff to SVCD, and you bet it's worth the bother if you want something that won't degrade every time you watch it like VHS will. Plus it takes up so much less space.

I'm using a Pinnacle DC10, and other than not being able to capture with VirtualDub with Windows 2000 (but can edit with it), I can't complain at all. The avis look just like the VHS does, and after running it through a VirtualDub filter, it looks much better. Normally everyone says to use temporal filters to clean up video noise, but no way for VHS. 2dCleaner is the best thing going for VHS, and it's fast. It will take away some of the detail if you crank it up, but the picture looks SO much better than having a "detailed" picture (VHS quality detail) full of detailed noise.

I'm using a 40gig drive at the moment for capturing about an hour at a time. Which would be just fine if I didn't also download big files onto that drive, so because of that things can get a bit cramped. An 80gig is under $100 nowadays, so make sure to think at least 80gig or higher if buying a new one.

Another thing about transferring VHS. I assume OZ is shot on film, so you could get away with mpeg1/VCD and probably fit each episode on a disc no problem. I'm transferring "live" sports stuff, and since mpeg1 doesn't support interlacing, it made the sports look like a movie instead of looking live. The quality was fine, but it didn't have that "live" look. So I'm forced to use mpeg2/SVCD to get the "live" look when playing back on a TV.

[Weeji]

you know, oddly, you are right, Deusxmachina, I recorded a live Disturbed concert from tv, and it had a "movie" feel to it, as if it was shot on film.. which it didnt have on tv.. is there a way around this?

[Deusxmachina]

If you find a way around it, let me know. I searched for days, literally, to figure out the best way to encode my old stuff I want to archive. I knew I could probably fit an hour-and-a-half show sans commercials onto one CD with mpeg1 @ 352x240, but that's almost impossible using mpeg2 @ 352x480. I've been encoding some test samples at 2500k/sec CBR, and that's barely enough for the action at times. 60 minutes is probably the max with squeezing it.

I tried dropping the fields, tried blending the fields, I even tried the splitting the fields then doubling them and doubling the frame rate, but that's really a divx thing since to work right the player (computer) needs to play it back at 60fps. A standalone can't do that. So, mpeg2 @ x480 it is.

Another thing that took me awhile to figure out: if you use TMPG, you have to encode the file with "non-interlace" encoding. It didn't make any sense since it's interlaced, but I guess the reason is many players won't read the file right without it. 3:2 pulldown and interlaced settings made the picture jump all over, but the non-interlace encoding made it perfect. I've been playing with CCE, and it's fast, but I don't care for it other than that, and it's far from as stable as TMPG.

Anyway, to get the live look on a TV, you have to encode at x480. I could find no way around it.