Ulead Visual Studio 6 vs. Virtual Dub

[gpwake]

So far I am finding that capturing with VDub cuts my frame loss rate by a TON.....Ulead losses like 50 frames to every 1000 captured, where VDub only losses around 5 or so! Am i NUTZ??? Actually, don't answer that!

Anyone else there that has used both, and has comments regarding quality and performance?

I wonder if VDub actually captures a better quality AVI than Ulead does? I haven't compared the 2 much, but maybe someone out there has, and can add to this topic....

I know that frame loss has alot to do with system specs, but the question is really whether in general VDub out performs Ulead or vice versa when it comes to capturing video........

LATE

[Tommyknocker]

I use Video Studio 6 with my ADS IDVD. It captures at MPEG-2 704 X 480 with no frames dropped. Hmmm. Must be the hardware. 8).

I only can use VDub for capturing with my Win TV Go Card. The highest I can go is 320 x 240 before I begin to drop frames.

[gpwake]

Probaby is the hardware as i am using a Dazzle DVC 80. Thank god i have my VisionTek XTASY Everything on its way! Hopefully i will have better luck with that!

[pepegot1]

I use Virtual Dub and then mpeg encode with TempGenc. You can edit in VD, and are not contrained by the 4 gig limit, if you are not an XP User. If I need to add titles, effects, .. etc., then I use Studio6 to burn in. If I don't need Titles, effects, etc., then I use CRDWIN (cue/bin) made with VCDImageGUI to burn.
Virual Dub has many extras that make it a delight. Cropping is a snap.