Why is OBS the superior, the state of art Video Capture Software?

[Truthler]

What does OBS make superior to all other capture software?


First:
It can handle all video capture sources/devices which have drivers. It can record from multiple video sources, what you can switch during the recording.




Second:
It can use all YUV and RGB color formats from 320*240 upto 8K@120fps super high resolution.

Third:
It has countless plugins for various special tasks.

Fourth:
All available container formats (more than 40 container formats) and if you chose Matoska container, it has more than 50 video codecs & audio codecs! No other capture software can offer so many formats on this planet.

It can use the full potential of FFMPEG. You can use your Nvidia cards too , even in NVENC AVC and HEVC lossless formats.

Just watch this short 1min long video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NK2D21HjRMY

[Cornucopia]

Looks like we have another gamemaniaco.


Scott

[Truthler]

Looks like we have another gamemaniaco.


Scott

I did not mention game capture.

[phelissimo_]

In my opinion, VirtualDub2 is better for capturing (especially old video tapes)

[Truthler]

In my opinion, VirtualDub2 is better for capturing (especially old video tapes)

Virtualdub2 can not function in some colorspaces. For example it is unable to record and give a live preview in NV12 color sources.

However OBS has no color format problems, because it knows all colors. VD also don't know so many containers and codecs like OBS, because OBS is standing on the shoulders of FFMPEG.

[Cornucopia]

Looks like we have another gamemaniaco.


Scott

I did not mention game capture.

Neither did I.


Scott

[phelissimo_]

In my opinion, VirtualDub2 is better for capturing (especially old video tapes)

Virtualdub2 can not function in some colorspaces. For example it is unable to record and give a live preview in NV12 color sources.

Who the heck even uses NV12 for video tape capturing?!

However OBS has no color format problems, because it knows all colors. VD also don't know so many containers and codecs like OBS, because OBS is standing on the shoulders of FFMPEG.

VD can use all the standard containers and codecs you need. And VirtualDub can work with AviSynth or alternatives which OBS can't

[Truthler]

In my opinion, VirtualDub2 is better for capturing (especially old video tapes)

Virtualdub2 can not function in some colorspaces. For example it is unable to record and give a live preview in NV12 color sources.

Who the heck even uses NV12 for video tape capturing?!

However OBS has no color format problems, because it knows all colors. VD also don't know so many containers and codecs like OBS, because OBS is standing on the shoulders of FFMPEG.

VD can use all the standard containers and codecs you need. And VirtualDub can work with AviSynth or alternatives which OBS can't

First: NV12 like YV12 are basic main YUV formats for 8bit consumer media files.
Second: Yes, OBS can use Avisynth
https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/rtmp-exec-push-not-working-from-encoder-to-stream...server.118916/

Moreover, Virtualdub2 don't know HW encoding ...

[phelissimo_]

First: NV12 like YV12 are basic main YUV formats for 8bit consumer media files.
Second: Yes, OBS can use Avisynth
https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/rtmp-exec-push-not-working-from-encoder-to-stream...server.118916/

Moreover, Virtualdub2 don't know HW encoding ...

First: YV12 are supported by VirtualDub2.
Second: Have fun configuring that ^^

[Truthler]

First: NV12 like YV12 are basic main YUV formats for 8bit consumer media files.
Second: Yes, OBS can use Avisynth
https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/rtmp-exec-push-not-working-from-encoder-to-stream...server.118916/

Moreover, Virtualdub2 don't know HW encoding ...

First: YV12 are supported by VirtualDub2.
Second: Have fun configuring that ^^

NV12 in 8 bit YUV is the sole output format of JVC Canon Sony Panasonic cameras and camcorders, and VD2 has trouble with NV12.
Second: You did not know the link between Avisynth and FFMPEG.

[themaster1]

hmm yeah for capturing my old vhs tapes with my hdmi card i still use VirtualVcr, i get better stability so far than OBS (preview problems etc..), plus it's light in comparison obs require full screen. When i use VVcr i can browse the web and watch the live recording. food for thought

[phelissimo_]

Second: You did not know the link between Avisynth and FFMPEG.

For me VirtualDub2 gives me the best results. OBS is just not designed for capturing old video tapes, instead for capturing games, your PC screen and such.
Sure, AviSynth will work but not just as easy like with VirtualDub2 / VirtualDub. I personally use OBS often and I really like it, but not for capturing such sources.

[Truthler]

hmm yeah for capturing my old vhs tapes with my hdmi card i still use VirtualVcr, i get better stability so far than OBS (preview problems etc..), plus it's light in comparison obs require full screen. When i use VVcr i can browse the web and watch the live recording. food for thought

Whyt? Does OBS require full screen? I record lossless 4K Utvideo from my camcorder with light small laptop, which has only 1080p display. The result is perfect 4K.

[Truthler]

Second: You did not know the link between Avisynth and FFMPEG.

For me VirtualDub2 gives me the best results. OBS is just not designed for capturing old video tapes, instead for capturing games, your PC screen and such.
Sure, AviSynth will work but not just as easy like with VirtualDub2 / VirtualDub. I personally use OBS often and I really like it, but not for capturing such sources.

Most Youtube content creators (the most professionals) use OBS to record their high quality 4K content, and they upload it later. because it is the best for video capture .

For example watch this video quality: https://youtu.be/lkAIdCZBXWM

[phelissimo_]

[QUOTE=Truthler;2604987]

Most Youtube content creators (the most professionals) use OBS to record their high quality 4K content, and they upload it later. because it is the best for video capture .

I know. But as I said - it's not designed for capturing video tapes.

[dellsam34]

Another troll needs to be taken care of, All the senior members here advice against OBS as analog format video capture and all of a sudden a prophet came along with all his wisdom telling the community after decades of experience such as Lordsmurf that they are all wrong.

[Truthler]

Another troll needs to be taken care of, All the senior members here advice against OBS as analog format video capture and all of a sudden a prophet came along with all his wisdom telling the community after decades of experience such as Lordsmurf that they are all wrong.

All of their myths and misinformations were refuted and debunked step by step, and proved to be false. Maybe they used OBS around 2014...and they did not check/notice its development.

[dellsam34]

Or maybe you've never tried capturing analog video. No, I'm gonna go with this one.

[DB83]

I try to be pragmatic in these situations.


The OP may have a case (even tho I fail to see why pure digital recorded formats need to be 'captured').


But the forum inferred by its name is to help others. So by all means promote an alternative program to capture video. But at the same time reply to all the topics when people come on here for the help when they have problems using the said software. That is share your experience if indeed you have any with it.


And before you ask. No. I have not used it. I have no use for it.

[Truthler]

But the forum inferred by its name is to help others.

Exactly. But there are people for whom the help is more difficult, maybe because they don't know what are they talking about. Because they make statements from a software, what they did not use, or what they used so-many years ago, and they did not follow its development. (Despite OBS is not a complicated software)

That is share your experience if indeed you have any with it.

You have right, maybe I need to explain the details for them.

[smrpix]

OBS is terrific and does what it does very well.

There are better ways to do analog capture of video tapes -- which is generally what is meant around here by "video capture." OP is using the phrase in a non-standard way and further making a provably ludicrous claim that it is the absolute best.

That said, there are many circumstances (such as multiple camera zoom calls with roll ins and overlays) where OBS is certainly my current tool of choice.

[Truthler]

OBS is terrific and does what it does very well.

There are better ways to do analog capture of video tapes -- which is generally what is meant around here by "video capture." OP is using the phrase in a non-standard way and further making a provably ludicrous claim that it is the absolute best.

That said, there are many circumstances (such as multiple camera zoom calls with roll ins and overlays) where OBS is certainly my current tool of choice.

And don't forget, it supports all available color spaces, what Virtualdub2 can't. And the above mentioned format versatility, all codecs and containers what FFMPEG can provide.

[Clockwork]

Looks like we have another gamemaniaco.


Scott

Is that the dude with the cat fetish, or the one with the mold obsession?
I have trouble keeping track.

[Cornucopia]

Mold. But potato/potahto.


Scott

[dellsam34]

Is that the dude with the cat fetish, or the one with the mold obsession?
I have trouble keeping track.

A dude once suggested a screw driver from a swiss knife to a professional plumber, The plumber looked bizarrely at him and shook his head, The dude said: but it is the best swiss knife I ever used .... This is the dude.

[Cornucopia]

[Truthler]

I can't see reasoning/arguments just (baseless) personal attacks.

[DB83]

I do not see personal attacks. I see opinion. What you fail to accept is that others will not see the software with the same rose-tinted glasses as you do.


But while we are still on-topic how about listing those 40 container formats that the software supports and the 50 codecs. And do not simply refer a response back to ffmpeg.

[lordsmurf]

In my opinion, VirtualDub2 is better for capturing (especially old video tapes)

VirtualDub2 doesn't handle capture the same as VirtualDub. It's different. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad.
These all act differently with different cards:
- VirtualDub 1.9.x
- VirtualDub 1.10.x
- VirtualDub FilterMod (pre-2) and earlier VirtualDub2 versions (these are based on 1.10.x)
- VirtualDub2 current version

Always start with 1.9.x, as it is usually best on all Windows OS (especially pre-10) for most cards.
1.10.x and FM and early-2 were buggy at capture.
Current-2 can actually cause dropped frames where other versions did not. But it can also allow cards others do not, and sometimes corrects preview issues for some cards (though stil at risk of more drops, for whatever reason).

What does OBS make superior to all other capture software?

For analog video capture, it's not whatsoever.

I already explained this in-depth here: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/399986-Any-Developers-Out-There-to-Add-HuffYUV-to-...ss#post2604879
... but hopefully Baldrick moves your threadjack/troll posts to this new thread, not sully the other with your OT rant. In which case, the above link will not be needed, my post will appear in this thread from then on.

All of your points are moot because they don't apply to analog video ingest needs. For example, "All available container formats" matters not, because you NEVER want to capture to delivery formats like H.264. Capturing compressed for a progressive screengrab is not ideal, but capturing noisy interlaced to compressed is juts plain nuts. Quality will unviewable, and resources will cause frame drops even with ideal hardware workflow.

When it comes to analog, apparently, you don't know what you don't know. So I suggest you stop this diatribe love letter to OBS developers.

OBS would probably work passably fine for noise-free progressive analog tapes. No grain, no overscan, perfection (aka, screen capturing, which is what OBS was made for). When you find some of those non-existent tape formats, feel free to use it, you have my blessing.

I can't see reasoning/arguments just (baseless) personal attacks.

If calling your advice clueless is a "personal attack", then so be it.

I've been capturing video for 20 years. And you?

A dude once suggested a screw driver from a swiss knife to a professional plumber, The plumber looked bizarrely at him and shook his head, The dude said: but it is the best swiss knife I ever used .... This is the dude.

I also like the analogy of using the wrong tool for a task.

- Hitting nails with a screwdriver may work, sort of, but it's won't be pretty.
- Banging in screws with a hammer may work, sort of, but it won't be pretty.

That analogy came from personal experiences decades ago. (I knew some really stupid people when I was younger!)

Using OBS for analog tape capture is the wrong tool for the task. It'll just make a mess, not do a proper/quality job.

[Truthler]

I do not see personal attacks. I see opinion. What you fail to accept is that others will not see the software with the same rose-tinted glasses as you do.


But while we are still on-topic how about listing those 40 container formats that the software supports and the 50 codecs. And do not simply refer a response back to ffmpeg.

Personal attacks? See #23 and #24.


I already showed the containers and codecs in my video. see: https://youtu.be/NK2D21HjRMY