Hi8 capture—digitizing using Digital8 camcorder vs. a professional service

[Sharc]

...Hopefully the thread can return to the intended topic.

Comments and recommendations have been given in the first few posts. Just follow it/do it

[stuffdvideo]

How are we supposed to know, since you didn't include a sample

Fair enough. I'm attempting to attach 10 seconds from a much longer clip of 33-year-old Hi8 video digitized by a Digital8 camcorder. I extracted the 10 seconds using ffmepg with "copy" as one of the arguments, which I understand *should* preserve the original encoding rather than re-encoding (please let me know if that's not actually the case, as a re-encode could obviously impact quality.)

This clip demonstrates the uneven saturation. Yellows appear over-saturated, some dark shades (green in the costumes, and blue in the bottom-left foreground) look reasonably saturated while some lighter shades (greens of the foliage and blue of the sky) are under-saturated. Using my NLE's color correction tools to improve an individual clip like this can vary from trivial to complicated, but as the saturation issues aren't consistent I can't just come up with one set of corrections to apply to all these old clips. That's why I'm curious if getting the tapes re-digitized by someone with better equipment could reduce the uneven saturation issues and minimize the need for color corrections.

[Sharc]

Your capture has levels instabilities which cause flicker. So you don't have to tackle this with color corrections, but rather look for deflicker algorithms. Can't tell whether its origin is in the Hi8 source and happend during shooting, or whether it was introduced by the D8 digitization (AGC/gain issues), but I don't think it is due to a degraded tape.
Sidenote: The clip has its luma extending into the 235...255 range (even with clipping/crushed brights) which is prone to cause more clipping and problems in subsequent processing steps (e.g. color corrections). Keep an eye on this. DV (D8) digitization is simple, but such levels issues are much better under control using an analog lossless capturing process, btw.

[rgr]

Flicker may have been in the original recording. This fragment should be played on VCR and checked.
It's - it's there and that's it. Neat Video should be able to handle this.
There is no flicker - tape to re-capture.

There are also a lot of minor image defects (black streaks), the question is whether they are in the original.

Video obviously needs simple luma correction, but it's easier than in analog.

[Sharc]

Here a quick shot using Retinex, reducing the brightness flicker somewhat (in exchange of hue fluctuations though ... )

[Sharc]

Unless I am mistaken it seems to me there is a chroma lag issue with the interlaced .mov capture of post#32.
The chroma motion seems to advance ("update") with every other field only which causes chroma ghosting.
Slow motion of separated fields is attached.

[VWestlife]

Analog Video8/Hi8 footage played in Sony Handycams with Digital NR (DNR) enabled will exhibit a color trailing effect on fast motion. This happens when played in analog Hi8 camcorders, too, not just Digital8 ones. The manual recommends turning DNR off if you see a "conspicuous afterimage".

This post explains how Sony's DNR works:
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-workflows/14546-sony-ccd-trv65.html#post97970

[Sharc]

Analog Video8/Hi8 footage played in Sony Handycams with Digital NR (DNR) enabled will exhibit a color trailing effect on fast motion. This happens when played in analog Hi8 camcorders, too, not just Digital8 ones. The manual recommends turning DNR off if you see a "conspicuous afterimage".

This post explains how Sony's DNR works:
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-workflows/14546-sony-ccd-trv65.html#post97970

Hmmm.... maybe this explains it. With DNR ON they average the chroma of the 2 fields and use that average for both fields, hence halving the temporal chroma resolution compared to luma.

[lollo]

Similar to what happens in JVC S-VHS non edit mode: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/401232-JVC-S-VHS-settings-for-capture-%28again%29 (edit mode mitigate the issue, but not not always)

[stuffdvideo]

Analog Video8/Hi8 footage played in Sony Handycams with Digital NR (DNR) enabled will exhibit a color trailing effect on fast motion. This happens when played in analog Hi8 camcorders, too, not just Digital8 ones. The manual recommends turning DNR off if you see a "conspicuous afterimage".
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-workflows/14546-sony-ccd-trv65.html#post97970

Thanks for posting that info. I'll have to try re-importing with DNR turned off and see if it makes any difference, assuming the camcorder cooperates (sometimes it will play entire tapes without a hitch, other times video playback is overwhelmed by static, seemingly at random).

[dellsam34]

It's a personal preference based on how much time and effort one can put into an archiving task, There are two extremes, Mostly hardware or mostly software, One can go from conventional capture with everything set to capture in the best possible way (including best hardware and hardware processing, TBC, DNR, procamp ...etc) to VHSdecode with heavy software post proc. on raw RF, There is also a combination of each that gives an unlimited choices in between.

[rgr]

Similar to what happens in JVC S-VHS non edit mode: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/401232-JVC-S-VHS-settings-for-capture-%28again%29 (edit mode mitigate the issue, but not not always)

One of the reasons why JVC units should be used for watching tapes, but not for digitizing them.

[Alwyn]

test (x264).mp4 post #34

That looks nice, not much point posting it though without telling us how you did it. What process did you use?

Here, Neat video did little to fix the pulsating, I suspect because the cadence is too slow.

[lollo]

One of the reasons why JVC units should be used for watching tapes, but not for digitizing them.

Stop your non sense.

That "inter-frame chroma contamination", i referred to just as example in this thread, stands for 1 frame at scene change fading in the next. So is simply not visible, except to someone analyzing the captures frame-by-frame like me.

Because I tend to reduce the AviSynth processing to absolute minimum possible, the NR in the JVC (lowered by the edit mode) is a positive feature, because it outcomes a nice video when keeping the original capture (most of the time my only filtering is masking the head switching noise), or allows to minimize the somehow "destructive" effects of the AviSynth filtering because a less aggressive (temporal) processing is required.

[rgr]

test (x264).mp4 post #34

That looks nice, not much point posting it though without telling us how you did it. What process did you use?

Standard luma correction + QTGMC with the 'slow' preset.

[rgr]

One of the reasons why JVC units should be used for watching tapes, but not for digitizing them.

Stop your non sense.

That "inter-frame chroma contamination", i referred to just as example in this thread, stands for 1 frame at scene change fading in the next. So is simply not visible, except to someone analyzing the captures frame-by-frame like me.

So your analyses aren't impressive. If they were any good, you’d find plenty of frames like that. But, as we know, analysis isn't your strong suit. And that’s not JVC’s biggest problem anyway.

Because I tend to reduce the AviSynth processing to absolute minimum possible, the NR in the JVC (lowered by the edit mode) is a positive feature

We can see the effects of JVC's hardware noise reduction. Any filter is better than that.

because it outcomes a nice video when keeping the original capture (most of the time my only filtering is masking the head switching noise)

The DVD era is over - this gets cropped, not masked.

or allows to minimize the somehow "destructive" effects of the AviSynth filtering because a less aggressive (temporal) processing is required.

There is nothing worse than the filter on JVC units (which cannot be turned off); it is the absolute pinnacle of image destruction.
https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/84111-1734125283/moving%20textures%20JVC%20AUTO.avi

[lollo]

So your analyses aren't impressive. If they were any good, you’d find plenty of frames like that.

You won't stop yor idiocies even in front of evidences, isn't it? compare_bis_1a_1b_1c_1d.avi

We can see the effects of JVC's hardware noise reduction. Any filter is better than that.

It depends on the processing and what one wants to "trade".

The DVD era is over - this gets cropped, not masked.

If the player supports the PAR flagging.

[The 14th Doctor]

Well this thread certainly went off the deep to "erm actually, JVC VCRs suck!"

I've done my comparisons between two JVC S-VHS VCRs being an MV45U and VS30U, image quality is basically the same, only very very minor nitpicking like differences. This is with both units set to Edit mode which does reduce the denoising from the JVCs.

Now in comparison to a Panasonic AG-1980 it is better than the JVCs in two scenarios, mono linear audio and video quality for specifically LP and EP mode tapes. SP mode is when the quality differences are small, nothing more than a slight frame shift and the head switching noise being reduced by like, two pixels. In the context of EP mode the JVCs are blurrier and have more head switching noise visible.

So then, are your tapes LP or EP mode RGR? If so then that explains it.. I dunno what recording mode Lollo used but I'm assuming it's been SP mode.

[rgr]

So your analyses aren't impressive. If they were any good, you’d find plenty of frames like that.

You won't stop yor idiocies even in front of evidences, isn't it?
[Attachment 93291 - Click to enlarge]

What conclusions would need to be drawn from a video that is unrelated to the topic?

We can see the effects of JVC's hardware noise reduction. Any filter is better than that.

It depends on the processing and what one wants to "trade".

JVC is very good for cheap, weak denoising - I think that's what you wanted to write.

The DVD era is over - this gets cropped, not masked.

If the player supports the PAR flagging.

If it doesn't support PAR support, masking won't help anyway.
And if the advice for such a person is "set DAR 4:3" then it is still better to make a good crop.

[rgr]

Now in comparison to a Panasonic AG-1980 it is better than the JVCs in two scenarios, mono linear audio

In HiFi Panasonic will be better too. Less clearly, but still. Well, it also depends on the tape. And even from where it was started.

and video quality for specifically LP and EP mode tapes. SP mode is when the quality differences are small, nothing more than a slight frame shift and the head switching noise being reduced by like, two pixels. In the context of EP mode the JVCs are blurrier and have more head switching noise visible. So then, are your tapes LP or EP mode RGR? If so then that explains it..

I don't have and probably never have had problems with JVC in LP mode. But I didn't really look at such tapes either.
All I remember is once having to turn on the stabilizer on the S6850 to keep the image from jittering.

Provide a video sample, preferably similar to mine, from both VCRs. And it depends which JVC model you had.

[lollo]

What conclusions would need to be drawn from a video that is unrelated to the topic?

Unrelated? (pearls before swine)

JVC is very good for cheap, weak denoising - I think that's what you wanted to write.

Bullshit.

If it doesn't support PAR support, masking won't help anyway.

No, masking will preserve 4:3 DAR, which is universally accepted (I head troubles in only 2 cases)

And if the advice for such a person is "set DAR 4:3" then it is still better to make a good crop.

No, better to keep right proportion and avoid resizing.

[The 14th Doctor]

Well I can certainly provide an old screenshot example for the time being

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/420129-VCR-vs-VCR#post2793195

[lollo]

I dunno what recording mode Lollo used but I'm assuming it's been SP mode.

Only S-VHS, SP modes, high quality cables, first generation, never resused a tape (so the starting quality is extremely high, and I can appreciate the differences when deviating from the recommended workflows)

But I also manage to work on recordings from many others, so the conditions are quite different compared to my own case. And in that case there is never a "best" VCR. A specific device may work better or fail compared to another for certain tapes. That's why we "never generalize" and suggest to have a set of different machines to solve different issues.

edit: And also actual conditions of these old machines are more important than the specific model.

[rgr]

JVC is very good for cheap, weak denoising - I think that's what you wanted to write.

Bullshit.

Well, I see...
https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/84111-1734125283/moving%20textures%20JVC%20AUTO.avi
You can't see because your "test" is one frame

If it doesn't support PAR support, masking won't help anyway.

No, masking will preserve 4:3 DAR, which is universally accepted (I head troubles in only 2 cases)

And if the advice for such a person is "set DAR 4:3" then it is still better to make a good crop.

No, better to keep right proportion and avoid resizing.

1. LOL, cropping isn't resizing.
2. I can provide magic data for proportional crop :P

[lollo]

Well I can certainly provide an old screenshot example for the time being

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/420129-VCR-vs-VCR#post2793195

I posted some time ago a comparison between a JVC S-9600 and a Panasonic NV-FS 200, could not find now, if you search (better than me) the forum you can look at it

[lollo]

Well, I see...
https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/84111-1734125283/moving%20textures%20JVC%20AUTO.avi
You can't see because your "test" is one frame

Sure, only 1 frame in my sample.

1. LOL, cropping isn't resizing.

Really? Only you knew that, I am not aware of it

2. I can provide magic data for proportional crop :P

You really cannot provide any useful to me.

[rgr]

Well, I see...
https://forum.videohelp.com/attachments/84111-1734125283/moving%20textures%20JVC%20AUTO.avi
You can't see because your "test" is one frame

Sure, only 1 frame in my sample.

One frame without comparison to decent equipment -- in a useless test. The operator must have been drinking quite a bit since the brightness there was changing

1. LOL, cropping isn't resizing.

Really? Only you knew that, I am not aware of it

You are not aware of many things.

2. I can provide magic data for proportional crop :P

You really cannot provide any useful to me.

I think so too - you would have to be able to understand them first.

[lollo]

One frame without comparison to decent equipment -- in a useless test. The operator must have been drinking quite a bit since the brightness there was changing

It is quite evident how the chroma contamination progresses, for someone able to understand.

You are not aware of many things.

You didn't even get the irony (or you tried to respond with another one of your idiocies).

I think so too - you would have to be able to understand them first.

There is nothing to understand in your nonsense; only something to laugh at.

Another thread derailed off-topic and into personal attacks. I apologize with the forum, because dellsam34 warned me about "Just put the noise in the ignore list and move on, It's not worth pursuing and it's not good for the forum."
I am going to (perhaps) follow his suggestion

[dellsam34]

One of the reasons why JVC units should be used for watching tapes, but not for digitizing them.

I don't think you know what you are talking about, If your JVC deck sucks that bad get a better one or get it serviced by a qualified person who knows how to get it back in a good working order, The linear track on JVCs can be readjust, I did my decks and they sound as good as the original track on tape can be, Both my decks had the alignment seal broken, So clearly someone had tempered with them before.

Here is a clip in linear mono with one of my JVC decks.

[Joscraft_05]

That's correct, That's why I advised against certain D8 camcorders and suggested using the original Hi8 camcorder outputs, high end Hi8 camcorders tend to have better digital processing than cheap stripped down D8 camcorders.

I don't know if this is related to the video heads too or the internal processing and chips of the camera (this is why i'm actually interested in getting in my hands a working vhs-decode setup with my CX PCI card, but i will be using it with a stock CX card and without that ADA amplifier), i found a German Sony magazine from the late 90's and in a small part i found a section where they talked about the late 90's Sony Video 8 XR and Hi8 XR cameras apparently having newer and improved "Hyper MIG" video heads based from digital video technologies, then in my small research about this i found a pdf in the internet talking about this and saying these heads apparently improved the luma and chroma signals and had a better signal to noise ratio with a better build quality on the heads.

Here's the evidence:

[Attachment 93344 - Click to enlarge]