Problems Digitizing VHS Cassettes...

[Kong]

I saw someone mention that D8 camcorders have TBC? Did I understand that correctly? Do ALL of these cameras have this feature?

Some D8 camcorders have TBC. My understanding is the TBC is inoperative on pure Digital 8 tapes because the video is digital (aka Firewire). The TBC is used when playing analogue tapes ie Video8 or Hi8.

It has been claimed that the TBC in these D8 camcorders functions on the passthrough signal (eg VCR to Firewire) but I can't see it in the test I did in post #59 so I remain to be convinced.

You'll have to check each model number; this wiki shows which Sonys do Passthrough.

All D8 camcorders can output over Firewire.

As for the Ebay prices, hard to know... perhaps we've passed peak video-transfer? And watch out for the fakes... from our very own VWestlife, a YT video on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG46lGBwa_s

Re your Firewire 400/800, you can get adapter cables with 4-pin FW400 on one end and 9-pin FW 800 on the other eg this one.

Alrighty.. Thanks

[rgr]

- DV's inferior color subsampling (4:1:1 for NTSC or 4:2:0 for PAL) as opposed to 4:2:2 for recommended lossless analog VHS captures.

With VHS and its low horizontal chroma resolution, YUV411 is worth the same as YUV422.

[lollo]

- DV's inferior color subsampling (4:1:1 for NTSC or 4:2:0 for PAL) as opposed to 4:2:2 for recommended lossless analog VHS captures.

And while there, 4:1:1 was designed as good digital approximation of the analog consumer formats (540 luma lines, 120 chroma lines). VHS/S-VHS feature 240/400 luma lines and <50 chroma lines, so theoretically fits well despite the constraints of its subsampling.
The downside of 4:1:1 is that the chroma resolution is so low that it is clearly visible (if not properly low-pass filtered, but that's another story)

As I wrote earlier, 4:2:0 means dropping every line of full horizontal resolution color in exchange for vertically higher color resolution, which is not adequate for surces with low chroma resolution.

In principle, 4:1:1 better fits the full horizontal resolution and low vertical resolution of consumer formats while 4:2:0 looks better for sources with high vertical chroma resolution, where 4:1:1 would lose significantly more vertical information than horizontal information. Of course 4:2:2 is better

[rgr]

- DV's inferior color subsampling (4:1:1 for NTSC or 4:2:0 for PAL) as opposed to 4:2:2 for recommended lossless analog VHS captures.

And while there, 4:1:1 was designed as good digital approximation of the analog consumer formats (540 luma lines, 120 chroma lines). VHS/S-VHS feature 240/400 luma lines and <50 chroma lines, so theoretically fits well despite the constraints of its subsampling.
The downside of 4:1:1 is that the chroma resolution is so low that it is clearly visible (if not properly low-pass filtered, but that's another story)

As I wrote earlier, 4:2:0 means dropping every line of full horizontal resolution color in exchange for vertically higher color resolution, which is not adequate for surces with low chroma resolution.

In principle, 4:1:1 better fits the full horizontal resolution and low vertical resolution of consumer formats while 4:2:0 looks better for sources with high vertical chroma resolution, where 4:1:1 would lose significantly more vertical information than horizontal information. Of course 4:2:2 is better

There are so many errors here that I will only correct the last sentence:

In principle, 4:1:1 better fits the low horizontal resolution and full vertical resolution of consumer formats while 4:2:0 looks better for sources with high horizontal chroma resolution, where 4:1:1 would lose significantly more horizontal information than vertical* information. Of course 4:2:2 is as good as 4:1:1 (for VHS)

* - he loses nothing here

[Sharc]

Attached 4 (synthetic) cases with U,V chroma resolutions for different 4-x-x formats. Take what you think "fits" your (interlaced) VHS/S-VHS captures "best" or adequate

Edit: Keeping in mind that NTSC has a lower vertical resolution than PAL (480 or 486 for NTSC vs 576 for PAL) the decision for DV may have been to NOT sacrifice any vertical chroma resolution but to compromise on the horizontal resolution instead, hence 4:1:1 for NTSC.
For PAL the compromise is made on the vertical chroma resolution, at the benefit of higher horizontal chroma resolution, hence 4:2:0.
Just speculating.
Obviously, 4:2:2 is the best compromise for both NTSC and PAL with respect to chroma resolution deficiency, with 4:4:4 just being overkill.

[rgr]

Was the source 4:1:1 material - as it is actually captured from the VCR?

[Sharc]

Was the source 4:1:1 material - as it is actually captured from the VCR?

It explains the principle. You can take any dodgy source and argue on your own.

[rgr]

Was the source 4:1:1 material - as it is actually captured from the VCR?

It explains the principle. You can take any dodgy source and argue on your own.

But not for showing the differences with a VCR source.
In fact, you could use an HD source and demonstrate that it's worth saving VCR files in HD, as it's better than SD.

Your source should look something like this, to match VHS:

ColorBars(720,576,"YUV444").KillAudio
chroma=BilinearResize(60,288).BilinearResize(720,576)
luma=BilinearResize(360,288).BilinearResize(720,576)
MergeChroma(luma,chroma)
ConvertToYUV444 # YUV422,411,420 etc.

Now check the differences.

[lollo]

There are so many errors here

Sure

Of course 4:2:2 is as good as 4:1:1 (for VHS)

No! As I wrote, for capturing VHS and S-VHS 4:2:2 is better than 4:2:0 and 4:1:1

[lollo]

Keeping in mind that NTSC has a lower vertical resolution than PAL (480 or 486 for NTSC vs 576 for PAL) the decision for DV may have been to NOT sacrifice any vertical chroma resolution but to compromise on the horizontal resolution instead, hence 4:1:1 for NTSC.

Yes, that's the story, as I wrote earlier.

For PAL the compromise is made on the vertical chroma resolution, at the benefit of higher horizontal chroma resolution, hence 4:2:0.

Yes, but 4:2:0 was introduced/better fits sources with "high" chroma resolution, not VHS/S-VHS.

Obviously, 4:2:2 is the best compromise for both NTSC and PAL with respect to chroma resolution deficiency, with 4:4:4 just being overkill.

Absolutely!

[Sharc]

@rgr post #128: The principle of color subsampling and associated chroma resolution is independent of the source. You can emulate or use any source, emulate or use a good or worn VCR, declare this as your "VCR/VHS reference" and then argue - or worse even generally conclude - that "one cannot see a difference" between various subsampling schemes.

[rgr]

There are so many errors here

Sure

You don't have to confirm, I know. I corrected it.

Of course 4:2:2 is as good as 4:1:1 (for VHS)

No! As I wrote, for capturing VHS and S-VHS 4:2:2 is better than 4:2:0 and 4:1:1

Of course, capturing non-existent values is very important. So also consider capturing in FHD.

[rgr]

@rgr post #128: The principle of color subsampling and associated chroma resolution is independent of the source. You can emulate or use any source, emulate or use a good or worn VCR, declare this as your "VCR/VHS reference" and then argue - or worse even generally conclude - that "one cannot see a difference" between various subsampling schemes.

The differences are visible, of course most noticeably in (high-quality) laboratory samples. This does not hold here.

[lollo]

I corrected it.

You cannot correct anything, because you are wrong. You can keep arguing with your crap AviSynth emulations instead of real VHS/S-VHS signals in proper workflows as long as you want, but capturing at 4:2:2 is better.

End of the story.

[rgr]

I corrected it.

You cannot correct anything, because you are wrong.

Maybe you should just learn to read and speak logically? Without confusing basic concepts?

You can keep arguing with your crap AviSynth emulations instead of real VHS/S-VHS signals in proper workflows as long as you want, but capturing at 4:2:2 is better..

It hurts so much you've never been able to do any tests? Okay, let it hurt. It's supposed to hurt

[lollo]

It hurts so much you've never been able to do any tests? Okay, let it hurt. It's supposed to hurt

I never test with "emulated sources". Just use real excellent tapes, in real excellent worflows, with real excellent expertize.

As you realize, no reason to be hurt!

[rgr]

in real excellent worflows

I told you it was worth abandoning JVC.

, with real excellent expertize.

Phew, I was already afraid you were doing it yourself!

[lollo]

in real excellent worflows

I told you it was worth abandoning JVC.

What you say doesn't matter at all

, with real excellent expertize.

Phew, I was already afraid you were doing it yourself!

Jealous, right?

[rgr]

phew, i was already afraid you were doing it yourself!

jealous, right?

:d :d :d