Overall recommendations ?

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

Hi folks,
First post here.

I've entered the world of VHS to Digital capture, and it's daunting, but also exciting.

However, I'm trying to find a thread for overall recommendations for the best capture quality of a VHS to Digital, which includes hardware and software, but cannot find it. Or maybe I'm missing something.

Is there such a thread ?

Thanks for any help
Buddy

[lollo]

However, I'm trying to find a thread for overall recommendations for the best capture quality of a VHS to Digital, which includes hardware and software, but cannot find it.

Are you serious? 99% of https://forum.videohelp.com/forums/10-Capturing-and-VCR deals with these topics!

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

I understand that, however it would've been nice to have a summary in one thread of recommended equipment, software etc.

Searching every thread and post for what is best is too much work.

[lollo]

There is no "best".

The most important element is the player (VCR), together with the conditions of your tapes. Choose a high-end S-VHS VCR with TBC.

Then the capture card, search the forum for the recommended ones.

According to the conditions of the tapes you may need an additional external TBC.

According to the conditions of the tapes, the internal TBC of the VCR may need to be replaced by a specific external DVD Recorder in pass-through mode.

Capture a Y/C signal into YUV 4:2:2, 720x576(x480), interlaced, lossless with AmarecTV or VirtualDub.

Post-processing is another chapter.

edit: I read just now and too late your statement: "Searching every thread and post for what is best is too much work."

Too much work??? I'm very tempted to delete everything I wrote!

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

Thanks for your comments.

[dellsam34]

There is no size fits all, Capturing analog tapes is a very deep rabbit hole, It depends on the condition of your tapes and their format as mentioned and how deep are you willing to go into that hole in terms of the cost of the equipment and the quality of the final result you are after.

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

Thank you. Appreciate the reply.

[Gary34]

Here are some summary type threads.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404694-NTSC-VHS-newbie-overall-summary-Processing-Conversion
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404423-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-1-VCRs-settings
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404434-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-2-TBC-Budget-option...-DMR-ES10-ES15
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404547-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-3-Pinnacle-710-USB-Capture-Device
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404568-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-4-VirtualDub-1-9-Ca...turing-Editing
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404589-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-5-Resolution-mp4-cr...tion-upscaling
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404634-NTSC-VHS-summary-6-Hybrid-for-Conversions-D...P4#post2646813

https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/14716-amateur-guide-vhs.html

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

Thanks Gary34. Appreciate the reply.

[Gary34]

You’re welcome.

[lollo]

Something to fix (not complete); some refer to post-processing, which is another story as already said:

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404694-NTSC-VHS-newbie-overall-summary-Processing-Conversion

1. (optional) Edit captured avi with VirtualDub to cut out unwanted material.

--> useless, trim can be done in AviSynth or Hybrid, which are mentioned later

4. Cropping/Masking Overscan
lordsmurf: "There's near-zero reason to crop before deinterlace."

--> better to crop before deinterlace to avoid QTMGC taking into account the head switching noise or black borders in its internal procedures

7. Convert AVIs to more compact format
lordsmurf recommendations: "MPEG-2 @ 15-20mbit high bitrate is an archival option, 4:2:2 when available

--> archive the original lossless capture, nothing else

8. Upscale & Resize (e.g. YouTube versions)
From lordsmurf: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-restore/12192-how-make-vhs.html#post80019
- "You must deinterlace first. Then generally sharpen and NR, scale (enlarge), and usually have to sharpen and NR again. When you scale, you emphasize noise and problems."

--> denoise before sharpen not after; no need for a second denoise + sharpen; sharpen before upscale shapen more than upscale and then sharpen; sometimes you may want to upscale in two steps.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404423-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-1-VCRs-settings

#1: VCRs & settings
lordsmurf: "- CALIBRATION is almost always bad

--> calibration on is almost always good, few exceptions
lordsmurf: R3 is always bad + PICTURE CONTROL = EDIT disables all NR on the deck, and the image output by the VCR is just as crummy as a regular VCR.

--> when COPIE (EDIT) = OFF, D3R improves image quality

lollo: COPIE (EDIT) = OFF, D3R (R3) = ON

--> because ghosting at scene change sometimes is generally better use COPIE (EDIT) = ON, D3R (R3) = OFF

--> finally: COPIE (EDIT) = ON, D3R (R3) = OFF and COPIE (EDIT) = OFF, D3R (R3) = ON are the best combinations, in this order.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404434-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-2-TBC-Budget-option...-DMR-ES10-ES15

--> the luma level problem of the ES10/ES15 can be fixed, and the posterization is marginal; overall these DVD-Recorder in pass-through mode are excellent! (but always better to have a S-VHS VCR with TBC and eventually an external TBC for problematic tapes).

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404547-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-3-Pinnacle-710-USB-Capture-Device
NTSC VHS newbie summary #3: Pinnacle 710 USB Capture Device

--> IOData GV-USB2 (all models) and Hauppauge USB-Live 2 (old model) and are just as good, are not expensive and available new on the market.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404568-NTSC-VHS-newbie-summary-4-VirtualDub-1-9-Ca...turing-Editing
NTSC VHS newbie summary #4: VirtualDub 1.9 Capturing + Editing

--> AmarecTV is better

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

Thanks lollo. Appreciate the information.

Maybe this thread is now overall recommendations. lol

[lollo]

Maybe this thread is now overall recommendations. lol

Not really, as dellsam34 wrote is not that easy

[VWestlife]

Remember that de-interlacing and upscaling are not archival. Don't commit to methods you may regret later. Always keep a copy of the original 480i / 576i captured footage -- that is your archival. For many purposes, de-interlacing and upscaling are not even necessary, because all TVs and virtually all media player programs will do that automatically as needed. And when capturing video recorded from broadcast or cable TV, consider using a method which preserves the original closed captioning and XDS data.

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

Much obliged.

[dellsam34]

I would say keep both versions, The original raw and a processed version, Few decades down the road these kids will not have a clue what to do with the raw footage, even if they do they are too lazy anyway, so they just use the processed version, at that point you've done your best.

[lollo]

Always keep a copy of the original 480i / 576i captured footage -- that is your archival.

Yes, as I wrote in post #11

--> archive the original lossless capture, nothing else

is mandatory.

Eventually you can archive a postprocessed version as dellsam34 suggests.

For many purposes, de-interlacing and upscaling are not even necessary, because all TVs and virtually all media player programs will do that automatically as needed.

About de-interlacing, I still have not found a TV capable of performing equivalent quality as QTGMC (and I own a Sony A95L and a LG AI G6).

Concerning upscale, I am not a big fan of it, I generally do it only for YouTube upload.

[VWestlife]

About de-interlacing, I still have not found a TV capable of performing equivalent quality as QTGMC (and I own a Sony A95L and a LG AI G6).

Keep in mind that QTGMC isn't just doing de-interlacing; it's also doing sharpening and noise reduction.

Any for the neophyte who is going to use anything less complex to setup than QTGMC, the hardware de-interlacing built into any GPU is far superior to any other software-based de-interlacing. Windows Media Maker(!), of all things, seems to be one of the few beginner-friendly video editing programs capable of leveraging this while rendering video, but only on certain systems, and only at a maximum of 30fps.

[lollo]

Keep in mind that QTGMC isn't just doing de-interlacing; it's also doing sharpening and noise reduction.

Well, we spent a lot of time and effort in the past to minimize sharpening and denoise in QTGMC through its parameters. With success

Any for the neophyte who is going to use anything less complex to setup than QTGMC, the hardware de-interlacing built into any GPU is far superior to any other software-based de-interlacing.

I disagree. Yadiff, TDeint (that I use for mixed interlaced/progressive materials) and similar are still better or marginally better than any hardware deinterlacer in modern TVs.

But yes, we are talking here about obtaining the maximum quality with a lot of effort. For most people, just let the modern TV do the deinterlacing produces satisfactory results.

[dellsam34]

For hardware de-interlacing to surpass low frame, non real time processing in quality, the equipment has to cost thousands of dollars, Back in the day some pro gear had that capability, haven't tried them personally to judge, But I do know that modern TVs including the top dollar OLED ones don't do justice for interlaced materials, I've tried them myself with different VCRs and DVD players and they didn't look good for analog inputs, File playback wise they looked okay but I could still see interlace artifacts.

If anything for the consumer market that did pretty decent job for interlaced materials would be Plasma TVs and some videophile DVD players and AVRs from the 2000's era, Upscaling and de-interlacing was a big thing back then, But it is nowhere near the quality of non real time software processing with modern CPU speeds.

[VWestlife]

If the source is home video on VHS(-C), keep in mind that most consumer-grade camcorders used a CCD image sensor with a below-NTSC-resolution image sensor (usually something around 200k to 250k effective pixels) -- so a lot of the time, even with the best de-interlacing, you still see visible "jaggies" on diagonal lines. They figured you wouldn't notice because recording at EP speed and then playing it back on a CRT TV through an RF connection would blur out all the fine details anyway.

[Alwyn]

Any for the neophyte who is going to use anything less complex to setup than QTGMC

Vapourbox is the go, then edit to MP4 in XXXXX.

@VHS-Digital-Buddy, I haven't incorporated that workflow yet...

[GAhere]

Hi folks,
First post here.

I've entered the world of VHS to Digital capture, and it's daunting, but also exciting.

However, I'm trying to find a thread for overall recommendations for the best capture quality of a VHS to Digital, which includes hardware and software, but cannot find it. Or maybe I'm missing something.

Is there such a thread ?

Thanks for any help
Buddy

As you can see, there are many, many ways to digitize analog video, can spend a lot of money and time on it and only you can determine if it is worth it.

I would suggest you consider if the video is really worth time and effort, if a commercial released video (IE movie or TV special) that has been released on better media (IE DVD, ect) might want to consider buying a new DVD or new media. Granted, some movies released on VHS may never get released on DVD or other digital means and those may be worth the work.

If it is "home movies" that you recorded of your family, then by all means digitize and preserve those memories for you family.

Your digitization hardware and methods can be as simple as a VHS player hooked up to a DVD recorder or VHS player hooked up to a standalone analog to digital capture device or as complex as it gets with multiple analog processing devices and after capture cleaning and editing.

Only you can determine exactly what is the best for your satisfaction, just remember, you can not "add" quality to something that doesn't have "quality", you can only subtract quality (Generational loss). Even in the digital world, there is generational losses each time you render/convert or manipulate the video. Software based video processing just like the old analog video processors work by removing unwanted noise/information so in reality you remove information (wanted and unwanted) in the process.

Myself, I have gotten very good results keeping it as simple as possible (IE direct from VTR to digitizing device), but most of my captures have been from Hi8mm tapes and not as much from VHS so I wasn't dealing with as much a mess to start with and I don't bother with any after capture processing.

I have used a DVD recorder and several stand alone digital recorders (no PC required), one is a Sandisc that records to a flash memory card and the other is a Argosy HV359T that records to an internal HD. Both Sandisc and Argosy units are out of production and no longer available. Yes, for the perfectionists, my methods may not produce "perfect" capture quality but it does get the job done with results that look as good as if I was playing it from the VTR (IE little to no degradation).

Don't over think this, as it is very easy to fall into a rabbit hole.. You can get started with most capture devices and see if the results look as good as the source material. There are a lot of capture devices available now days, many will do a pretty good job unless you are hyper critical over the smallest detail.

[lollo]

I agree with most of your comments, and DVD-Recorder path is an easy way and may perform decent quality.

But you lose 4:2:2 colorspace and lossless encoding. And Y/C source for devices like the one you mentioned; and you have no control if you are dropping frames. I hope you have not lost time base correction in your workflow.

The MPEG-2 encoder is the key element for final quality. Here a comparison done long time with what is considered the best DVD-Recoder in term of quality for capturing: https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/12740-current-capture-device-3.html

my methods may not produce "perfect" capture quality but it does get the job done with results that look as good as if I was playing it from the VTR (IE little to no degradation)

I doubt it, but if you are satisfied, that's all that matters.

There are a lot of capture devices available now days, many will do a pretty good job unless you are hyper critical over the smallest detail.

This is an exaggeration. No one is hypercritical of the smallest detail, but we want to extract the contents of the tapes with the least possible degradation (as you mentioned). And not all workflows allow this.

[VWestlife]

DVD-Recorder path is an easy way and may perform decent quality.

They do vary in quality. I recently tried an LG DVD/HDD recorder and even at the maximum bitrate XP mode it has very noticeable blocky compression artifacts on high-detail scenes like ocean waves, and while the image is kept stable, on video transferred from sources that lack a TBC, there is some minor flagging effect.

Comparatively, on the Sony VRD-MC5 DVDirect, which you can get for around $20 on eBay, I have not noticed any blockiness even when using the SP mode, and it has a rock-solid TBC with perfectly aligned vertical edges -- and it automatically preserves closed captioning and XDS data. I have sung the praises of the DVDirect on multiple platforms as a dirt cheap, super simple device that makes capturing high-quality video as simple as plugging in a few cables and pushing the big red recording button, and yet no one cares because "DVDs are old technology".

[GAhere]

I agree with most of your comments, and DVD-Recorder path is an easy way and may perform decent quality.

But you lose 4:2:2 colorspace and lossless encoding. And Y/C source for devices like the one you mentioned; and you have no control if you are dropping frames. I hope you have not lost time base correction in your workflow.

Correct, with standalone devices you do not have a "choice" of color space or lossless encoding, you only get the settings that the manufacturer of said device decided for you. However, one will have the choice of recording "quality" which is basically the bit rate of the digital recording which can affect the final result considerably. Bit rate is a lot like the same idea as VHS 2,4,6 hr speed, 2 hr setting gives "best" quality but less recording time, 6hr speed gave the longest recording time but severely degraded picture quality. Choosing the highest "quality" setting will result in the best capture as possible with the largest file size.

The MPEG-2 encoder is the key element for final quality. Here a comparison done long time with what is considered the best DVD-Recoder in term of quality for capturing: https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/video-capture/12740-current-capture-device-3.html

MPEG-2 is a digital video specification which specifies a form of high compression encoding which anyway you cut it is not "losseless" even if you save it in a non compressed container file as it must conform to all of the MPEG-2 standards to be called MPEG-2.

https://www.mpeg.org/standards/MPEG-2/

"MPEG-2

ISO/IEC 13818
Generic coding of moving pictures and associated audio information

A suite for standards for digital television
Parts

Systems
Part: 1
This standard specifies the Systems layer of MPEG-2

Video
Part: 2
This standard specifies a compression format for interlaced video

Audio
Part: 3
This standard specifies an MPEG-1 Audio backward compatible audio compression format

Conformance Testing
Part: 4
This standard specifies conformance testing suites and methodologies

Software Simulation
Part: 5
This standard specifies MPEG-2 reference software

Extensions for DSM-CC
Part: 6
This standard specifies Digital Storage Media Command and Control

Advanced Audio Coding (AAC)
Part: 7
This standard specifies an audio compression format

Extension for Real Time Interface for Systems Decoders
Part: 9
This standard specifies the Real Time Interface

Conformance Extensions for Digital Storage Media Command and Control (DSM-CC)
Part: 10
This standard specifies conformance testing suites and methodologies for DSM-CC

IPMP on MPEG-2 Systems
Part: 11
This standard specifies an IPMP system for MPEG-2"


You have zero control over the compression built into the MPEG-2 standards.

If you want to get more granular of MPEG-2 specifications Part2 is broken down

https://webstore.ansi.org/standards/iso/isoiec138182013-1503986?source=blog

" ISO/IEC 13818-2:2013
Information technology - Generic coding of moving pictures and associated audio information - Part 2: Video

ISO/IEC 13818-2:2013 specifies a coded representation of video data and the decoding process required to reconstruct pictures. It provides a generic video coding scheme which serves a wide range of applications, bit rates, picture resolutions and qualities. Its basic coding algorithm is a hybrid of motion compensated prediction and discrete cosine transform (DCT). Pictures to be coded can be either interlaced or progressive. Necessary algorithmic elements are integrated into a single syntax, and a limited number of subsets are defined in terms of Profile (functionalities) and Level (parameters) to facilitate practical use of this generic video coding International Standard."

They don't tell you exactly what type or how much compression is applied but it IS there regardless as per the bolded section in the text above.

The reality is the A to D process quality depends a lot on the bit rate, the higher the bit rate, the more sample points in time you can capture which means you have a much better digital representation of the analog waveform.

This is an exaggeration. No one is hypercritical of the smallest detail, but we want to extract the contents of the tapes with the least possible degradation (as you mentioned). And not all workflows allow this.

Perhaps "perfectionist" can describe it better.

Nothing is perfect, everything has some flaw, every method of will have flaws in it, it is the nature of the beast.

Nothing wrong with extracting the contents with the least possible degradation, but however one can accidentally introduce more unwanted artifacts by over complicating the process with additional items inserted into the analog video chain. Once the unwanted artifacts have been digitized then you have your work cut out to remove those unwanted artifacts.

More often than not, using the barebones most direct workflow reduces the chances of introducing unwanted issues, nothing wrong with trying the direct approach for the first try and looking at the results before adding in additional external devices which have a good chance of degrading the quality (IE K.I.S.S. method, or Keep It Simple Silly). Not every video tape requires TBC to get a good capture, most do not and if it is not needed, remove the TBC from the chain as leaving it in can degrade the picture if it really isn't needed.

My advice is to try the simple approach first before going out and buying a bunch of old used analog video equipment to add to the analog video chain before the digitizing device of choice. One may be pleasantly surprised just how good it can work.

[Sharc]

...I've entered the world of VHS to Digital capture, and it's daunting, but also exciting.....

What equipment do you already have? Let's start with the VCR/tape player (brand/model) and proceed from there - before you are getting drowned in too much expert video babble. How did you play and view your tapes up to now?

[lollo]

They do vary in quality.

Absolutely, and just few of them are convincing, see my comments below.

Comparatively, on the Sony VRD-MC5 DVDirect, which you can get for around $20 on eBay, I have not noticed any blockiness even when using the SP mode, and it has a rock-solid TBC with perfectly aligned vertical edges -- and it automatically preserves closed captioning and XDS data.

Yes, I have seen your writing and test about it (thanks for sharing your experience). Not too bad. I never used such a device but I can say that is still not as good in term of final quality as the recommended workflow.

The reality is the A to D process quality depends a lot on the bit rate, the higher the bit rate, the more sample points in time you can capture which means you have a much better digital representation of the analog waveform.

There was no need to report the MPEG-2 specifications, we all know. For sure the full Analog to Digital conversion depends on the allocated bitrate, but the quality of the A/D converter (meaning the IC in charge of it) and the hardware encoder (another IC) also play a role. An this depends on the specific hardware (integrated circuits used). Not all of them are equal.

Not every video tape requires TBC to get a good capture, most do not and if it is not needed, remove the TBC from the chain as leaving it in can degrade the picture if it really isn't needed.

False. Most of the tapes (marginally less for Hi8) need the intra-frame time base correction performed by the high-end VCRs/Camera/Players and specific DVD-Recorders in pass-through mode. If your tapes are in pristine shape what you do not need is the additional inter-frame TBC and frames synchronization.

Nothing wrong with extracting the contents with the least possible degradation, but however one can accidentally introduce more unwanted artifacts by over complicating the process with additional items inserted into the analog video chain. Once the unwanted artifacts have been digitized then you have your work cut out to remove those unwanted artifacts.

Not sure about what you meant to say here. The best workflows reduce the "unwanted artifacts" and aim at maximum quality. What is a "compromize" is the rest, not the recommended workflow.

My advice is to try the simple approach first before going out and buying a bunch of old used analog video equipment to add to the analog video chain before the digitizing device of choice.

I agree, but respecting the basics rules of the recommended workflow.

[lordsmurf]

Not every video tape requires TBC to get a good capture, most do not and if it is not needed, remove the TBC from the chain as leaving it in can degrade the picture if it really isn't needed.

It's really quite amazing how capturing analog videotapes is 25+ years old now, and stupid advice still exists.

TBC is not needed, you say? Have you been living under a rock?

Of course time base correction is needed!
- Analog formats are contained chaos on mylar tape.
- Digital ingest (capture) expected digital precision.
- The TBC is the translator between analog and digital realms.

There's no debate to be had here. This was settled science decades ago. Apparently, some people never got the memo.

And the whole "TBC makes video worse" is always from somebody that
(1) has broken equipment, or
(2) has never used a TBC, likely because
(3) they're too cheap to buy a TBC, and spreading FUD to make themselves feel better

False.

How you doing lollo? Well, I hope. Take care.

[VHS-Digital-Buddy]

I wanted to post a new thread on this, however I think since this is titled Overall Recommendations, I will leave my thoughts here.

Capture Hardware. USB vs PCI Capture Cards.

Almost from the start, I have not liked the idea of USB capture cards. A title of a Youtube video always sticks in my head "All USB capture cards are garbage." USB is meant for mouse, keyboard and external drives. This is just my view.

By the way, I received two USB's from a friend, Roxio and Nero and the footage is ok to pretty good, but I'm really finicky about quality.

I prefer real hardware. A guy I know who does this thing for a living uses the BlackMagic Intensity Pro PCI card, and the footage is really good, although it adds a slight hue to the recording, for some reason. However, I've been leaning towards the Hauppage ImpactVCB-e 01381B, even though the USB Live 2 is highly recommended on this forum.

Yes, I'm the newbie, but I like my hardware to do the job. So, there's that. However, I've been consulting Claude (for better or worse) and it suggests, capture device does not matter, what really matters is tape condition, and the VCR you are recording from.

Thoughts are welcome.