Cheap HDMI capture card

[eurofanaticlaun]

Hi all,

Just wondering if you had any reviews of the velocap suite of capture devices? What is the best cheap capture card (usb or PCI-e) from your experience? Obviously, I am not looking for 4K capturing just hoping to get better than DVD quality captures, maybe 1080p if I am lucky?

Cheers,

[eurofanaticlaun]

Also does anyone have a review of the AVerMedia GL310 Live Gamer Portable Lite Capture Device

[lordsmurf]

Capturing what, exactly?
Video games?

[Eric-jan]

My guess is games are to be captured, or streamed, but there are better gamer forums which can answer these kind of questions better, sometimes HDCP needs to be switched off, or hacked.
The Elgato CamLink is very populair for that.

[eurofanaticlaun]

I was hoping to capture a bit of everything, I would like to ideally capture a Chromecast output as well as some PS3 games but really primarily a chromecast output as I have purchased movies with google play movies and would like to watch them in HD on my PC (720p is okay) but they don't allow it. Also do you know of any HDCP removing devices, a lot of the ones that I thought might work have been removed from sale.

[Eric-jan]

Yes, you will run into HDCP problems, you should use an audio extractor like the MINI HDMI2HDMI, (white little box) it has HDMI in and out, and will strip the HDCP in the process. it works for me, and other people too.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/334145-HDCP-strippers/page16

[eurofanaticlaun]

Thanks very much,
I cannot seem to find a place to purchase the audio extractor, do you have a link? Also, will this work with a chromecast device? What recording device do you use?
Thanks very much for your help

[sambat]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/HDMI2HDMI-Audio-Converter-to-Analog-Extractor-Splitter-Analog...371766275#rwid

[eurofanaticlaun]

Cheers,
Thanks for the link, I couldn't find one anywhere and they ship to Australia which is even better. Just wondering if you can confirm what HDCP version this will work up to? Will it work with a standard 1080p Chromecast? What is your favourite capture card/device?
Anyone used any velocap products?

[codehound]

I used to use this, and a previous model too:
https://www.hauppauge.co.uk/site/products/data_hdpvr2-gaming.html

External box. It overheats to f**k and I ended up using it on its side with a 140mm fan ziptied to it. I capture mainly sports broadcasts so a 4 hour + show caused me more grey hairs than a 20 year marriage. This external box has the added influence of a USB connection too, as I would imagine all ext do (?) - just something else in the equation to go wrong.

I now use the Elgato HD60 Pro card. Internal.
https://www.elgato.com/en/gaming/game-capture-hd60-pro

Not for any gameplay though, purely for TV recording from cable TV source. And yes I too use a HDMI splitter to 'remove' the HDCP. I don't think there is a concerted effort to remove splitters from the market - unless I am very much mistaken. Its always been a hit 'n miss affair as to which ones work and which don't. I don't see an agenda here.

I also have a friend who 'capps' and his splitter bought from Amzn failed after 18mths, and so he did the Amzn 'buy again' option from his orders profile for the exact 'same' model, and the new one worked, but didn't strip the HDCP. So obviously the splitter internal chips/circuitry are sourced from just about anywhere.

My only issue with the Elgato is the software, which is geared towards gaming, but does some stupid things, too. The card is excellent and more than adequate for my needs. (I haven't got a 2160p monitor or a 2160p TV). The bundled software is utter garbage and I use only OBS now. (I can enlarge on this if necessary).

[eurofanaticlaun]

Good to know, I had been looking at some hauppauge products. Does your setup work with a Chromecast? I had looked at Elgato products but they all seemed rather pricey so I had been hoping for some cheaper alternatives.

[Eric-jan]

My guess is that you still need to defeat HDCP in any case scenario, also different HDMI versions can make a big difference, you need to check/do research in that field.

[eurofanaticlaun]

Yeah that is my concern. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to find which HDCP version the standard chromecast is compatible with. What version is your HDMI audio splitter compatible with? Have you tried it with a Chromecast. I have read that this HDMI capture device is compatible with HDCP v1.4 but who knows:
https://www.amazon.com/Capture-Recorder-Streaming-Nintendo-Compatible/dp/B073WJ2XTZ/

[Eric-jan]

In this case it comes down that you must avoid the newer/higher versions HDMI, this info is already available in the forums, and the gaming forums can inform you better on this, i have not much experience with this, i google for it, and what i found for my situation, also worked.
i also tried a HDMI cloner but that did not work for me, and it needs a special "procedure" which makes it also sensitive for failure.
(If you can capture through component video, you should do that, because there's no copy protection through this connection. and it also supports the higher resolutions. be aware that both sides should support the resolutions available before buying)

[pchan]

Hint: Avoid any device that is HDCP compliant.

Just look for a cheap HDMI splitter(1 to 2) like the picture below.

[dellsam34]

I'm too looking for a HDCP non compliant splitter for an experiment, my requirement however that it has to be HDMI powered, Ugreen use to make a nice splitter with built in a short HDMI pigtail, it's HDMI powered and can bypass HDCP, they are no longer available on Amazon unfortunately.


[Attachment 93678 - Click to enlarge]

[Alwyn]

This topic is 5 years old and the restarter is clearly self-promoting.

[lordsmurf]

...

Both of those are worthless pieces of crap.

This topic is 5 years old and the restarter is clearly self-promoting.

Yep.

[Eric-jan]

the trick is to capture via component yuv video. not HDMI.
by component you can use better capture devices not those crap HDMI ones.
btw..HDMI is already digital, pro HDMI devices won't allow to copy by that.
component works better because of that, with PAL players you need to select
the correct mode to select the RCA component output.

at least i'm not the first one to respond to an old thread here.

[dellsam34]

There is no such old thread, Threads are created to help other people who land in them in the future especially when it comes to legacy stuff. I've purchased products that are no longer supported by the official channels and found the help I needed in places like this in threads decades old.

Anyway, There are instances where HDMI is better than component, Some combo VCR/DVD can output VHS over HDMI and digitize the signal from the YC pins inside the ADC chip (mostly PAL machines) in this case it is better to capture HDMI, therefore you would need to strip HDCP. But if the HDMI is derived from the CVBS pin inside the chip (mostly US machines that use pre-packaged chips with only CVBS processing according to OLN) then in this case the use of component is better.

[Eric-jan]

There is no such old thread, Threads are created to help other people who land in them in the future especially when it comes to legacy stuff. I've purchased products that are no longer supported by the official channels and found the help I needed in places like this in threads decades old.

Anyway, There are instances where HDMI is better than component, Some combo VCR/DVD can output VHS over HDMI and digitize the signal from the YC pins inside the ADC chip (mostly PAL machines) in this case it is better to capture HDMI, therefore you would need to strip HDCP. But if the HDMI is derived from the CVBS pin inside the chip (mostly US machines that use pre-packaged chips with only CVBS processing according to OLN) then in this case the use of component is better.

Thankyou for this info ! though i noticed, the NTSC machine have brightness/IRE control on video in and output !
i would have liked that on the/my PAL version... so it's all about the chip versions... and PAL or NTSC... still think the PAL machines give best results. capturing analog video gets harder, also by OS "upgrades" or "updates" and not supporting old hardware.
Better use not any pc /apple or laptop for capturing.

[dellsam34]

Yes, computer capture has a lot to go wrong and can be frustrating for a lot of people who don't want to deal with software and drivers issues, The alternatives are out there but it can be challenging finding the right equipment with the right specs required for lossless capture, and can sometimes be outright cost-prohibitive.

[Eric-jan]

Yes, computer capture has a lot to go wrong and can be frustrating for a lot of people who don't want to deal with software and drivers issues, The alternatives are out there but it can be challenging finding the right equipment with the right specs required for lossless capture, and can sometimes be outright cost-prohibitive.

That's valid for all methods, and lossless gives just too big files for most people, ProRes422LT is enough for VHS or SuperVHS,
Hi8 is best analog video format, only most sensors were not up to that quality of those camcorders

[lollo]

With a PC approach you have full control about what's happening during the capture, i.e. about dropped and inserted frames and actions taken by the software during the capure.
Without that, you are at the mercy of whatever may happen.

Lossless is ... lossless; any lossy compression is not recommended for capture, especially if a restoration is planned.

[dellsam34]

Actually with 100% hardware capture you are 100% in control, You have a setting for everything, If you want the capture to stop on single dropped frame you can do that too, But if you allow dropped frames (hardly any, mostly junk frames like static) you don't end up with an audio drift or a choppy video. It's a proven capture method that I've been testing for years now without any known issues. The problems of software capture have more to do with the software itself, drivers, CPU, RAM, storage drive speed, OS activity ... and less to do with the VCR and the capture device.

A well designed computer based software capture system should work without issues, But not all people have the knowledge and patience of a hobbyist to pull through. In the other hand a fully hardware based capture system can be very hard to find and can cost a lot. This is why a lot of people throw the towel and give up or have someone do it for them, Few with large pockets just buy a complete workflow that is advertised to work out of the box. There is also the other category that just get a clearclick and call it a day.

[lollo]

It's a proven capture method that I've been testing for years now without any known issues.

I fully trust your experience, but I used myself a no PC/Software approach, and found discrepancies between different captures of the same source (few no frame matching). So I am not confident. With a PC/Software control capture I have the full understanding of what happened (except the events occurring prior to the capture chain, of course).

About the rest, I agree 100%!