USB-Live2 worse quality than EasyCap

[videonewb]

Hi there!

I captured a PAL VHS with both EasyCap and Hauppauge USB-Live2 using AmaRecTv 3.10 on a Windows 10 PC. Now the problem is that the result of USB-Live2 looks very bad. Even totally still images are jittering, and it looks like there is a fly screen all over the picture. Also the audio of the USB-Live2 has constant static noise whereas the EasyCap sounds clear.

On AmaRecTv I set: w=720, h=576, fps=25.00, fcc=YUY2, bit=16

I set the USB-Live2 to PAL_B video standard which should be fine for a German VHS. I didn't set anything for EasyCap when using it because it showed up as a webcam and I could only set some basic options like contrast.

For both devices I'm using Huffyuv codec and for the USB-Live2 I'm using the latest Windows 10 drivers from https://hauppauge.com/pages/support/support_usblive2.html#drivers

I bought the USB-Live2 after the EasyCap to get better quality but it looks like the total opposite.

Something I also noticed is that the EasyCap picture is more zoomed in. I guess it's a resolution problem.

I attached screenshots of the same still image from both devices. The first one is from EasyCap.

[DB83]

Upload an actual 10-20 secs sample from each device - the same sequence if possible. A single picture does not say anything.

[videonewb]

Here is the EasyCap version:

https://www115.zippyshare.com/v/6P7yJljo/file.html

and here the USB Live2 version:

https://www115.zippyshare.com/v/4zDNdVgX/file.html

Both compressed with H.264 for the upload.

[DB83]

Not working. Getting a 403 'Forbidden'


Just upload them here as attachments. Originals would have been better.

[davexnet]

Works for me, I was able to download these files, I thought the "Live" wasn't capable of lossless.
Isn't it mpeg-2 only?

[videonewb]

Sorry I think I used the private option for uploading. I used some quite good quality options for compression so I hope it's OK. Also the file upload already takes very long for me with the compressed versions.

[Sharc]

Both are butchered.
- Possibly wrong captured. Upload a short sequence with motion of the captured file (.avi?)
- Wrong encoded (progressive instead of interlaced)

[DB83]

Firstly, lossless is available for the USB (I thought you said you had used that) when you use a third-party capture program such as Amarec or Vdub


The problem with offering re-encoded versions is that the encode could well have 'corrected' some of the issues you saw. Both samples looked and sounded fine to me although there are signs of drop-outs/sparklies in the USB sample. These will inevitably get worse the more times you capture. They can be removed post-capture.


Also the two versions are not alike. You have different bitrates and the Easycap one has variable bitrate against the constant bitrate of the USB.

[DB83]

Both are butchered.
- Possibly wrong captured. Upload a short sequence with motion of the captured file (.avi?)
- Wrong encoded (progressive instead of interlaced)

As I originally requested. And I agree since only then do we see the 'raw' result.


I did notice the progressive which, I guess, is the result of the re-encode, but, again, to my one good eye they were not so bad as you make them out to be subject to the comments I already made.

[videonewb]

@Sharc Here are the files as recorded by AmarecTv. I just saw that I used Lagarith for the EasyCap version and Huffyuv for USB Live2 if that makes any difference.

@ DB83 I set the lossless Huffyuv encoder in AmaRecTV. I don't know if I can also set lossless in the USB settings.

[DB83]

Both lagarith and huffyuv are lossless codecs so there is no other implicit 'lossless' setting.


But, again, you are not comparing like with like. My understanding is that lagarith is a more efficient codec so the different you see could be down to that.

[videonewb]

I thought just the file size will be a bit smaller with lagarith but since both are lossless the quality should be the same.

[DB83]

Actual quality can not be the same since the bitrate is different as is the codec.


To get a true comparison you must compare like with like. That, at the very least, means doing a small lagarith capture with the USB

[Sharc]

I would assume that the VHS source is interlaced. The Huffyuv .avi is interlaced acc. to Mediainfo, whereas the Lagarith has no flag, maybe Amarec deinterlaced it?. So it's unclear what the encoder will do as per default, and the comparison is not very meaningful.

The Huffyuv should either be encoded as interlaced or should be (bob-) deinterlaced for encoding.

It would be more helpful to have a sample with horizontal motion or a camera pan rather than just rolling text.
The codec and the capture settings should be the same for comparing the 2 devices.

Do both use the same interface? Or is USB via Composite Video and Easy Cap via S-Video? The USB shows a lot of dotcrawl but keeps also more picture details.

[videonewb]

So I tried USB with Lagarith default settings (the same I used with EasyCap). USB with Lagarith looks similar to me as USB with Huffyuv.

@Sharc Maybe EasyCap does the deinterlacing?

[DB83]

Well I just did test VHS capture using lagarith in vdub to compare with one I did earlier today in Amarec for a different topic.


Neither show any interlacing flag

[DB83]

As Sharc points out it is very difficult to really assess when you have no real motion in your samples.


The word on the street is that the easycap, when it works (and that is not very often), blows out real detail. The sample you give is obviously brighter and you did state you altered the contrast.

[davexnet]

As Sharc points out it is very difficult to really assess when you have no real motion in your samples.


The word on the street is that the easycap, when it works (and that is not very often), blows out real detail. The sample you give is obviously brighter and you did state you altered the contrast.

Agreed this is a poor clip. Post some of the actual video, something showing steady sideways/diagonal
movement.

You can certainly see a lot of jitter, probably due to the absence of a time base corrector

[TimA-C]

I tend to set up my settings as Presets as I'm fairly sure that changes done in the GUI aren't always honoured, whereas I haven't noticed any issues when using my pre-defined presets. (Try playing with the deinterlacing settings there.)

One other thing, since I added a Hauppauge WinTV DualHD (USB twin Freeview DVB-T tuner) to the PC with the USB-Live2, if I make any changes to the Live2's procamp settings from within AmarecTV they're lost as soon as the AmarecTV config window is closed. I have to use Graphedit to open a saved Graph(?) of the "Hauppauge Cx23100 Video Capture" device and right-click on it to get the "Filter Properties..." menu option to get to the Procamp settings which Amarec will remember and use until the next time the config window is closed. It's a bit of a pain but not the end of the world. I've tried removing all references to WinTV (including in the registry) and running without the software as well as with each of the three different versions of WinTV that I'm eligible to use. Of course, it might well be an issue caused by one of the many dratted Win10 "updates" that just happened around the same time as I bought the DualHD device? Anyway, I thought I'd just mention it in case any of the OP's settings are being lost when the settings window is closed?

[jagabo]

Actual quality can not be the same since the bitrate is different as is the codec.

No. They are both lossless codecs. If handled properly the YUY2 video that comes out of the decoder is exactly the same as the YUY2 video that went into the encoder. Of course, the size of the compressed video may vary depending on how much the codec was able to compress the data. But the output of both is identical to the data that went into them.

[

Well I just did test VHS capture using lagarith in vdub to compare with one I did earlier today in Amarec for a different topic.

Neither show any interlacing flag

The AVI container doesn't really support an interlaced flag (the ODML 2 extnsions do but few programs use those). And neither codec has a private interlace flag. It's up to the user to keep track of interlacing.

I've only really looked at the mp4 files. Although the EasyCap has better horizontal time base and less noise it's inferior in almost every other way. The EasayCap has less noise because it's been through a noise reduction filter. It's much fuzzier than the USB2 cap. The noise in the USB2 cap can easily be reduced with much better results. The EasyCap has also been deinterlaced and zoomed, loosing the four edges of the picture. It has blown out brights which cannot be recovered (maybe this can be adjusted with the capture device's proc amp settings).

And yes, the lossless caps are worthless given their content.

[usually_quiet]

Works for me, I was able to download these files, I thought the "Live" wasn't capable of lossless.
Isn't it mpeg-2 only?

The video format used for the "Live's" captures depends on the capture software used. The "Live" outputs uncompressed video and audio, which is encoded by software running on the PC. Hauppauge's bundled software captures using MPEG-2. Third-party capture software might allow using other types of encoding, like AVC or lossless.

[davexnet]

This makes sense to me, however I specifically asked one of their support people if it could capture lossless using third party software and he said no. My old Avermedia M780 could capture lossless even though it had hardware MPEG-2. I guess there are many possibilities

[DB83]

^^ Hauppauge are hardly going to suggest you use a third-party program. They inevitably know they work but do not wish to get in to discussion with any user about it.

[TimA-C]

Davexnet, that'll teach you to ask manufacturers' tech support rather than asking Here! ☺

[davexnet]

I don't even have the device. I must admit, their response was suspicious. I've dealt with Avermedia support before, and they were upfront about capabilities and restrictions of their devices