VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
Thread
  1. Hi everyone
    I am writing as I am about to purchase my first analogue to digital video converter. First and formost, I have a huge lot of old VHS-SVHS-tapes, betas etc I'd like to digitise. However, it is of the oddmost importance that there is no quality loss during this process. In other words, the dv-result digitised into my pc should be of the same quality as the vhs/beta source. Therefor I also dont mind shelling out some more cash in order to be able to convert in a deasont quality
    I dont plan on dooing any reall colour corections myself afterwards, or anything like that, I just want to digitise so that they end up in the quality that is present on the video tape.
    I've looked around for satisfying sollutions, and a converter that seem to be able to handle the job pretty nicely, according to reviews is the Grass Valley ADVC 110 unit. one feature I especially like about this is that it has locked audio, which should mean that I hopefully will not have to deal with sync issues if captured correctly.However, according to the specs, it seems to have been around for quite some time thoughw, and I was wondering if there perhaps were any newer models out there that could do a better job? I've of course been onto the grass valley website, but they still seem to promote this unit.
    Also, it would be quite nice with more inputs, so that I, say, could digitise for instance 2 tapes at once in order to save time.
    Also, apart from this digitising projekt, it would also be great to bbe able to hook it up to say, a satellite receiver and record a HD movie via hdmi or series for later burning on to BD. However, these units dont seem to have hdmi?
    I was wondering if anyone inhere could reccomend some alternatives to the grass valley, or is that model currently the best one out there for my project?
    Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have.
    All the best from allan
    Quote Quote  
  2. No converter will give you pristine results. You can't do better than what you capture initially.
    Any conversion will introduce (admittedly perhaps, only minor) compression artifacts.

    'However, it is of the oddmost importance that there is no quality loss during this process. In other words, the dv-result digitised into my pc should be of the same quality as the vhs/beta source.'

    Capture and invest in more storage if money is not an issue. Maybe archive on blue-ray discs (HDD fail, become corrupt, eventually).

    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/345098-Best-method-for-capturing-VHS
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by mallanikkelsen View Post
    Hi everyone
    I am writing as I am about to purchase my first analogue to digital video converter. First and formost, I have a huge lot of old VHS-SVHS-tapes, betas etc I'd like to digitise. However, it is of the oddmost importance that there is no quality loss during this process. In other words, the dv-result digitised into my pc should be of the same quality as the vhs/beta source. Therefor I also dont mind shelling out some more cash in order to be able to convert in a deasont quality
    I dont plan on dooing any reall colour corections myself afterwards, or anything like that, I just want to digitise so that they end up in the quality that is present on the video tape.
    I've looked around for satisfying sollutions, and a converter that seem to be able to handle the job pretty nicely, according to reviews is the Grass Valley ADVC 110 unit. one feature I especially like about this is that it has locked audio, which should mean that I hopefully will not have to deal with sync issues if captured correctly.However, according to the specs, it seems to have been around for quite some time thoughw, and I was wondering if there perhaps were any newer models out there that could do a better job? I've of course been onto the grass valley website, but they still seem to promote this unit.
    Also, it would be quite nice with more inputs, so that I, say, could digitise for instance 2 tapes at once in order to save time.
    Also, apart from this digitising projekt, it would also be great to bbe able to hook it up to say, a satellite receiver and record a HD movie via hdmi or series for later burning on to BD. However, these units dont seem to have hdmi?
    I was wondering if anyone inhere could reccomend some alternatives to the grass valley, or is that model currently the best one out there for my project?
    Thanks in advance for any suggestions you might have.
    All the best from allan
    If you want the least quality loss for VHS capture, then you need different type of device, not one that outputs a DV stream. The type of device you want instead provides uncompressed output which can be captured using software that can encode to a losslessly compressed format. There are a number of USB capture devices that can do a good job at that and cost less than anything in the Grass Valley ADVC line. The Hauppauge USB Live 2 is one that I know is available in the EU.

    DV isn't a lossless format, but many people like it for VHS capture. If you have already decided that to capturing to DV AVI is the only acceptable route, then as far as I know, the Grass Valley's ADVC line of analog to DV converters are the only such devices still in production. Otherwise, some people find that a Digital8 camera with an "analog pass-through" feature which they already have can provide acceptable DV output from analog input.

    However, the key to getting optimum results from VHS capture is getting a relatively clean, stable, orderly analog signal to capture. There are discussions on that subject here a VideoHelp and other places like http://www.digitalfaq.com

    I have never seen a capture device capable of capturing from two sources at the same time. You would need one capture device per source and possibly one computer per device. DV captures consume about 13GB/hour and is already encoded so it needs little in the way of CPU recources, but lossless capture uses more CPU resources and consumes about 30GB-40GB/hour depending on the source material and lossless encoder. Also, capture software may not allow multiple instances to run at the same time.

    I suspect that if you want to put HD video from a satellite box on Blu-Ray you will be happier using different devices for capturing VHS and capturing from the satellite box. To capture from a satellite box, get an HD capture device like the Hauppauge HDPVR Colossus 1412 or a one of the Hauppauge HD PVR 2 models with S/PDIF input. These can capture h.264 .ts files with 5.1 audio. They won't record video from HDMI with HDCP copy protection, but will record from analog component video connections.

    Neither BD-R nor hard drives are perfect as storage media. Some people use both or use one or the other and make regularly scheduled backups for multiple copies to prevent data loss. BD-R probably has a shorter lifespan than single-layer DVD-R. I'm using BD-R anyway for storing saved HDTV programming now, but hope that more reliable media that is equally inexpensive will be released in the future.
    Last edited by usually_quiet; 28th Apr 2013 at 13:33.
    Quote Quote  
  4. No media lasts forever, I guess. M-Disc promise 1000 years (and are in the process of launching a blue-ray version). I'd like to see the guy who even cared if it had lasted 20 years in 21 years time.. http://www.mdisc.com/what-is-mdisc/

    Capture cards are going to be outdated soon too, I think. Why tie the computer up with process intensive compression when I can have an external unit at about the same cost, comes with a on-board hardware converter, can capture in real time at almost top-line blue-ray quality, that just plugs into the USB (and you don't even need a computer to capture!)? 7.1 audio to follow in a year or two, I presume. The only thing stopping it being a popular monster hit now is the HDCP/HDMI connectivity issue...but even there, there are ways and means.

    http://www.amazon.com/AVerMedia-Portable-Capture-Xbox360-60Mbps/dp/B00B2IZ3B0/ref=cm_c...pr_product_top

    I am not sure about the MacroVision problems, but there is no reason why a Component-to-HDMI Converter shouldn't work for VHS.

    I might be trying one of these soon myself. One or two small problems still to iron-out, but hey, it's new.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Linux works fine for digitizing VCR tapes, but I had a hard time finding any good instructions.
    Here is my tutorial for video capture with Linux (much easier than the other methods that I've read about):
    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/355880-Tutorial-Video-capturing-VHS-using-Linux-%28...-VLC-player%29
    Quote Quote  
  6. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by transporterfan View Post
    No media lasts forever, I guess.
    True. How long do HDD's and similar devices last? Do you use your HDD archives three times a day? Once a day? Once a week? Once a month? Twice a year? Once every 5 years? For how many working hours are those drives and storage devices rated? 100,000? 200,000? 1,00,000? How often do you play each of your optical discs? Do you anticipate that you will be playing any one of your optical discs for a total of 100,000 hours or more?

    I have a ton of mass storage archives myself. Hell to keep track of, and every time I boot one I wonder if this will be the time I her that grinding noise or get a message about something not being found or, sorry, the requested file cannot be read.

    Originally Posted by transporterfan View Post
    Capture cards are going to be outdated soon too, I think. Why tie the computer up with process intensive compression when I can have an external unit at about the same cost, comes with a on-board hardware converter, can capture in real time at almost top-line blue-ray quality, that just plugs into the USB (and you don't even need a computer to capture!)? 7.1 audio to follow in a year or two, I presume. The only thing stopping it being a popular monster hit now is the HDCP/HDMI connectivity issue...but even there, there are ways and means.
    Capture cards won't become obsolete for users who know the difference between capturing noisy crappy crummy and aging but personally valuable video sources to lossless media and working them properly, as opposed to capturing the same valuable material to ugly artifact-riddled lossy compressed media. The O.P. asked for highest quality capture ideas. You just described one of the lowest quality methods for capturing and archiving VHS.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 28th Mar 2014 at 18:46.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    Capture cards won't become obsolete for users who know the difference between capturing noisy crappy crummy and aging but personally valuable video sources to lossless media and working them properly, as opposed to capturing the same valuable material to ugly artifact-riddled lossy compressed media. The O.P. asked for highest quality capture ideas. You just described one of the lowest quality methods for capturing and archiving VHS.
    Not really. I didn't advise him of anything. It was only an observation of where things might be going.
    I can only see external capture improving over the next few years as markets saturate and specs improve.

    If this was available to the mass market at an affordable price I think everyone would want one.

    http://www.matrox.com/video/en/products/monarch_hd/
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by mallanikkelsen View Post
    I've looked around for satisfying sollutions, and a converter that seem to be able to handle the job pretty nicely, according to reviews is the Grass Valley ADVC 110 unit. one feature I especially like about this is that it has locked audio, which should mean that I hopefully will not have to deal with sync issues if captured correctly.However, according to the specs, it seems to have been around for quite some time thoughw, and I was wondering if there perhaps were any newer models out there that could do a better job? I've of course been onto the grass valley website, but they still seem to promote this unit.
    Also, it would be quite nice with more inputs, so that I, say, could digitise for instance 2 tapes at once in order to save time.
    Also, apart from this digitising projekt, it would also be great to bbe able to hook it up to say, a satellite receiver and record a HD movie via hdmi or series for later burning on to BD. However, these units dont seem to have hdmi?
    I was wondering if anyone inhere could reccomend some alternatives to the grass valley, or is that model currently the best one out there for my project?
    For what you need to do, I can't see the need to pay out for the ADVC110. The ADVC55 model from Grass Valley (Canopus) is more reasonably priced, and has the same internal converter chips. It just doesn't include the reverse pathway.(converting the digital signal back to analogue..)

    I've used the predecessor, the ADVC50, and have been very pleased. VHS is not a very high quality source anyway, and the conversion to DV will essentially be visually as good as the tape.

    Can't see the point of burning to disc these days?.....Blu-ray is overkill for this quality of signal, and probably suffers from the problems that 'burnt' DVDs do, with not unusual data failures after only a couple of years. (Commercial 'pressed' DVDs seem to be much more reliable). No one yet knows whether 'burnt' Blu-ray discs will be as bad.

    My inclination would be to capture as DV - which is also easy to edit - and then convert to mp4 for your archive, and use a media player - like the WD Live -- for replay through your TV or monitor.

    (At 13GB per hour, you won't want to be keeping the files as DV !)

    If you have any commercial tapes you need to rescue, you'll need to consider a way of removing the Macrovision protection. AFAIK, the newer ADVC converters (like the ADVC55 and ADVC110) do not have that facility. The older ones, like my ADVC50, do.
    That of course won't be a problem with your own tapes......
    Quote Quote  
  9. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by transporterfan View Post
    If this was available to the mass market at an affordable price I think everyone would want one.

    http://www.matrox.com/video/en/products/monarch_hd/
    Record tape to lossy format and don't even clean it up? No thanks. You miss the point. But suit yourself.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 28th Mar 2014 at 18:46.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by sanlyn View Post
    Originally Posted by transporterfan View Post
    If this was available to the mass market at an affordable price I think everyone would want one.

    http://www.matrox.com/video/en/products/monarch_hd/
    Record tape to lossy format and don't even clean it up? No thanks. You miss the point. But suit yourself.
    Actually, it is more accurate to say that he is missing YOUR point, not THE point. He has his own point which is different from yours.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    I realize that. Sorry if I phrased that incorrectly. My point is that capturing dirty crummy icky VHS to lossy compression, even at high bitrates, is a headache for any kind of cleanup and is lesser quality than the lossless-cleanup-encode method. Of course, the lossy way is more convenient. I've done it often msyelf, and if the source video is in good shape it won't look that bad. But, the O.P. stated in post #1, "However, it is of the oddmost [sic] importance that there is no quality loss during this process" Going lossy isn't the way to do it.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 28th Mar 2014 at 18:46.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Formerly 'vaporeon800' Brad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Search PM
    "Oddmost" is the greatest ESL misspelling ever.

    The OP never mentioned what VCR he plans to use...?
    Quote Quote  
  13. Hi everyone
    Thanks for all your replys and suggestions. I have been following them all with great intrest.
    Just to reply to the post above, the VHS VCR I am planning on using is a Panasonnic AG 7350, and the beta I have is a Sony SLHF-950.

    All the best from Allan
    Quote Quote  
  14. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York, US
    Search Comp PM
    Both machines will do. If you wanted better, you'd probably spend months looking for something that hasn't been used to death by now.
    Last edited by sanlyn; 28th Mar 2014 at 18:46.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Indeed, and I have actually been pretty lucky concerning these, as I've gotten them whilst they are still in a very nice shape. The sony only has about 50 ours behind itself, and it is something simular concerning the beta, although this doesnt have any built in hour meter like the sony does.

    Oh, and I do have some comercialy pre-recorded tapes, so I believe that I'm bound to run into some sort of macrovision issues, at least if I were to go the DV rout with the canopus.
    All the best from Allan
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!