VHS with Blackmagic Intensity PRO and OBS studio...

[Bartoloni]

Sorry for the probably very newbie question.. but i want just to undersatand if i'm doing something wrong.

i need to digitize a VHS in a compressed format (removing interlacing) and making the final clip a 4:3 (that can be saw correctly on computer monitors)

the blackmagic intensity is converting VHS to 625P PAL (or 625I PAL) , progressive or interlaced.. (can't se any difference selecting P or I ) that become a 720x576

OBS studio is taking the signal from the blackmagic card.. and resizing it from 720x576 to 768x576 (to have rounded circles on computer montiors)

i used the yadif 2x for the deinterlacing...

and output is the matroska stock of OBS with increase quality.

i'm doing something wrong?

[DB83]

Nothing is wrong.

625 is the total number of interlaced lines that a analogue signal sends to a tv. Not all lines are visible so you end up with a standard....


576 vertical lines as the analogue signal from the vhs is converted to digital.


720 is the standard horizontal width from the same conversion. However....


720 * 576 is not 4:3 (it is 5:4) and would require a flag in the captured file to make it so. Thus the captured file is now resized to....


768 * 576 which is 4:3 (check the maths) which is how that same 720 * 576 should display if the flag was present.

[lollo]

First of all you need a stable signal to deal with BlackMagic Intensity Pro (and most capture cards). A high end S-VHS VCR with lineTBC or a specific DVD Recorder in pass-through mode is required.

i need to digitize a VHS in a compressed format (removing interlacing) and making the final clip a 4:3 (that can be saw correctly on computer monitors)

There are 2 different phase:

• capture 720x576, YUV 4:2:2, 8bit, lossless
  
• deinterlace if needed, and then encode to h264, specifyng/adding 4:3 DAR flag to final file

(can't se any difference selecting P or I )

Because probably you are capturing a video not interlaced, but with PAL 2:2 pulldown telecine (the 2 different fields building the frame are from the same moment in time)

OBS studio is taking the signal from the blackmagic card.. and resizing it from 720x576 to 768x576

There is no reason to use OBS nor to lossy resize. A 720x576 frame with 4:3 DAR will be displayed at the equivalent of 576*4/3=768 x 576 (right proportions). Remember to mask the head switching noise at the bottom.
(To be more accurate you should crop 8 pixels from left and 8 pixels from right to create a 704x576 frame, but let's keep it simple for now)

i used the yadif 2x for the deinterlacing

QTGMC is better

...with increase quality

You can introduce a quality improvement in this flow only because the deinterlacing obtained using QTGMC may be superior to the one in your display or in your player, and because QTGMC perform a noise reduction

[lordsmurf]

First of all you need a stable signal to deal with BlackMagic Intensity Pro (and most capture cards). A high end S-VHS VCR with lineTBC or a specific DVD Recorder in pass-through mode is required.

That's line TBC.
BM cards need frame, not just line.
But it must be frame designed for consumer analog source, not some ancient rackmount unit made for pro sources.

All cards need some form of TBC, it's not optional.
But especially BM cards, no sorta-kinda TBC(ish) works well, or at all. Even BM suggests NOT using their own cards for VHS transfer.

[Bartoloni]

very thank you to every one!

. Even BM suggests NOT using their own cards for VHS transfer.

Great...

i used the yadif 2x for the deinterlacing

QTGMC is better

this mean that i can't do acquisition and deinterlacing at the same time.. because i have to post process the footage with ffmpeg o avisynth? (i think there is no way from OBS to add this deinterlacing plugin)

720 * 576 is not 4:3 (it is 5:4) and would require a flag in the captured file to make it so. Thus the captured file is now resized to....

how i can add this flag? seems that OBS or Media Express from BM can't do that... there is another software that can do that? (or it's necessary to add the flag in 2nd time? )

All cards need some form of TBC, it's not optional.

i will buy a VCR+TBC when i'm sure that everything is working fine


P.S. what is the best way you do these kind of things? and what about the 5:4 to 4:3 conversion? i want to be sure that i can watch the videos on standard monitor without issues or give the videos to my parents without issues...

P.P.S. i saw on Aliexpress a PCI-Express aquisition card that has a fixes 768x576 output on PAL... it costs 89$ (circa) and is equipped by an old realtek chipset used on avermedias (but with drivers for WIndows 8 / 10 ) https://wap.aliexpress.com/item/1005001835118210.html anyone knows ?

[lordsmurf]

this mean that i can't do acquisition and deinterlacing at the same time..

Correct, cannot deinterlace at capture time. The most that can be done at capture is drop-field or blend, fugly stuff.

(i think there is no way from OBS to add this deinterlacing plugin)

OBS is a digital screen recording software, not analog capture software. Yes, it can "also capture" from analog, but it does so by screen recording the input. It's not the same. VirtualDub best, falback to VirtualDub2, AmaRecTV and some others, as needed. But try to get settings right, capture with VirtualDub.

Wrong tool. OBS is a screwdriver, but you have nails.

i will buy a VCR+TBC when i'm sure that everything is working fine

That's line TBC. Good start, but not done.
- line TBC cleans the image
- frame TBC cleans the signal
- you need both

P.P.S. i saw on Aliexpres

Typical Chinese crap cards. Avoid. Those give "a picture", but it's not quality. Understand that too many chips are reversed engineered counterfeit garbage. Easycaps, etc. As I've stated before, the comm method does not matter, USB vs. PCI. That's not what determines card quality. The card determines card quality.

[lollo]

i will buy a VCR+TBC when i'm sure that everything is working fine

VCR+TBC is a S-VHS VCR with (line)TBC, and it may be adequate. If the conditions of your tapes are good you may not need a (frame)TBC, which introduces a lossy A/D/A conversion and a degradation.
If the VCR in not able to stabilize problematic tapes, add a DVD-R Recorder in pass-through mode disabling the VCR (line)TBC. Only if really needed, add in the chain a (frame)TBC.

The BM cards are not famous for their Analog capture wonderful capabilities (I use one of them only for Digital Betacam tapes), but they are OK of the input signal is really stable.

In term of capture software, the best by far for Analog capturing is AmarecTV. VirtualDub has often synch problems with modern OS and cards. You can search the forums for tens of reports and experiments from many users (I am one of them).

Once more, do all the filtering (deinterlacing, encoding, etc,) in a second step, and not while capturing.

There is not 5:4 to 4:3 conversion. 5:4 is the storage aspect ratio or SAR (720 : 576 = 5/4). The display is performed according to the Display Aspect Ratio or DAR, which is 4:3 in your case. This means that the player or the TV display the 576 vertical lines and take the DAR (4/3) to extrapolate 768 points in each vertical line from the 720 points (576*4:3 = 768). (Technically not too accurate, but I hope you get it)
You could convert the "square pixels" 768x576, or crop the 720x576 and specify the Pixel Aspect Ratio or PAR, but stay simple for now.

In term of alternatives to BM cards, if you want to stay in consumer range, you may consider a Hauppauge USB-Live 2 or a I-OData GV-USB, excellent cards providing you feed them with a stable Y/C signal (GV-USB is bettern than Live-2 for composite input, signal that I do not recommend anyhow)

[Bartoloni]

OK, i successfully deinterlaced an interlaced clip aquired by BM mediaExpress using Virtualdub2 and the QTGMC .. and the quality is better than previously attempt using OBS or ShowBiz5 (with 3 differnet USB adapters) ...

is possible to apply the QTGMC directly on Virtualdub acquisition? (i think no.. but i'm hoping) just to reduce time of coversion.

thank you for the (great) help provided you guys.

deinterlacing:

[Attachment 70800 - Click to enlarge]

on right the version with QTGMC

[Attachment 70801 - Click to enlarge]


[QUOTE=lollo;2689127]

or crop the 720x576 and specify the Pixel Aspect Ratio or PAR, but stay simple for now.

and how i "SPECIFY" the pixel aspect ratio ? (this make that the player, VLC or others can uderstand that the clip need an horizontal adaptation... right?)

P.S. i found also the "MSU Deinterlacer" that came as a Virtualdub filter... anyone used it? (Russians says that is better than QTGMC )

[lollo]

and how i "SPECIFY" the pixel aspect ratio ? (this make that the player, VLC or others can uderstand that the clip need an horizontal adaptation... right?)

Through a flag written by the encoding software in the video file, i.e. Adding the option -aspect=4:3 in ffmpeg

[Bwaak]

You could convert the "square pixels" 768x576, or crop the 720x576 and specify the Pixel Aspect Ratio or PAR, but stay simple for now.

No need to crop if PAR is specified and honored by the playback device.

[Sharc]

You could convert the "square pixels" 768x576, or crop the 720x576 and specify the Pixel Aspect Ratio or PAR, but stay simple for now.

No need to crop if PAR is specified and honored by the playback device.

Yes. At the risk that people come back and complain that the display aspect ratio (overall) is 1.3636 instead of 1.3333... (4:3)

[lordsmurf]

a (frame)TBC, which introduces a lossy A/D/A conversion and a degradation.

Stop with the FUD BS.

Just because you're too cheap to buy DataVideo/Cypress type frame TBC doesn't mean it harms quality (QUITE THE OPPOSITE!) or is "not needed". I've been nice to you for months, but you're going off the rails now.

The irony here is that the ES10/15 type Panasonic recorders, which you suggest, are the items that harm quality. Luma, AGC, posterization, sync, and more. Again, you do not get that with the recommended DataVideo/Cypress frame TBCs.

You have excellent Avisynth advice, but your capturing advice sucks. People are following you off a costly time-wasting cliff far too often now.

You found a workaround method that works (GREAT!). But your error is insisting the workaround should be the primary method. No.
- Primary is TBCs, VirtualDub, better capture cards, which gives solid results, almost always.
- Not the cheapskate/hack(ish) method with a high fail rate.

Only if really needed, add in the chain a (frame)TBC.

- Line TBC cleans the image.
- Frame TBC cleans the signal.
You need both.

You can attempt to use the non-TBC frame sync in the ES10/15 type recorders, which is married to a strong+crippled line TBC, but it's not bulletproof. And again, all the quality-reducing effects. But do not assume the capture are fine without scrubbing or watching, which is where folks always find the errors at a later (sometime very later) date.

There's also a lot of "also has" TBC items, between the cost of an actual TBC, and the minimalist ES10/15 type unit. Those can be better options, especially when certain units are paired in the workflow. So budget items exist, it's not all or nothing (or mere ES10/15 type unit). But it takes advice based on the sources, the formats, etc. Not random advice that the newbie can't easily digest.

In term of capture software, the best by far for Analog capturing is AmarecTV.
VirtualDub has often synch problems with modern OS and cards.
You can search the forums for tens of reports and experiments from many users (I am one of them).

More FUD.

[Bwaak]

i will buy a VCR+TBC when i'm sure that everything is working fine

It is sensible to master basic workflow first (frame/field rate, aspect ratio, resolution, codec, bitrate, etc), then to upgrade hardware or to add new pieces to the chain if you decide you need them. You may not need a TBC at all if your tapes and VCR are in good shape; you'll have some faint shimmering in an otherwise reasonably rectangular frame. Nowadays people pay money for plugins to distort their pristine HD videos for them to look like VHS, but you can get it for free

Neal Francis - Alameda Apartments (Official VHS Video)

[lollo]

Stop with the FUD BS.

The one who has to stop his bullshit is you. It has been proven by many experienced users (latreche34, Skiller, Scharfis-brain, Bogilein, oln, myself) that if the tapes are in good conditions the frameTBC may not be needed. And DVD-R recorder stabilization/correction may be good enough for another set of tapes with problems.

You have excellent Avisynth advice, but your capturing advice sucks. People are following you off a costly time-wasting cliff far too often now.

Another bullshit. I have no conflict of interest like you, I do not sell anything. My capture advice are excellent; tape condition first, high end VCR with lineTBC, recommended card by the community (not what you sell), eventually a DVD Recorder, and lastly eventually a frameTBC.
There is no reason to spend money if it is not needed.

More FUD.

VirtualDUb is far inferior to AmarecTV for analog picture. Period. Prove the opposite with facts otherwise, instead of your classic blah-blah.

I've been nice to you for months, but you're going off the rails now.

You do not have to. I left your site/forum because your bullshit and lies, as many others did. Reply to me as much as you want here, I will destroy your theories and your blah-blah.

[lollo]

It is sensible to master basic workflow first (frame/field rate, aspect ratio, resolution, codec, bitrate, etc), then to upgrade hardware or to add new pieces to the chain if you decide you need them. You may not need a TBC at all if your tapes and VCR are in good shape; you'll have some faint shimmering in an otherwise reasonably rectangular frame.

Correct Bwaak, based on technical facts and experience

We have a different views avout the "definition" of line correction and frame TBC, but I confirm that if the first is present and the tapes are in god condition the second may not needed.

[lordsmurf]

The one who has to stop his bullshit is you. It has been proven by many experienced users (latreche34, Skiller, Scharfis-brain, Bogilein, oln, myself) that if the tapes are in good conditions the frameTBC may not be needed. And DVD-R recorder stabilization/correction may be good enough for another set of tapes with problems..

Some form of TBC is required for digital ingest of analog videotapes. This cannot be escaped.

The farther you get away from actual TBCs (and as designed for consumer analog sources), the more issues you'll have, the more quality hits you'll endure. This is fact.

Your weasel phrase here is "in good conditions", which I do concur with. However, it's not visual "good", but signal "good" -- in other words, something you cannot see (although there are visual tell-tales).

You also cannot smush together the concepts of line, frame, and field.

Nor blindly believe in whatever device wanted to claim "TBC", as that was a wide term with many interpretations. As I often joke, my toaster has a TBC by some loose definitions.

You also continue to mislead newbies with the phrase "DVD-R recorder stabilization/correction". Again, it's not just any random DVD recorder that suffices here. It's very specific models, usually specific Panasonics from around 2006. Not just whatever was in the closet, under the bed, wherever. Not random. Specific.

I have no conflict of interest like you, I do not sell anything

Again with the FUD. The reason I began to sell gear in 2016, gear that we all need in this community, is because it was disappearing and falling into disrepair. Your accusation is ridiculous since I sold nothing from the late 1990s until 2016.

There is no reason to spend money if it is not needed.

As usual, conversations about gear/TBCs are not about quality, but money. And some folks double down on not wanting to spend money by concocting whatever sort of BS they can to make themselves feel better about not spending said money. However, mental gymnastics are not required to simply state "I DON'T HAVE MONEY FOR THAT". Furthermore, it does a disservice to others who aren't so damned cheap (or simply cannot afford, which is understandable), and desire quality. There are workarounds for you. What there is not is any accuracy to your absolute bullshit regarding TBCs.

VirtualDUb is far inferior to AmarecTV for analog picture. Period. Prove the opposite with facts otherwise, instead of your classic blah-blah.

Cards fail to be seen, mystery frames insert/disappear, and users have issues using it (even with experienced guidance).
AmaRecTV has warts, but it is a good fallback fior times where VirtualDub/2 refuse to cooperate.

Every rules has exceptions.
But exceptions cannot overrule rules. For whatever reason, you think your limited experience overrules most. It's an ego thing. Get over yourself, come back down to reality.

Again, I'm glad that you found a capture path. But others have had serious issues recreating your success. It comes down to the software being buggy, imprecise. The love/advice of cheap variable Hauppauge cards doesn't help either.

I will destroy your theories

I'm amused. You don't understand what a theory is, do you? Hint: science, fact.

[lollo]

But others have had serious issues recreating your success.

Smurf, I helped many people with capturing analog tapes, and never had that feedback. But may be they write to you insted of talking to me. Can you forward their message to me?

My success is a lucky personal results, and I never used it as an evidence of anything.

You also continue to mislead newbies with the phrase "DVD-R recorder stabilization/correction". Again, it's not just any random DVD recorder that suffices here. It's very specific models, usually specific Panasonics from around 2006.

It was just a summary, we all know the right devices and we always help the newbies with specific indications.

But exceptions cannot overrule rules. For whatever reason, you think your limited experience overrules most. It's an ego thing. Get over yourself, come back down to reality.

You see, the "word" is that you take my personal experience as being an evidence I bring (which i do not), the "fact" is that there are tens of reports about people fixing their VirtualDub asynch problems switching to AmarecTV. Many on your forum.

You don't understand what a theory is, do you? Hint: science, fact.

I am amused too. Funny. Science and facts are not your strong point. Across all my post I always support my words with facts when needed, whith comparison, side-by-side view, output video files, image comparison, etc. You only spend words (theory). I have never, ever, seen a fact from you in thousand of posts.

Take care, until next time...

[lordsmurf]

Smurf, I helped many people with capturing analog tapes, and never had that feedback. But may be they write to you insted of talking to me. Can you forward their message to me?

Sure.

Next time such a conversation happens, I'll see if I can loop you in.

I've always wanted to investigate why AmaRecTV does what it does, both the good and the bad, and the unknown. Something is going on there, not dropping frames is not magic. There's really two scientific reasons: (1) AmaRecTV is not properly reporting, and there is evidence leading to this conclusion; and/or attenuating audio, or (2) VirtualDub/2 settings are wrong; or the card hates it, which is plausible. Anything but "it just works" type magical thinking. There must be a reason that you, and indeed a few others, claim/seem to have good results.

But be warned, you must always be open (like a true scientist!) to the fact that you may be missing something in your own analysis. Accept that you can be wrong. I certainly do.

My success is a lucky personal results, and I never used it as an evidence of anything.

We all have those lucky moments.

It was just a summary, we all know the right devices and we always help the newbies with specific indications.

Alright, fair enough.
Although, no, newbies don't dig deep enough at times. They see a comment and run with it. "Any DVD recorder, alright, check!" ... and that won't end well for them. So I always specify certain aspects.

You see, the "word" is that you take my personal experience as being an evidence I bring (which i do not),

Alright, great.

Again, you're having an unusually excellent capture experience. As long as your realize it won't translate well to most others -- and perhaps they need to be made aware of that.

tens of reports about people fixing their VirtualDub asynch problems switching to AmarecTV.

The problem here is that mere tens (dozens) is nothing. I can sometimes deal with mere dozens in a week, sometimes even a day.

Furthermore, as mentioned, switching software doesn't prove VirtualDub was setup correctly, and is therefore not a 1:1 comparison. Nor does it address some of the observed issues with frame accuracy (by others, seemingly not you). As stated, AmaRecTV is not magic. Something is going on.

Take care, until next time...

I see no reason why we can't return to being friendly.

The first time I tried to install and use AmaRecTV, several years ago now, because VirtualDub and VirtualDub2 were being obstinate, it would not work. But nothing on that system would. That specific Win10 system hated that card. But at the time, I didn't assume where the fault was, or wasn't. It could have been PEBKAC, OS, card, or AmaRecTV. Assumption is the enemy of science. It's blurry at that early stage. PEBKAC was quickly ruled out, card was fine on other OS/systems with VirtualDub. The "fix" was a different card for that system.

Later on, another system and OS, AmaRecTV still showed some oddities, but it did work with bugs.

I've not had time to revisit, but I have received similar comments from other non-newbie users. It's mostly the newbies that find it "fine" without any further testing or confirmations. They could be making botched captures, and never know it, never pay attention. That's just too common, and so those users cannot be given much credibility. Noting I do see a couple old seasoned comments at VH, in the reviews, but I'd certainly want to follow up there, ask questions.

To me, AmaRecTV remains something to cautiously use, verify. It was never well vetted by the capture community.

[lollo]

Next time such a conversation happens, I'll see if I can loop you in.

I'll wait for it and publish here, to help anyone else.

I see no reason why we can't return to being friendly.

I have always being friendly with you, except when you are blind and do not want to see the evidence, or lie (in the "innocent" sens of the verb). Without giving facts.

For example AmarecTV not performing better the VirtualDub or not reporting properly. Remember we (myself and a bunch of people/friends all around the world capturing old TV Sci-Fi series) have DVB dumpings of exactely the same video, and Digital Betacam from the Broadcaster to compare with. And we do frame-by-frame, step by step analysis, because we are obsessed with completeness (a missing frame for me is a stab in the heart).

Or when talking about edit mode of JVC S-VHS, or quality of Hauppauge USB-Live 2 and I-O Data GV-USB2, or frameTBC absolutely necessary, or specific DVD-R being not able to sove many problems, or MPEG2 as archive format (just to mention where we often disagreed in the past), and so on.

Which does not mean that I am not open to discussion, and share expertize, and perform together specific test, with you or anybody. In the goal to provide facts!

Edit: I missed earlier this pearl of wisdom from you:

The problem here is that mere tens (dozens) is nothing. I can sometimes deal with mere dozens in a week, sometimes even a day.

Sure! That's why you never posted a single fact rather than a blah-blah, because you have too many. Be serious...

[lordsmurf]

I have always being friendly with you,

Hmm ... then it must be a translation issue. Because it's not so friendly at times.

[Bartoloni]

Emh... BTW thank you for everything , thanks to your help i was able to obtain a very beautiful conversion... maybe not the maximum but still better than the image that i can see on a TV directly from the VCR...


[Attachment 70849 - Click to enlarge]

on the left best quality that i can obtain with 60/200 euros USB converters and relative softwares.... on the right my final result

[lollo]

I have always being friendly with you,

Hmm ... then it must be a translation issue. Because it's not so friendly at times.

Sometimes it seems like you are not the english native language between us.

I wrote: "I have always being friendly with you, except...".

Nevermind, waiting to be included in the chats where your customers are following my examples and having troubles

[lollo]

on the left best quality that i can obtain with 60/200 euros USB converters and relative softwares.... on the right my final result

Glad you're happy, but please post a sample of your untouched capture. A still image says nothing.

[Bwaak]

We have a different views about the "definition" of line correction and frame TBC, but I confirm that if the first is present and the tapes are in god condition the second may not needed.

Not so much different views, but the lack of a common ground. "Line TBC" and "Frame TBC" are not industry-standard terms, so I was looking for their description from people who use these terms and I don't remember a usable definition was provided.

[Alwyn]

Glad you're happy, but please post a sample of your untouched capture. A still image says nothing.

Does it matter? Bartoloni is happy. Are you going to convince them to go into a full-scale AVISynth training course? Probably not.

And to me, a still image tells us a lot. Perhaps you would like to see what could be done with the original capture, but to say "a still means nothing" is a bit rich. How many times have you flashed Imgsli pics at us?

[lollo]

And to me, a still image tells us a lot. Perhaps you would like to see what could be done with the original capture, but to say "a still means nothing" is a bit rich.

Correct, I did not explain well my request.

OP wished to deinterlace on the fly while capturing, something that we did not recommend. And resize. And use lower quality (but maybe acceptable) deinterlacers. I just wanted to tell him that his capture is ok, or trying to help if there is any problem. Then the request for a video sample.

When I post a single image is because we are checking specific aspects, for example the details left/erased by a denoiser, or the halos induced by the sharpening, where a still can say a lot. Of course, a video is always mandatory; the image still is a complement.

Are you going to convince them to go into a full-scale AVISynth training course? Probably not.

Not at all. We can give some hint on how to improve the captures, but the final choice is in OP's hands.

[Bartoloni]

i don't have a lot of money .. and i'm waiting to receive a Philips VR1000 (199 Euros) hoping it will not destroy my VHSs... it has a TBC and Svideo out... probably not a professional solution but is all i can do... any other TBC or TBC+VCR costs too much (for me)