Using intraframe codec for VHS to digital transfer?

[kingmustard123]

I previously captured my home VHS tapes using interframe codecs but found that clean cuts between clips was almost impossible.

Is it plausible to use intraframe codecs for VHS to digital transfer to assist editing, before exporting with an interframe codec? Are there are downsides? Any specific intraframe codec you'd recommend for this use case?

[dellsam34]

You should be capturing in lossless AVI YUV 50 fields per second, edit, de-interlace and then encode to a lossy format.

[themaster1]

Ut Video codec is a good candidate it takes less space than lagarith or huff. Moreover, with Sony Vegas (probably other NLE aswell) you can edit only a part of the clip and it will not reencode the other parts

https://www.videohelp.com/software/Ut-Video-Codec-Suite

[Cornucopia]

In answer to your question, it is not only plausible, but often THE RECOMMENDED workflow, if you want both high quality and ease/smoothness of editing.

Capture in lossless (UT, Lags, HUFF, etc) or slightly-lossy (ProRes, Cineform, DNXHD, GX, etc) intraframe intermediate codec, Edit, Composite, and Render to master file in same format.
Then Convert a copy/copies to lossy interframe codecs of your choice (DIVX/XVID, AVC/H264, HEVC/H265, etc) for sharing/distribution/consumer playback.


Scott

[jagabo]

Is it plausible to use intraframe codecs for VHS to digital transfer to assist editing, before exporting with an interframe codec?

As other have said, yes, it's the preferred procedure. Capture YUV 4:2:2 directly to the lossless codec, edit/filter, export the final video with a lossy YUV 4:2:0 codec like MPEG 2 (DVD), or h.264 for BD, streaming etc.

Are there are downsides?

The files are much larger. With VHS caps you're looking at something like 30 GB/hr.

Any specific intraframe codec you'd recommend for this use case?

UT Video codec isn't always better than Lagarith. It depends on the nature of the video. In my experience Lagarith compresses noisy VHS caps a little better than UT.

[JVRaines]

In the archival setting, I used Lagarith as the capture codec. On a modern fast system, edits pretty well to create use copies in a distribution codec such as AVC. Then transcoded to FFV1/MKV for longterm storage; much higher (although still lossless) compression.

[Alwyn]

Then transcoded to FFV1/MKV for longterm storage; much higher (although still lossless) compression.

Being a LAGS fan, I just did a test converting LAGS to FFV1 using VDub 2. The FFV1 file was only 6% smaller than the LAGS file; FFV1 5800MB verses LAGS 6170MB. Higher, yes, "much", not so sure.

[Eric-jan]

ProRes422LT stores all details you capture from VHS per frame but parts of your setup can also add details which you want to avoid, you don't mention anything about your setup !
on MAC you can use ProRes, but on Windows ?
It's hard to make a setup to capture on Windows or MAC operating systems, it starts with a good TBC, near $1000 or more, but a good VCR, or a DVD recorder as passthrough saves you money in this case.

[kingmustard123]

So, I emailed five nearby places with the following:

Are you please able to confirm if you are able to capture VHS tapes to files via a lossless, intraframe, intermediate codec? (e.g., UT, Lags, HUFF etc)

One has responded with:

Yes I am able to convert your VHS tapes using an intraframe codec. The video is captured using h.264 and then tided up and rendered in Final Cut Pro X which also uses h.264.

This is the way I have been transferring VHS tapes for the last seven years. Clients sometimes just want the original capture footage without using Final Cut Pro X.

Would this work in my case? Can I cut H.264 video frame-by-frame, or should I request something more specific?

[DB83]

h264 is, generally, not intraframe/lossless. Are you on a Mac ?

[kingmustard123]

h264 is, generally, not intraframe/lossless. Are you on a Mac ?

After I receive the videos from whoever I manage to rip them, I will be splitting them and rendering them on a Windows PC.

[DB83]

Ok. But it does appear that the firm who replied does not know the difference between intraframe and interframe (what h264 typically is). It can be edited but not as accurately as pure intraframe/lossless.

[Eric-jan]

h264 is, generally, not intraframe/lossless. Are you on a Mac ?

After I receive the videos from whoever I manage to rip them, I will be splitting them and rendering them on a Windows PC.

On Windows you can use the (intra) codec from Avid.