Quality of video and sound vital - Which one is for me?

[TheGame7]

I have just purchased a new, high spec. PC and it has a DVD writer.

Now I want to use it to capture my old VHS collection and then transfer them to DVD (some editing may also be involved).

However, the neccesity is that video and sound quality remains almost if not exactly the same.

Here are the options I have looked into:

1) PCI Video Capture Card e.g. Haupaugge's Win TV PVR 250 and AVI AIW

The advantages of this first are foremost, I think, is that it is a PCI card so it won't drain the computer's resources like a USB device would. Also, it would be that I can encode straight into mpeg 2 format preventing frame loss. However, would this prevent me editing?

Is it still possible to capture in avi format using Virtual Dub and by pass the card's encoding if one wishes to?

The major problem I am worried about is that the sound quality will not be up to scratch. I think this because I only have AC97 on board sound. I would have to attach the composite lead to the TV Tuner card and then a RCA to 3.5mm jack would be inserted into the line in of the sound card. Past experience suggests this is not a brilliant sollution which may lead to out of sync sound as well as poor quality.

2) USB Video Capture Device e.g. Haupaugge's Win TV PVR 350 and Pinnacle's Dazzle DVC 150

The advantage of this is that it has all the inputs - both S-Video/Composite + the RCA Audio.

Will this maintain sound quality?

Also, if I was to capture this with Virtual Dub, how would the sound be captured with the video??

Will the fact that they are USB 2.0 devices mean they are faster and capture a better quality? (Becuase I read the old USB 1.0 devices used up a lot of the system's resources and their was a fair bit of frame loss as well as a poorer quality compared to a PCI option.)

3) Use a Analogue to Digital Converter which connects to the PC through firewire, e.g. Canopus ADVC-100 Analog to DV Video Converter

This seems a good option, but an expensive one at that. Also, what puts me off is that it is compressed to DV-avi by the hardware. I have read posts stating there can be colour problems and also DV-avi would not be my first compression option.


Any help much appreciated on which option you think suits me.

P.S. I tried a TV Tuner card from my old PC into the new one, the capture quality seemed poor and there was a lot frame dropping.

This suprised me since my new PC has a dedicated hard drive for vid capping (160Gb) and I have plenty of RAM (1024Mb) and a 3.2GHz Processor)

Did the fact that the card is five years old have anything to do with this?
So would another cheap but new TV card be an option?

Thanks again.

[TheGame7]

I do not want to buy an ATI AIW card since I have an excellent AGP graphics card (one of the nVidia GeForce) and so not only would this be a waste of money but also something I do not want.

This means I could opt for a Haupaugge or Pinnacle TV Tuner Card?

But will the fact that I have on board sound affect it. (The possibility of having to use a RCA to 3.5mm jack converter does not seem an idealic solution.

So, this leaves me two options.

Either go for a USB 2.0 "capture" device or a firewire one.

For both, how do they go about capturing the sound with the video? Is it through the USB/Firewire also (or is that just for video), or do they still connect to the sound card?

Once somone can answer this and my queries in my previous question, I can consider what next..

[FulciLives]

Get the CANOPUS ADVC-100 (anywhere from $250 to $300) and a stand alone TBC unit such as the DataVideo TBC-1000 which can be found at a variety of on-line stores for around $300 or the AVT-8710 which is sold by AV TOOL BOX for $179.00

Now why do I say that?

1.) I've been working with a PCI TV tuner type card. While it is true that these cards can provide excellent image when using the HuffyUV codec or the PICVideo MJPEG codec there is a BIG problem most of the time ... A/V sync or rather the lack of A/V sync. It will simply drive you INSANE! I've finally found a method that works for me in keeping A/V sync but it really is not a perfect solution. In short there is a LOT of tweaking with the PCI type cards and it can be a nightmare. I'm looking forward to eventually getting a CANOPUS ADVC-100 myself. Also bear in the mind the DataVideo DAC-100 is essentially the same thing but cheaper. I still haven't 100% made my mind up as to which one I will get.

2.) I've seen recently what a good quality TBC can do and it is simply amazing especially with VHS quality video. Even with high quality video sources such as LD or cable TV it can make a difference. I've come to the conclusion that a TBC is an absolute essential tool for analog to digital conversion.

Hope this helps

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[TheGame7]

As I have asked in another thread, what is the advantages of the ADVC over a DV camcorder pass through?

Or a cheaper option as you mentioned, or the Pinnacle systems?

Also, what are the faster than the old ones, USB 2.0 devices?

[FulciLives]

As I have asked in another thread, what is the advantages of the ADVC over a DV camcorder pass through?

Quality wise there should be no real difference between using a DV camcorder pass thru VS using the Canopus ADVC-100

Quality of image and sound as well as 100% A/V sync should be the same either way.

However consider this ... with the use of the Canopus ADVC-100 you do not need to put any "wear and tear" on your expensive camcorder. You also have the convience of leaving the ADVC-100 hooked up to the computer all the time and not having to disconnect and re-connect the camcorder whenever you want/need to use it AS a camcorder.

Also you can do scheduled TV captures with the ADVC-100 without needing to be home. I'm not sure BUT I don't think that scheduled unattended captures are possible with a camcorder.

Last but not least the ADVC-100 can work with PAL and NTSC video. If you have a NTSC only camcorder then the pass thru will only work with NTSC video. All camcorders that I know of are either NTSC or PAL and one format cannot handle the other.

Or a cheaper option as you mentioned, or the Pinnacle systems?

Also, what are the faster than the old ones, USB 2.0 devices?

The main benefit of the CANOPUS ADVC-100 is the audio sync issue. Most devices that convert analog A/V to digital will have some sort of A/V sync issue. This is NOT the case with the ADVC-100 and should be about the same with a DV camcorder pass thru although it has been noted that there are instances where lack of a TBC unit will sometimes cause A/V sync issues with a DV camcorder pass thru whereas the ADVC-100 seems better able to handle that kind of problem. Either way having a TBC unit is a good idea if you ask me.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Tearren]

CANOPUS ADVC-100 - $250
AV TOOL BOX - + $179

Total $430

If you are considering spending this kind of money, and video and sound quality are that important to you, I believe you should consider purchasing a standalone DVD recorder.

For a little bit more you can even get one with a hard drive.

Tearren

[FulciLives]

CANOPUS ADVC-100 - $250
AV TOOL BOX - + $179

Total $430

If you are considering spending this kind of money, and video and sound quality are that important to you, I believe you should consider purchasing a standalone DVD recorder.

For a little bit more you can even get one with a hard drive.

Tearren

Well the main benefit to the computer based solution boils down to control.

For instance it will be very easy to edit your capture. Yes MPEG-2 can be edited but it is a tricky thing to do correctly and even then you can't put your edit points EXACTLY where you want them. No problem with editing a DV AVI capture or even a HuffyUV or PICVideo MJPEG capture.

The next major benefit is that you can control your MPEG-2 DVD encoding options much better on the computer. You can choose Full D1 or Half D1 along with the EXACT bitrate you want to use for the audio and video. You can do a true 2-pass or multipass VBR encode. Last but not least you can apply various "noise" filters etc. to help clean up the video.

The computer method is by far the way to maximize quality but yes it is more complicated and time consuming which are the benefits of using a stand alone DVD recorder. Ease of use and real-time MPEG-2 DVD encoding. But no stand alone DVD recorder will match what can be done on a computer except maybe in the 1 hour mode which uses the MAX DVD bitrate of approximately 8000kbps but even then you have the editing issues and the lack of being able to use "noise" filters.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Tearren]

-FulciLives

Interesting points. I admit the editing is not framerate accurate on a standalone, but it is pretty close. In the past I have had difficulting editing on the computer. I was using MPEG2VCR which wasn't framerate accurate either. This was what everyone suggested to me. What program do you use to do your editing?

As for encoding, all the captures from camcorders, I have made were done in XP mode. So the quality was excellant. They were all under 1 hour though.

On a side note, I read in one of your other posts about your favorite horror movies or some such. You recommended Evil Dead. I rented it around Halloween and enjoyed it. Real creepy. It was good esp. considering the budget they worked with.

Tearren

[FulciLives]

-FulciLives

Interesting points. I admit the editing is not framerate accurate on a standalone, but it is pretty close. In the past I have had difficulting editing on the computer. I was using MPEG2VCR which wasn't framerate accurate either. This was what everyone suggested to me. What program do you use to do your editing?

I don't do direct to MPEG-2 captures. I fooled around with using a stand alone DVD recorder but wasn't crazy about the quality.

As far as editing MPEG-2 you either got MPEG2VCR or TMPGEnc DVD Author.

As for encoding, all the captures from camcorders, I have made were done in XP mode. So the quality was excellant. They were all under 1 hour though.

The higher quality the source the less need or improvements needed with such things as "video noise" filters etc. Also XP mode (the 1 hour mode) uses pretty much the highest bitrate that DVD can use. So it is when you want more than 1 hour per DVD or are working with less than steller quality video that the computer method is needed to ensure quality.

On a side note, I read in one of your other posts about your favorite horror movies or some such. You recommended Evil Dead. I rented it around Halloween and enjoyed it. Real creepy. It was good esp. considering the budget they worked with.

Yes I do love horror films
If you liked EVIL DEAD you should enjoy the two sequels or at least EVIL DEAD 2 as EVIL DEAD 3 aka ARMY OF DARKNESS gets a bit over silly and pretty much tosses out any "real" horror.

My favorite horror film is George A. Romero's 1979 DAWN OF THE DEAD which has been released twice now on DVD with a new version due out sometime in 2004 including a box set which will have all 3 "cuts" or "versions" of the film. Neither of the first two DVD releases were really satisfactory in terms of quality so this will be a major release to genre fans.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman