Best capture res for VHS?

[Jer]

I want to capture stuff from VHS
what is the best res to use?
480x480 352x480 320x240 325x240???
I Cant do 7XX system cant handle it with dropping frames

the S/W that comes with the card can do max of 352x240 MPEG II
I was the recoding this to 480x480 to make an SVCD - or is that pointless
I know when I did that the image came out clearer then without the
re encoding

I was also able to use vdub to capture at 480x480 then encoding with main concept

which is better?

[vh5150]

Others can say likewise, but I have always captured at double NTSC 4:3 which would be 704 by 480. I rather resize in software than resize in hardware. Difference being is that things get blurred in 352/240 than in 704/480. Filtering noise is always done at whatever size. If you do little or no noise filtering that would just add to the overall size of the file.

Do a capture at both sizes or in between. You will see that the video is a lot sharper when captured from a bigger frame size. Even if it is VHS. But remember to use a noise filter after capturing when encoding to a final medium.

[johns0]

Whats the reason for dropping frames at higher res?If you are capturing avi with compressed sound that will drop frames.

[duhmez]

I'm all about 352x480. there is not 704 worth of detail in a vhs, so anythig more is overkill. HOWEVER, i read her somewhere that bt8x8 cards do some weird not too good thins at less than 360, so it may be better to do full 704 in them. I use ati AIW so i stick with 352 and get fantastic results off the svideo satelite.

[briandugas]

I want to capture stuff from VHS
what is the best res to use?
480x480 352x480 320x240 325x240???
I Cant do 7XX system cant handle it with dropping frames

Have you been over to www.LordSmurf.com? You'll find some good stuff there on Understanding Your Source. I am a relative newbie at this stuff, and I am finding my groove, and I'm using 352x480 for VHS, and 704x480 for Hi8 camcorder capture. Do a search on this forum for VHS capture resolution. You'll see this subject has been tossed around several times. Every time it comes up, I read every post by every person to get all sides of the story. You'll see that most people are using 352x480, unless they want to do some editing...then we enter a whole new ball game.

[dalejr8988]

ive recorded quite a bit with my card off of vhs and i found that recording in 352x240 in divx 5.11 codec at 1300 kb/s and mpeg layer 3 audio at 128 kb/s then opening in virtual dub and using the resize filter as bicubic to resize to 512x384 gives very good results. the file size after the resizing is actually smaller and better picture.


sorry for hijacking the thread but i gotta question.

im sure if i had a better tv tuner i could get better quality cause there is quite a bit of noise in the picture when there is a lot of action and i dont know how to reduce that. would it work record at 3000 kb/s then resizing at just 1300 kb/s?

[stackner]

i suggest that if you computer has the power and speed behind it then just capture everything at FULL size. it is the clearest you will get!

[lordsmurf]

Best depends on use..

... though I will 100% disagree with the comments that "more is better" ... more is just more. It's like feeding a fat kid more cookies after he's already said he's full.

[stackner]

yes i must agre with lordsmurf. i just find it easier with my captures to capture at FULL resolution as my machine has no problem doing this and mean it should come out very clear instead of trying 1/2 and 1/4 resolution.

[Capmaster]

It's easier to cap at a too-high res and then throw away unused res later than it is to cap at too low a res and interpolate later, wishing you had capped at a higher res
Four things you can't achieve:
1) A capture that has too high a resolution or bitrate
2) Too much money
3) A girlfriend that's too hot
4) A car that goes too fast

[WuphonsReach]

I Cant do 7XX system cant handle it with dropping frames

Did you try encoding to a codec like HuffYUV or MJPEG? If you can't encode straight to MPEG2 at 720x480/576 you might try capturing to AVI using one of those 2 codecs.

[dalejr8988]

if i capture as avi i can only capture at 352x240 if i try any higher i lose tons of frames. now i only lose very little. also i am using the software that came with the card (winfast pvr) to record cause i couldnt get virtual vcr to work.

[vh5150]

It's easier to cap at a too-high res and then throw away unused res later than it is to cap at too low a res and interpolate later, wishing you had capped at a higher res
Four things you can't achieve:
1) A capture that has too high a resolution or bitrate
2) Too much money
3) A girlfriend that's too hot
4) A car that goes too fast

My sentiments exactly

[Dr_Layne]

I cap VHS thru a DAC-100 which converts analog video to digital video and transfers the data via firewire to the HD. The conversion is 720x480 but I encode to mpeg2 at 352x480 since the souce is VHS. This allows me to use a lower bit rate and still get no worse video quality than the original vhs source.

Steve

[scottb721]

It's easier to cap at a too-high res and then throw away unused res later than it is to cap at too low a res and interpolate later

VHS only has 200-300 horizontal lines.

If you capture at a higher resolution than the source aren't you still interpolating anyway, just during the capture instead of later ?
You're still creating something from nothing.

I tried capturing the same material at 352x576, 480x576 and 720x576 and burnt it to CD.
I honestly couldn't tell the difference when played back on my TV.

[fmctm1sw]

I want to capture stuff from VHS
what is the best res to use?
480x480 352x480 320x240 325x240???
I Cant do 7XX system cant handle it with dropping frames

the S/W that comes with the card can do max of 352x240 MPEG II
I was the recoding this to 480x480 to make an SVCD - or is that pointless
I know when I did that the image came out clearer then without the
re encoding

I was also able to use vdub to capture at 480x480 then encoding with main concept

which is better?

This thread had some good info in it (and pictures)....

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=199669

[trevlac]

I'd say quite a few people here have it wrong..... :P

A capture device always samples the analog signal at a fixed size above 720. It then resizes to what you want. Even 720. So if you capture and then resize, you are resizing 2wice.

BTW: Resize = Resample = Interpolation = smoothing filter


However, there is a lot between your analog signal and final product. One should always test their setup and do what works best.


So......

It's nice to THINK :

1) you are capturing a high resolution
2) you have a lot of money
3) you have a hot girlfriend
4) you have a fast car

But alas .... sometimes it is not so.

[FulciLives]

I want to capture stuff from VHS
what is the best res to use?
480x480 352x480 320x240 325x240???
I Cant do 7XX system cant handle it with dropping frames

the S/W that comes with the card can do max of 352x240 MPEG II
I was the recoding this to 480x480 to make an SVCD - or is that pointless
I know when I did that the image came out clearer then without the
re encoding

I was also able to use vdub to capture at 480x480 then encoding with main concept

which is better?

A final resolution of 352x480 is fine for a VHS source.

But how do you get there?

Some like to capture at 720/704x480 then resize in software to 352x480 because they think they get sharper results that way.

However my testing has shown that you can get sharp results if you capture at 352x480 but this depends on your capture card and the driver for it.

Take a look at the link that fmctm1sw posted just a couple posts up from here.

BTW you said you were making SVCD discs. If so try to capture at 480x480 if you can (i.e., computer can keep up). If not you can try making a CVD which is similiar to a SVCD but uses 352x480 otherwise you encode as you would a SVCD and burn with NERO as a non-compliant SVCD disc.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
480x480 is not a valid DVD resolution ... only good for SVCD but 352x480 is a valid DVD resolution.

[henasau]

I wonder if capture at, or near the resolution used by particular card.
would give better results.

Trevlac said:

A capture device always samples the analog signal at a fixed size above 720. It then resizes to what you want. Even 720. So if you capture and then resize, you are resizing 2wice.

Yesterday I did some testing. I used various resolutions for my captures: 768x576, 720x576, 704x576, 352x576
I had my Task Manager on. I noticed the smallest load on my CPU at 704x576 ~55-75% and the highest at 720x576 95-100%.

Would this mean 704x576 is the closest to the actual capture resolution/ sampling used by my capture card ?
I wonder if this would have any bearing on picture quality - less resizing. I had no dropped frames in any of the captures

[indolikaa]

I had my Task Manager on. I noticed the smallest load on my CPU at 704x576 ~55-75% and the highest at 720x576 95-100%.

Would this mean 704x576 is the closest to the actual capture resolution/ sampling used by my capture card ?

Sounds like the CPU is trying to interpolate those extra 16 lines on the fly, doesn't it?

I'd say 'yes' on that one.

[trevlac]

I had my Task Manager on. I noticed the smallest load on my CPU at 704x576 ~55-75% and the highest at 720x576 95-100%.

Would this mean 704x576 is the closest to the actual capture resolution/ sampling used by my capture card ?

Sounds like the CPU is trying to interpolate those extra 16 lines on the fly, doesn't it?

I'd say 'yes' on that one.

I'd guess that your card samples over 1500 times per line. It then (in 1 fell swoop) decodes the color signal, resizes by interpolating the pixels, and coverts to the color space you ask (and slices and dices) all on that nifty little card ... before your cpu knows what is going on.

So... you can't avoid a resize, it always happens. You can't get the number of samples as pixels because the resize needs to happen on the chip to make it work.

As far as CPU load ... got me. 720 is bigger so the compressor (whatever) has to work harder, but +20% seems too much.