Very Bad VHS Tape

[gcutler]

I found that using an older VCR might work better. Especially one that does not AUTO-Track. When I have used a VCR with Auto-Tracking turned on the VCR was constantly adjusting the tracking and thus dropping frames like crazy. But when I turned off the feature or used a VCR without Auto-tracking it worked alot better. Granted it wasn't perfect but noticably better than with a state of the art VCR. And it might not cost you anything to get one as a friend may have one sitting around in the kids room that you can borrow. Clean the heads first if you can...

[SatStorm]

If you type "Dynamic Noise Reduction" to google, it is the first link that shows on the screen!

http://www.shdon.com/view.php?doc=vid_dnr

It is a good filter: A fast chain - for typical use - is
rmPAL
Statin Noise Reduction 6
Dynamic Noise Reduction 8

I use Dynamic Noise Reduction last on any chain, and with a value always less than 10. If a time base axis filter goes before, then is better not to use DNR at all, and if you have to (to "stable" the picture), you have to do it with really very low values (6 at most!).

The Video denoise filter, is a very heavy one and helps only on bad and noisy VHS tapes. You don't use it direct, 'cause it de-interlace the source. You use it after "deinterlace (unfold)", and before the other filters. It is useless for DVD and SVHS SP sources.

In general, for long time VHS tapes with tracking problems, time base axis filters like temporal smoother are good. Also, those filters are good to eliminate transmission noises like those zig zag lines of the bad reception. BUT: Somehow, screw up motion, so when a picture is "good" but it has lines from another station, you have to find better alternatives that this. Here comes framemerger.

When you realise what each filter does, then you know how to use them. And you never - ever judge static pictures / frames. With virtualdub, you roll the picture so to preview it.
There are filters which looks excellent on still pictures, but in motion do horrible job. And there are others that on still picture don't look so excellent, but they don't distort the motion.
We have to find the correct ballance all the time.

Post proccessing is my favorite part of this hobby.

[FulciLives]

Hi TheFamilyMan,

I have one of these and it did not help with my situation(same problem as the original poster).It has a TBC but I don't think it's as good as a standalone TBC.It's good in cleaning up video noise though.
Can any of you recommend a good TBC(standalone) for around $500.00

Thanks!

Basically as I see it there are really only 2 choices:

1.) The AVT-8710 which goes for $179.00 USD on the AV TOOL BOX website.

2.) The DataVideo TBC-1000 which seems to go for around $300.00 USD and can be bought from a variety of website. Try PRICEGRABBER.COM

I've used neither of these myself but they are the two that keep comming up in the forums over and over again.

Ironically I've heard both good and bad comments about both of these. Since I have no real experience with either ... well what can I say?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[TheFamilyMan]

The TBC in the AVT-8710 did nothing to correct jitter when I used it on old VCR tapes, check out my post on this:

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=768686#768686

and this followup:
https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=770476#770476

[WuphonsReach]

It is a good filter: A fast chain - for typical use - is
rmPAL
Statin Noise Reduction 6
Dynamic Noise Reduction 8

I use Dynamic Noise Reduction last on any chain, and with a value always less than 10. If a time base axis filter goes before, then is better not to use DNR at all, and if you have to (to "stable" the picture), you have to do it with really very low values (6 at most!).

Thanks, finally had the "ah ha!" moment with the DNR filter (the web page description is rather vague). I now understand what it does.

Only question I have about it is whether or not it's safe for interlaced video? (Web page doesn't say, no interlaced switch on the dialog...) I've wrapped it in a de-fold/fold since you listed it that way earlier in the thread.

Post proccessing is my favorite part of this hobby.

It's the reason I didn't just buy a set-top DVD recorder, much more challenging to find good post-processing methods.

[SatStorm]

Dynamic Noise Reduction is just fine for interlace sources.
But all the filters do work better with a de-fold/fold chain...
(practical objervation with no scientifical prooves at all)

[lordsmurf]

While some of this information given by satstorm (and those commenting on it) seems interesting, I still stick by the opinion that more will be needed. The description of the problem clearly exceeds what has been mentioned here. The still examples of satstorm's filter in action is chicken-feed compared to problems I face on a regular basis. Any number of quickie filters could erase that small amount of noise. I've gotten pretty good at this restoring video thing in the past 2-3 years. If the problem is being described correctly, you're looking at some major work. The image is destabilizing, and that kind of error can ONLY be corrected with video playback hardware. Any amount of software filters will be futile.

[SatStorm]

I agree with lord smurf.
NTSC **** up tapes, need more than filters.

Now let me clearify something:
General speaking, filters can "clean" the noise from a picture. IMHO, there is no hardware way to do that better.
BUT:
Before this step, you have to capture your source (the tape in this case) on the PC. For that step, you need hardware. The best possible.

Also, the term "Filtering" isn't about the correcton of the flows of the NTSC system, neither about the correction of the flows on the VHS tapes. This proccess is called restoration for tapes and adjustments for the signal (NTSC). Adjusting the luma, chrominanance, the fields, stablise the framerate, etc, are not filtering, are restoration.
But, same way we call "picture resolution" the framesize of DVDs, we generally call "filtering" those steps - which for NTSC are critical but for us, the PAL users, ain't even an issue.....

The first filter chain I suggested, is an attempt to do with software something which with a good hardware equipment, you don't have to deal with, the first place! It is filtering and restoration the same time, software based.
But the results are far inferior compared a combo of Hardware restoration (TBC, colour correction / luma for NTSC users mostly) and PC noise filtering (mosquito noise, aerial transmission problems, tape noise).

[lordsmurf]

Don't step too far, my friend. While I have seen PAL fair better than NTSC, in terms of degradations of colors and age, I've seen my fair share of bad PAL quality. Normally related to poor tracking (inferior equipment in PAL-land) and other mild things. I think color noise is a problem of PAL not present in NTSC. Not to be confused with luma/chroma. You've got things a bit easier, but not by much. Again, practical experience, theorists need not reply.

Filtering is anything done that alters the raw source.
Restoration is the process.

[SatStorm]

Well...

The popular VCRs in Europe (philips, sharp, jvc, sony, thompson, aiwa are among the most usual), don't have tracking problems. Also, all VCRs have both manual and auto tracking from the mid 80s. This objervation of yours about inferior equipment in PAL-land is far out wrong. The same we - the europeans - can say, when we try to buy a NTSC VCR in our countries. They all suck, because from the few and rare NTSC models we have to choose here, only few are good - and they don't come from the manufactures we trust in Europe about VCRs.
So, your objervation about this subject, is limited on what you probably can find in USA. Sorry, but on this, you are wrong!

About the colour problems or PAL, are well known and easy corrected with filters.
rmPAL eliminated them for good
http://homepages.fh-giessen.de/~hg6423/rmPal/index.englische-uebersetzung--translated-...o-english.html

The other colour problems you may have notice on PAL tapes, appears when you see a PAL tape, converted from a SECAM or NTSC source. The reason behind this, is that for those convertions, universal VCRs used to make the convertions on the fly. Also, the differences between the PAL flavors, do create problems. UK for example use different transmission PAL from Germany (the original PAL system). In short terms, tapes with recordings from pure PAL aerial transmissions (Germany, Swiss, Sweden, Italy...) are excellent. The ones which are products of any kind of convertion (even inbetween PAL flavors), may have problems.
So, don't mix up things and speak general terms.

In those cases I describe, you can't do something with hardware as you probably use to do with NTSC (there are hardware solutions for almost all the NTSC problems). You have only software solutions. The best on that direction, are the ones based on chroma sifting, vertical ghosting elimination, even hue adjustment!
Not that there are no hardware solutions for those problems, but I bet my friend that you don't have them. If you have that equipment, then I suggest you to sell it and with the money you gonna get, go to Hawai for your rest of your life and retire... You won't need to work ever again if you have that hardware and sell it...

Just for the story, the ultimate horror, is a VHS tape, from an aerial SECAM retransmission of a PAL source, which was a product of realtime convertion from NTSC! In the 80s for example, all the USA for Africa music concerts, was NTSC: They received them through satellite from Germany and realtime they converted those transmissions to PAL. Then, through cable links the signal end up to France and realtime was converted to SECAM. From there, through telephone lines they feed all the SECAM countries in Europe and Middle East!
I recently convert tapes from that period. The Horror! Like a 6th generation NTSC tape...

And about the terms, based on my english (UK version, US english are not teached in Europe): Restoration of a tape is to eliminate all the elements the time and other factors made to it. Filtering, is the post procces of a the captured source which alters it in various forms, so to make it look visually better.
For the restoration step, you need hardware. There is no way to restore something captured fucked up on the PC.
For the filtering step, you need software PC solutions. The hardware solutions, beyond the fact that there are too expensive, filters specific things.
Chroma sifting, adjustments like chroma/luminance/saturation/Hue and Time Base Correction of a tape, are not filtering: Are corrections of the various flows of a tape, a transmission, or whatever. Those corrections can be done both with PCs and hardware.
PAL nature has far less chroma/luminance/saturation problems than NTSC and no Hue problems (because of the transmission) at all (you only have hue problems because of bad convertion). So, for PAL users, the adjustments of those elements can be done easy and fast with PC filters and 100% success. For NTSC sources from the other hand, the hardware solutions succeed the most acceptable corrections, because they follow the so called references of that system. With PAL there is no one reference for all the convertions: You have to deal each time with a different problem.

This is my opinion about this subject, also this is my practical experience. Also, I'm well known about receiving blames for my not so scientifical explenations or the subjects I use to talk about. Just not someone reply me to blame me about it also....

[lordsmurf]

Satstorm, I'm speaking of equipment and tapes that was flown in from Australia and UK. So, I'm not wrong. Those are my observations.

As far as PAL equipment made in NTSC-land not being great, I'll agree. But again, that's not what I'm dealing with in that regard.

Even a cheapo NTSC player will track most tapes. The PAL tapes I had were obnoxious in this regard, no matter what they were put in. I've seen this on several tapes from several sources.

[FulciLives]

My experience with PAL VHS is with UK, Greek and Dutch tapes. I think I also have one from Scandanavia (excuse me I'm sure that is spelled wrong).

UK PAL VHS tapes seem OK in quality. Most that I have look decent but none look super great. The Greek and Dutch PAL VHS tapes I have are utter shit. The one Scandanavian PAL VHS I have is probably the best of all!

This is using a Toshiba 8 Head Hi-Fi Stereo multi-system VHS VCR.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
I've seen many fine PAL DVD discs from the UK and Germany as well as Dutch etc. so I don't know if the PAL problem was poor videotape or poor video mastering. I have run into only a handfull of shit PAL DVD discs but most of those are on a label that isn't around anymore so I don't really count those hehehe

[offline]

LordSmurf,

Given that you can get crap media and poor quality transfers in
both NTSC and PAL formats, what do you think about the quality
of both formats when done perfectly?

[lordsmurf]

LordSmurf,
Given that you can get crap media and poor quality transfers in
both NTSC and PAL formats, what do you think about the quality
of both formats when done perfectly?

Winners:
Color quality: PAL
Hue/Gamma retainability: PAL
Interlace: NTSC
Progressive: PAL and NTSC-film
Noise: NTSC
Sharpness: NTSC

Audio is another story. NTSC tends to use it better than PAL.

Some of this is based on "perfect" DVD releases as my idea for "perfection". It may not be perfect. In a perfect world, I'd hope both could suffice.

[SatStorm]

Your objervations simply agree with what I said:

While PAL is one system, the PAL transmissions have plenty flavors. The main differnce has to do with the audio and how much of the bandwith gonna use for the transmission. So, from country to country, let say that a source "scretch" one way or other, during the distribution of the material.

The original and non modified PAL version, is the German one. It is used in Germany, Swiss, Italy, the Scandinavian countries and also, this PAL (PAL B) it is used on all the former SECAM countries in east europe and Middle east today.

The "originals" of any source (film / NTSC) are always converted first on PAL as the Germans determine. Also DVDs are based on those specifications and outputs PAL as it is determined by them.

The UK PAL tapes, are always or a second generation PAL tapes converted from original PAL or direct convertions to UK's PAL.
But since the UK PAL "crop" video bandwith to give to audio, the convertion is "OK" with minimum picture loss from the other PAL flavors but the direct convertions to PAL UK compared PAL B is inferior (bandwith is missing...).
And here is the problem:
When you convert UK's PAL to any other PAL form, you have problem, because you have to add lines! (UK gives the shorter bandwith for picture of all PAL flavors). Why this is a problem?
Because of the distribution we have in Europe.
You see, Danmark, all the BeNeLux countries and other smaller countries of Europe, are subtitling their transmissions, they don't translate them (dubed them). Dubbing is common while Germans and Italians, which they do their own convertions to PAL from FILM or NTSC sources.

The best distributor in Europe for English speaking programs, are the Brits. All the american series, first goes to UK, the Brits convert them to PAL and from there, the european countries which subtitle foreign (for them) programs, transfer them in their own PAL flavor!
Well, we talking here for a 3rd generation material, it is natural to look like shit.

Scandinavians also do what UK do, but they don't distribute to Europe. They distribute on their countries only. This is the agreement with hollywood.

Just for the story, years ago, the French would convert PAL / NTSC to SECAM and distribute to east Europe and middle east, but that stoped the last 12 years. That is another reason, that hurt the French cinema and the french music, because currently, there is not a french distribution channel in Europe as it use to be: You see, when they converted stuff for the small countries that used SECAM, they also add their own material on the distribution channel they controled, so tha way they manage to "wide" their market with french speaking material. Today this is not possible, because noone in Europe use the French distribution anymore...

For Greece and other former SECAM countries, all the PAL VHS tapes are a product of SECAM to PAL convertion. Only last decade's Greek VHS tapes (after 1992) are recorder from true PAL B (German like) TV stations. And for a period of 5 - 6 years, during the 90s, much of the material aired in Greece, use to be from NTSC sources converted to PAL B by Germans, then converted to SECAM ME from French and back to PAL B from us Greeks to transmit them on our updated TV stations.
Why that? Because the deals we had with the french about SECAM wouldn't end before a 20 years period after the first colour transmissions in Greece (1979 - 1999). So, by law, officially anything in Greece end up SECAM. Unofficially, after 1988, almost all the local channels - except the national ones - had a parallel unofficial distribution of true PAL material, which wasn't a product of PAL - SECAM - PAL chain....
Also, all the series, all the archives our TV stations have from the 80s and before, are SECAM which now must be converted to PAL to transmit (or the channels have to buy them again, which is not an issue: Nobody buys again the same product).
Same situation today face the East Europe and all the SECAM countries in Africa and Asia. The problem is that we had money to do the switch, they don't...
Thank God, with the digital solutions based on PAL, those stupid convertions between PAL flavors and SECAM ended once and for all!

The bottom line is, that you can't judge the PAL sytem from the PAL VHS tapes. There is a huge background about them.
If you compare a current German VHS PAL tape with a current USA VHS tape, the PAL VHS tape is a clean winner.
But if you judge PAL from a PAL VHS tape from a former SECAM country about a Hollywood film, then you sure gonna see issues...

[kly577]

I have a question about filtering to get my vhs recording to look better. When I used the filter settings you recommended, this video becomes very choppy. I think this is mainly a problem because it is a football game. The only problem I have with my video, is that there is some motion at the top of the screen (kind of slightly moves from side to side). I have heard this is pretty normal with VHS. Is there a filter I can use to make the picture more stable, or is this something I would need to use a TBC for? Thank you all in advance for your help.

P.S. The tape is from 1996 and is otherwise is pretty good shape. It was recorded in SLP mode and had been recorded on several times before that which is probably why I am having issues.