ATI AIW Radeon Theater 200 Chip Better than the original??

[mastersmurfie]

Do the newer cards Ati All in Wonder cards that have the Theater 200 chipset capture better quality video than the cards with the original Theater Chipset??

Do any of the ATI PCI add on cards feature Theater 200 or the original Theater chipset or is this a feature of the All in Wonder Cards only?

Thanks.

Offroad...I have an ATI AIW 128 with an "original" theater capture chip. I use MMC 7.7 (I cannot use any 8.** MMC)

I personally have ZERO issues with capturing video, either direct to MPEG2 or AVI...

I use Lordsmurf's guides (no affiliation) and set my captures appropriately..

just a thought

mastersmurfie

[thecoalman]

Ooops somehow managed to make a double post....see my post below.

[FOO]

OK sorry , I lied
I have MMC 8.8
Shouldn't be much difference.

Anyway it's still no good because the light dark effect is still there

[thecoalman]

Sorry but if a product can't perform a task it shouldn't be marketed that it can.

ATI worked fine for my VHS and Beta collection...


Never mind the fact that the USER may have recorded the video in question on a VCR that wasn't properly aligned and calibrated? Why is it that when people can't make hardware work, it's always the vendors' fault?

I use multiple ATI AIW 9000 Pros. They were used to transfer a vault's worth of videotapes, many more than 20 years old. Most of them transferred fine, some needed a TBC.

I'm glad you were able to copy your collection with little trouble. Let me ask you this: Should I not expect similar results in capture to those I get when viewing my tape on a direct VCR to TV connection?

IMO If the answer is yes then ATI is misrepresenting it's product because I and many others can't get the same results, this is not an issue isolated to me. If the answer is no then ATI is misrepresenting it's product because the literature on there website states that it can. I could get better results if I recorded the tape by playing it on a TV and pointing my DV cam at the screen. I'm not sure if this actually possible I've seen the lines when a TV is recorded but I'm trying to illustrate my point.

On a final note I'd like say I was informed by the tech from my computer vendor that they will no longer be offering this card because of this issue and another unspecified issue. Apparently I'm not the only one that feels that it is flawed.

[BrainStorm69]

I had an ATI AIW PCI VE (new 7500) that I could use the MV hacks with. They worked with 8.x MMC as long as I used the 2.4 or older Catalyst drivers. But, as Foo mentions, the hacks don't correct the cycling from dark to light. I had to get a SIMA Color Corrector ($88 at Amazon) to correct that problem (but it does).

[thecoalman]

I was in contact with another person who was in the same boat as me, he could view his home movies on VCR to TV connection but couldn't capture them. He informed me that the Sima color corrector wouldn't correct the flashing on his AIW 9000. He purchased a TBC-1000 and is able to capture both his home tapes and Macrovision protected movies.

[indolikaa]

I'm glad you were able to copy your collection with little trouble. Let me ask you this: Should I not expect similar results in capture to those I get when viewing my tape on a direct VCR to TV connection?

IMO If the answer is yes then ATI is misrepresenting it's product because I and many others can't get the same results, this is not an issue isolated to me. If the answer is no then ATI is misrepresenting it's product because the literature on there website states that it can. I could get better results if I recorded the tape by playing it on a TV and pointing my DV cam at the screen. I'm not sure if this actually possible I've seen the lines when a TV is recorded but I'm trying to illustrate my point.

On a final note I'd like say I was informed by the tech from my computer vendor that they will no longer be offering this card because of this issue and another unspecified issue. Apparently I'm not the only one that feels that it is flawed.

Part of the problem is the way the VCR's output signal is handled by various devices. From what I learned in my experiences, the TV is much more forgiving than capture cards. Little inconsistencies I never noticed on the TV were suddenly viewable when capturing with a variety of sources: an Asus V7700 (GeForce2 GTS), Dazzle* DVC-II, Digital8 passthru, and ATI AIW 9000.

To each his own. Many people have had nothing but success with ATI, many people have had nothing but problems. The important thing always is that the person finds a solution. If going the nVidia method solves your problem, more power to you. I am well aware of ATI's technical support and will not begin to argue that point; it's been that way with them for years, and for a long time I refused to service their product.

One thing I have often wondered. Is their MV protection scheme so stringent that borderline signals are misconstrued as MV? Could be the problem...

[distendad]

I had the same problem capturing with an ATI AIW 8500 card. Solved the problem with FacetVideo's CARIFIER placed between the signal source and the ATI card input combined and/or s-video. See www.facetvideo.com. The small box cost me $100.10, March 04, delivered to my Pennsylvania home. I am well satisfied with the device. Picture stability is no longer a problem.
Radman

[BrainStorm69]

I was in contact with another person who was in the same boat as me, he could view his home movies on VCR to TV connection but couldn't capture them. He informed me that the Sima color corrector wouldn't correct the flashing on his AIW 9000. He purchased a TBC-1000 and is able to capture both his home tapes and Macrovision protected movies.

Interesting. I haven't been messing with my ATI in awhile (been using my AverTV Stereo), but I'll try some more tests this weekend if I can find the time. Maybe what I'm remembering as far as resolving the problem relates to my older regular AIW 7500 AGP (Theatre 100 Chip). But it had the same problems as the 7500 VE as far as light/dark cycling goes, even after installing the hacks. I know I can capture copy-protected tapes on my AIW 7500 AGP with the Sima even without the driver hacks

[thecoalman]

One thing I have often wondered. Is their MV protection scheme so stringent that borderline signals are misconstrued as MV? Could be the problem...

IMO that is exactly the case. Have you viewed my page with the results I have. http://www.coaldelivery.com/ati I am no expert on capturing video by a long shot having only done so for about 2 months. I take what I read on the internet with a grain of salt (e.g. the california town that banned water...hehe) but when I see a consistent trend I tend to beleive it. Give me your opinion on my page. I can't wait until I receive my two new cards so I can compare results.

BTW you mentioned about the VCR being out of calibration etc. I have also tried capturing from the original camcorder my tapes were recorded on. Not sure if that would make a difference but thought I would mention it.

Hey distendad Pennsylvania huh? Need any Coal?

[ajc53]

[quote="thecoalman"]

One thing I have often wondered. Is their MV protection scheme so stringent that borderline signals are misconstrued as MV? Could be the problem...

That is exactly what we have been saying. And we think ATI knows it and should disclose it. Then the buyer would know that more equipment may be needed.

See the link Coalman is referring to. Misalligned VCR and recording device or not, the same is used for both.

[indolikaa]

Give me your opinion on my page.

Hmmm...

* I am no expert, either. I found a very specific process that worked, and used it to move a huge collection into enough DVDs and CDs to keep Taiyo Yuden in business. Once I locked-in the process that worked, I left good-enough alone. I then turned my attention to the Off-Topic boards.

* Keeping in mind that I'm not expert, here's my take on your website pictures. The ones on the left, in regards to the darkening effect, look like an Automatic Gain Control problem. The static/distortion at the top and bottom wouldn't be an issue due to overscan. The tearing of the image is familiar to me. I never had that problem, but I want to say it's a tracking issue or a synch issue. I've seen other threads that deal with this specific issue, but I don't have a quick link to one.

* The color banding I see from time to time in my captures, but never on the television when the final product is produced. I wrote this off as a graphics-display issue (how the ATI card translates the signal to be displayed on the monitor) and nothing more.


Tapes produced from VHS camcorders were the ones I had the most problems with. Especially with overall quality. Camcorders from that era didn't have the sophisticated optical systems, and as a result resolution and sharpness seemed to suffer. All but a few of my tapes were from 8mm, which is and has been a superior camcorder format. I never had any problems with those tapes.

From what you've posted, I'd say the MV detection is the culprit, but not necessarily the root of the problem. I'd be very interested in seeing how an ATI card with a hacked MV ability would perform. I used to have an Asus V7700 and I'd bet even money it wouldn't have had problems with those tapes.

I'm still using my ATIs for satellite TV captures. They do a remarkable job in that arena. And no argument here, they are bad-ass graphics cards.

.indolikaa.

[thecoalman]

The type of macrovision varies with the tape.
there is the "false hsync" signal which is the type detected by ATI.
This can be circumvented with the driver hack.
There is also the "luma overvoltage" type. This is not actually detected
but causes the picture brightness to vary up and down.
This cannot be fixed in software , because the capture hardware does it.
(and not on purpose either , just like a VCR)

Most of my tapes have both kinds. Some only have the first kind , and
capture just fine ( with the hack )

I think there is another type , but I don't have a tape with it.

My home video is what is described in "luma overvoltage" type. The commercial tape produces this and jumpin and repeating frames. I have the current drivers relaesed just the other day. I just applied the hack to see if it would remove the jumpiong and jittering from the commercial tape and leave just the flashing from bright to dark. It still produces the same result before applying the hack......I have also tried my tape with the new drivers with the same result as before as well. I would assume the hack has been cicumvented in the new drivers so it still produces the jittering affect on the macrovision tape and the hardware itself is still detecting it as protected producing the Luma affect..

[hudsonf]

thecoalman: the button you are talking about is for tv on-demand.

Kolosus; I think the MV hack depends on the driver not the MMC program. Foo is correct I have the AIW 8500 Radeon Card and the hack was working with MMC 8.9 using the catalyst 3.6 driver. I haven't tried any newer catalyst drivers. I just upgraded to MMC 9 this morning so I haven't tried capturing anything with it yet. If it doesn't work with the MV hack I can use my Video Clarifier or AVT-8710. The only thing I don't like about the ATI Card is the cpu usage. Sometimes if I use the computer while capturing I get dropped frames. I'm thinking about getting a WinTV-PVR-250 Card because from what I've read in the forums it does hardware encoding so I can still use my computer and capture at the same time.

distendad: I got lucky; I got my Video Clarifier just before the price increase. I think it's because of all the recommendations on the forums the demand increased to much.

I didn't pay attention when I installed other versions of MMC but this morning when installing MMC9 the program wanted to access the internet. I wonder if that is why the installer stops working for some people?

[djmattyb]

Shall I discuss the fact that you do not know the difference between resolution and actual image size.

Are you talking about file size or image dimensions? You don't specifically say. If you are talking about image (video frame) dimensions, than you are wrong. The image size (dimension) IS the same as resolution. Same as for HDTV standards, same as for Monitor sizes (resolutions).

[thecoalman]

I was reffering to images not video, probably shouldn't have brought it up as it has nothing to do with this. I had asked him to give me his opinion on my page being that he "specializes in ATI". For whatever reason he was unable to load the page. In the typical fashion that I have come to associate with Lordsmurf he gave me an arrogant remark about using Jpg's or Gif's because his cable connection was unable to load it. He also suggested that I use a resolution of 72 to produce a smller size file which it doesn't it just produces a larger displayed or printed image as opposed to actual size. I use a resolution of 96 because it produces the best results on new monitors, 72 is kind of standard because older monitors were unable to produce an image resolution higher than this anyway. Additionally the resolution information can be disregarded entirley by your browser if the page specifys a display size whether it be in pixels, inches or %. You can view my homepage for an example of %. Change your display settings and you will see that my logo changes with it.

[djmattyb]

By the way, you may want to fix your signature. The link is to :
http://www.www.coaldelivery.com/
there is an extra www in there that makes it not work.

[thecoalman]

Thanks! I must have been sleeping when I typed that in. Here's another example for you. Same images the one on the left is 96 the one on the right is 72. They are the same viewable size because the resolutuion has been diregarded because of the HTML code used on this page. It's really a useless paramater unless whatever your using it for doesn't specify display or print size.

[lordsmurf]

Me arrogant? You've got some nerve. Especially after I tried to help you. Arrogant would be me laughing and pointing. Standard WEB JPEG/GIF format is 72 dpi, coalman. I don't care what you think, that's the industry standard. Use PHOTOSHOP, use SAVE FOR WEB. You want arrogant? How about YOUR comment that "Photoshop SAVE FOR WEB is for amateurs", which is by far the most uninformed opinion I've heard about software in years.

On to ATI again...

Your tapes are damaged and/or Macrovision protected sources. It may look "fine" on tv, but the source is damaged. This happens. It's video. It's NTSC. That's how it goes. You might need a TBC. You've been given the answer, you just don't like it.

[FOO]

Go get 'em smurf

[thecoalman]

Your tapes are damaged and/or Macrovision protected sources. It may look "fine" on tv, but the source is damaged. This happens. It's video. It's NTSC. That's how it goes. You might need a TBC. You've been given the answer, you just don't like it.

They can't be Macrovision protected they are home movies.... We shall see if I'm correct because I will have not only one but two capture devices to compare results with by the middle to late of next week, depends on the shipping date. I'll be sure to keep you posted.

[ajc53]

Got my Sima CT-1 in yesterday and it really helped. On my first real "problem tape" it captured without one freeze frame or drop frames. Before I would have about 20 freeze frames to cut out to make it watchable. It still has some flicker and the white light on top but is not too noticeable when burned and viewed on TV. It is bearable considering the quality of the tape.

I am sure I will be able to improve this process when I get the JVC 9811 VCR and the TBC-1000.

So, I am going to stick with the ATI 9800 Pro. It is hard to buck the experience of some of the pros posting this site.

I am getting used to the idea that I am going to have to get the right tools if I going to 50+ more of these two hour tapes.

I have also learned the lesson of acquiring the right tools the hard way in my other hobby , working on cars.