Horrible capture quality

[mbekkali]

I have Canon ZR65MC. I transferred 1 hour DV tape into computer in raw format and the file takes about 12GB. However, the quality of this raw file is much worse that the quality you can see on the small screen of my camcoder, lots of noise, especially in fast moving scenes, where it becomes virtually unwatchable. What could be the source of problem. I thought that raw file should be the exact copy of the tape, but it looks that it's not the case. I used Adobe Premier 7.0 pro to capture video so I assume it should handle capturing well given its hefty price tag. Please advise.

[flaninacupboard]

best DV capture progs i've used are DVapp and DVIO.
it could be your decoder is set up wrong - hit file properties in media player, find the DV decoder and check if it's on full size decode or half size.

[overloaded_ide]

Many posibilities, including crappy recording.

Play the tape back to a TV and see what it looks like if you haven't already done that. Just like picture files, what you see very small may look good but when you enlarge it alot it will be crappy.

I had the Z60 model of that camera, and sometimes what looked good on the little led screen looked bad on TV played directly from the camcorder.
Mostly I was recording theater plays for the group and the stage lights really were hard to figure how to record for best quality, plus they keep changing. I got alot of trash tapes and several good ones, I recorded every show then choose the best acts for the DVD. Almost all the tapes looked good on the led viewer though.

As for a DV transfer, what you have on the tape should be what you have on the computer. Should not be any change in video quality since you are copying data same as moving a file from one hard drive to another hard drive. Nothing Changes other than the location.

If your software played with the data, that is different! Don't know that program myself, but I used other stuff that would convert the file to DVD or Mpegs as it was transfered, or maybe even a different form of AVI. Did not like those programs, they really messed up the quality!
If the program is converting the file, then you need to find settings to change it to better quality if you can.

I never really had much luck with DV myself, only tried it a few times then went back to VHS camcorder for the plays. Returned DV camera and firewire card for refund, was about $600 at the time and did not work well for theater plays for me. One big problem was the tape going in the bottom of the camera, too hard to change fast durring a play in a dark theater mounted on a tripod. They all seem to be that way though, very poor design I think. Geuss they never thought about tripods and stuff your recording lasting more than 45 minutes or whatever the time of the tapes were??
VHS may not be quite as good quality, but I can change a tape alot faster and miss less action, plus the tapes are 2 hours anyways!

[guns1inger]

Sounds like interlacing to me. You have to remember that consumer DV cameras are record an interlaced signal - two fields for every frame, each showing every second line. Your monitor is a progressive display, which does not handle interlaced footage very well. Your TV, on the otherhand, will show an interlaced clip without the noise.

Generally this should be a problem when editing and encoding for DVD. So long as you have the field order correct (DV is usually lower, or bottom, field first), it should look fine once you get on disc.