Quality of BT based capture card (with screen caps included)

[lordsmurf]

I don't see a magenta tint, nor is it darker. The SIMA is probably screwing with it, however, that much is for certain. The ATI caps here look like your good BT caps.

[BrainStorm69]

The ATI AIW captures look VERY similiar to my captures made on my BT card with the Cyberhome CH-DVD.

It has that slight magenta "tint" to it.

Though god only knows what the SIMA is doing to it but I assume you had to use that to remove macrovision etc. since the ATI is "sensitive" to it.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

Fulci, I wouldn't read that much into these caps as I played alot with the coloring. Maybe I'll try doing these with the Panasonic DVD player and the composite cable so I can capture on the ATI without using the SIMA.

However, I would say that you have done a marvelous job with the BT878, and I certainly think most would be pleased regardless of their card if their caps came out that well.

[FulciLives]

The magenta pull is not as evident as it was on my Cyberhome CH-DVD 500 but it is there in the ATI caps but I'm sure the reason is the SIMA unit and not the ATI card.

Look in the bit of sky in the upper left hand corner of the shot where Van Helsing is holding his "machine arror gun" crossbow thing.

The VAN HELSING DVD is a DVD9 but if you make a back-up without re-encoding or transcoding (use TMPGEnc DVD Author and cut off the second half of the film or split it on 2 discs etc.) then you can capture from it with the ATI card wihtout the need for the SIMA since the copy protection will be gone.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[FulciLives]

However, I would say that you have done a marvelous job with the BT878, and I certainly think most would be pleased regardless of their card if their caps came out that well.

Thank you very much

The kicker is I do all this on a P3 650Mhz with 256MB RAM and WinXP Pro.

It cracks me up when people can't get a good capture and they have a P4 3.6Mhz with 1 Gig RAM and SATA HDD blah blah blah

The killer is the MPEG encoding step though ... CCE 3-pass VBR can take up to 48 hours for a single DVD.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[BrainStorm69]

Just for further comparison...here is an ATI cap from my Panny over composite (the Panny can play the decrypted copy of the movie burned to DVD+RW, but has no s-video out, only composite and component). It was the SIMA causing the color issue.

[FulciLives]

Just for further comparison...here is an ATI cap from my Panny over composite (the Panny can play the decrypted copy of the movie burned to DVD+RW, but has no s-video out, only composite and component). It was the SIMA causing the color issue.

Yes this looks much better from the Panny without the SIMA.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[FulciLives]

Well I think it is time to sum it all up.

What do YOU think looks best?

DVD Rip on left ... BT chipset capture from Cyberhome CH-DVD 500 on right


DVD Rip on left ... BT chipset capture from Pioneer DVD-606D on right


DVD Rip on left ... Philips chipset capture from DVD player on right


DVD Rip on left ... ATI capture from DVD player using SIMA unit on right


DVD Rip on left ... ATI capture from DVD player wihout SIMA unit on right


This makes it easier to compare I think.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[lordsmurf]

The Philips and the ATI are the most accurate.

[FulciLives]

The Philips and the ATI are the most accurate.

You totally suck my blue friend :P

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Wilbert]

I have created this thread in order to show that a BT based capture card CAN INDEED be a MOST EXCELLENT capture device if not possibly the best type there is.

As a footnote to the above paragraph I should indicate that I am not saying that the BT chipset is the best chipset. What I am saying is that capture cards (for instance the Philips based cards like what BrainStorm69 has used here or even the ATI cards like LordSmurf uses) that allow true 4:2:2 color sampling along with the ability to capture to AVI using little to no compression are the BEST kind of capture cards/devices. It just so happens that BT based cards are in that "family" of products and by no means is the BT chipset the "dog" that some try to make it out to be.

Nice job people !!!! Thanks for the tests.

One more request The presented tests are made using "full" resolution. I also would like to see this comparison at a smaller capture size: 400x576 / 368x480 (it's the smallest acceptable size for bt8x8). I hope you still have the energy to do this.

Thanks again. I really appreciate this!

[BrainStorm69]

The Philips and the ATI are the most accurate.

You totally suck my blue friend :P

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

*LMAO*

Nice job people !!!! Thanks for the tests.

One more request The presented tests are made using "full" resolution. I also would like to see this comparison at a smaller capture size: 400x576 / 368x480 (it's the smallest acceptable size for bt8x8). I hope you still have the energy to do this.

Thanks again. I really appreciate this!

Ack....not again....

!You're welcome.

[vhelp]

I'm a little disapointed in the comments made about the ADVC-100
that I could have added pics too, ..but that's ok. I can take it

The bug that is refered to in the DV of things (w/ respects
to the ADVC-100 is (imo) a myth, though I could be a tadd wrong.
I think that DV (w/ it's bugs w/ the 4:1:1 thing is w/ respect to DV cams
and not passthrough captures) Again, I could be a tadd wrong here also.
But, to my eyes I haven't seen the difference.
.
But, I won't go into any testing here w/ you because I really don't
feel like going out and buy the test DVD you use (nor rent) either
.
I wish I could add to your pics, but you used a new movie, and
I don't feel like spending the $$ for it (though it's a good movie)
..nor do I wish to rent it. It's too big of a deal for me.
.
Darn.. I have tons of other DVD movies.

But, if you throw in some DVD title suggestions, I might actually have
one in my library

Until then..

-vhelp

PS: after all the nonsense w/ encoding the following movie.., everyone
has the Matrix (1st movie) - - nudge.

[racerxnet]

The test resolution of the ATI, BT chipset, Canopus and I believe the Phillips was done, and the Canopus had the highest resolution of all. I'll post the link later when I have time to search again.

PS. the final encode to DVD is 4.2.0 regardless of capture devices.

MAK

[lordsmurf]

PS: after all the nonsense w/ encoding the following movie.., everyone
has the Matrix (1st movie) - - nudge.

Very true.

[FulciLives]

Nice job people !!!! Thanks for the tests.

One more request The presented tests are made using "full" resolution. I also would like to see this comparison at a smaller capture size: 400x576 / 368x480 (it's the smallest acceptable size for bt8x8). I hope you still have the energy to do this.

Thanks again. I really appreciate this!

I don't see the point.

We already know from past threads that the BT card needs 368 width or higher otherwise it looks like crap.

I also don't see why 400x576 is important. I have captured PAL video with my BT card (I have some PAL VHS tapes and a multi-system VHS VCR that plays back PAL as PAL) so maybe 400x576 is the same "magic" resolution for PAL as 368x480 is for NTSC ... at least for the BT card? Is this what you are saying?

I am of the opinion that Half D1 resolution on DVD is just fine for many sources such as VHS.

For instance if I have a VHS video capture that is 120 minutes long and I put it on DVD with a 256kbps AC-3 audio track then I have to use a video bitrate of approximately 4800kbps. At that level I would have to do a 2-pass or multi-pass VBR if I used 720x480 but at 352x480 I can just do a CBR of 4800kbps and it probably will look better in terms of MPEG artifacts etc.

However ... if I have a 60 minute capture I could MAX out the DVD spec with 1536kbps PCM WAV audio and a video bitrate of 8000kbps and with those figures I would want to use 720x480 instead of 352x480

In short I would rather capture at 720x480 and use 720x480 on the DVD if I could MAX out the spec for DVD but unfortunately right now that only gives you about 60 minutes per DVD ... so we have to make comprimises when the running time is longer.

Sometimes ... due to running time ... you can get an overall better image at 352x480 than 720x480 ... as my example above indicated.

Also if you want to use Half D1 resolution (352x480 or for you PAL people 352x576) then I would rather do the capture at Full D1 resolution (720x480/576 NTSC/PAL) and then resize in software to Half D1 resolution.

However I prefer to capture AVI and then do a software MPEG encoding.

If you are doing direct to MPEG encoding then I guess it makes sense to capture at Half D1 if that is what you want since your capture is the end result (no further encoding is to be done etc.)

But then that brings us to those that capture direct-to-mpeg at a VERY HIGH bitrate and then re-encode. For instance I know some people with the Hauppauge WinTV PVR-250 capture at 12,000kbps to 15,000kbps then process (edit, filter, resize) with the "final" step being a software MPEG encode to get it to DVD MPEG-2 spec. So in that case it would make sense to capture at Full D1 resolution even if you intend to resize to Half D1 for the final encode. AT least that makes sense to me!

As to all those that don't like my comments about NTSC DV AVI ... too bad! I've seen enough examples now that I know this is a bad thing. I wish I had bookmarks to all the threads I've read (with pictures etc.) but I don't. Maybe I will look them up if I find time.

If someone is willing to loan me a DV capture device (like the Canopus ADVC-100 or DataVideo DAC-100) I am sure I could make enough captures to prove my point.

Actually that would be really kewl if someone was willing to do that

I promise I would be as fair as possible ... I would even try the 2 different 4:1:1 filters that exist and I would provide screen caps. I would even be willing to provide sample AVI or converted to DVD MPEG-2 spec video files if someone made the space for them somewhere on-line.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[FulciLives]

PS: after all the nonsense w/ encoding the following movie.., everyone
has the Matrix (1st movie) - - nudge.

Very true.

I actually don't have THE MATRIX on DVD but I see it used for like $6.00 to $8.00 all the time at local used DVD shops.

I guess I could pick it up if you guys want to switch to using that as a source.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Poplar]

We have a real nice discussion here. I have some questions about drivers of BT878 card. The driver that comes with my WINTV card was very limited, because it refuses to capture at full D1. The newest driver I got from Hauppauge site still won't do the trick. That's why I chose BTWinCap driver, which I am able to cap at full D1.

The problem I have with BTWin driver is that it often crashes with "stop 0x000000D1, Driver_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL, ....wdmaud.sys" BSOD. I haven't figured out and fixed this problem. Does anybody else have this problem? Is there another driver that I can use?

[FulciLives]

We have a real nice discussion here. I have some questions about drivers of BT878 card. The driver that comes with my WINTV card was very limited, because it refuses to capture at full D1. The newest driver I got from Hauppauge site still won't do the trick. That's why I chose BTWinCap driver, which I am able to cap at full D1.

The problem I have with BTWin driver is that it often crashes with "stop 0x000000D1, Driver_IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL, ....wdmaud.sys" BSOD. I haven't figured out and fixed this problem. Does anybody else have this problem? Is there another driver that I can use?

I did use the BTwincap driver for a while with my AVerTV Stereo PCI capture card. I never encountered any errors at all little alone the error you are getting.

The only reason why I stopped using the BTwincap driver is becasue I noticed that the official Avermedia driver for my capture card had a perfectly balanced picture at the default settings (I am talking about contrast, brightness, color saturation etc.) whereas the BTwincap driver captures looked a bit too dark for me and it is hard to adjust that stuff since NTSC video looks so different on a PC monitor than on a NTSC TV.

Ironically when doing all these VAN HELSING captures I did install the BTwincap driver and I did something different than I did in the past because the captures I did with it (I never posted the pics and I have since deleted them) perfectly matched up to my captures using the Avermedia driver ... in terms of contrast/brightness and color saturation etc. This was using the default settings of the BTwincap driver.

But like a dumb ass I uninstalled it and went back to the Avermedia driver. I probably should have left it though because I'm not sure what I did when I installed it that made it "match" like that. For anyone that has installed this driver there is all kinds of "crap" you have to select as to what type of BT card you have etc. and apparently it is a tricky thing to do!

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
I know with my Avermedia drivers that my BT card should capture at 688x480 NTSC and 696x576 PAL to get a correct aspect ratio. I also know that under the BTwincap driver that 712x480 is correct for NTSC but I never tested that driver with a PAL source so I wonder ... what is the correct resolution to use for PAL when you are using the BTwincap driver?

I might try to install it again.

[Poplar]

I have been using BTWIN under WIN2K Pro with no problem. It only started giving me trouble when I clean installed WINXP Pro SP2. Maybe it's has something to do with my on-board audio. Just a hunch. Waiting for a new driver from Hauppauge....

Sorry, I have never dealt with PAL material. Living in NTSC country. Don't know if it's a good thing...

[BrainStorm69]

PS: after all the nonsense w/ encoding the following movie.., everyone
has the Matrix (1st movie) - - nudge.

OK, I do have the Matrix. Let's all agree on some good scenes for comparison.

[NightWing]

Remember that viewing a "DV" capture is based on the quality of the codex not the box.

Same DV AVI but different decoders.
Left is Canopus vs Microsoft Standard.

[Wilbert]

I also don't see why 400x576 is important. I have captured PAL video with my BT card (I have some PAL VHS tapes and a multi-system VHS VCR that plays back PAL as PAL) so maybe 400x576 is the same "magic" resolution for PAL as 368x480 is for NTSC ... at least for the BT card? Is this what you are saying?

No, I'm not referring to do that (although it is true).

I was referring to the "fact" that the difference between 720x576 and 400x576 is minimal for saa71xx, bt8x8 and cx2388x caps, while there is a visible difference between those and the ati caps (due to ati's resizer).

what is the correct resolution to use for PAL when you are using the BTwincap driver?

The active capture window is 52.03 µs (section 5.4), which is equal to 702 dvd pixels.

[lordsmurf]

Remember that viewing a "DV" capture is based on the quality of the codex not the box.
Same DV AVI but different decoders.
Left is Canopus vs Microsoft Standard.

Partially true. The "box" has hardware codecs. These can be problems too. Canopus I find to be one of the single worst ones. They can do decent, but not the best. The dummy-friendly nature of the device and imperfect ability to avoid MV is the only redeeming value, added to the fact that it has "not bad" quality (which is not the same as "good" quality).

[SatStorm]

I stayed away from this discussion, but FulciLives done an excellent job, to show to anyone that with a BT8xx you can have excellent results.
Not the best possible ones, but really excellent ones.

And if you do some tests with VHS sources, you gonna agree with what I say for years: With a bt8xx card you can succeed excellent VHS to DVD transfers. Not the best possible ones, but excellent ones. Period!

[thegig]

Just my two cents, I have to agree with the analysis of Canopus vs bt cap cards. The quality on Canopus seems to be a little washed out compared to the bt cards. I only use the Canopus because of some system issues I have. My Aver (since going XP) has had issues with sound scewing. I spent months trying to tweak it before finally throwing in the towel. But I do know I don't have to think twice now when I cap something using the Canopus.

Like Lordsmurf said,

The dummy-friendly nature of the device and imperfect ability to avoid MV is the only redeeming value, added to the fact that it has "not bad" quality (which is not the same as "good" quality).

I'ld take a BT card cap any day over Canopus, but you deal with the hand dealt. I'ld love to see Canopus (or any one) come out with some real quality codecs to at least match the quality of the BT cards. Good job on this thread.

[NightWing]

Thats the problem with a DV style box. You have two codex to deal with. The one in the box and the one the computer uses.

I wish the old DC10+ card could do at least 704 x 480 instead of 640 x 480. That Philips input chip was pretty good. The quality of the card beats the heck out of the ADS Pyro Link box hands down. Heck even the two DVR recorder beat the ADS box.

[vhelp]

Ha fulci pal ...

Don't get upset (case you did) about my response back. I respect your comments on
the ADVC-100 (I always do, as I do others here)

I'd also like to throw in a VHS test as well. But as Brainstorm69 said, we
sould come up with a set number of sceens - and stick to it

But as good as pics are, lets face it, .JPG's are unsatisifactory to me.
The only format I respect, is the .PNG because it is truely lossless. Even .JPG's
mess with the color space. And not everyone is knowledgeable w/ .jpg posting
and optimum settings w/ out tainting the "original" aim, and quality thereof

Also, I'd like to add in a few AVI frames.. and then MPEG-2 ones as well.
After all, the argument (not that there is one) is the end result/goal. To achive
the best "reproduced" quality as that of the original source. That is why we choose
the card(s) (hence your post on your AverMedia) afer all
.
We all (most of us) know that we *can not* obtain the same level of quality as the
source ..but we can get darmn near close with the right tools and
equipment (and knowledge) etc.

Your pics on your card are very good. They represent almost near perfect repro's :P

Yeah, great thread.
-vhelp

[racerxnet]

You guys set the test parameters and I'll post some pics with the DVRex Pro and we'll see how superior the Bt chip is in regards to quality. We would just have to make sure us dummy friendly programmers are capable of the standards one sets Otherwise a great post.

Here is a very informative link on the technical side of the BT chips:
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=a400d4e7caa351e8a63aa143af77532b&threadid=6728...0&pagenumber=1

MAK

[BrainStorm69]

DVRex Pro, eh? I went and did a quick google...looks pretty high end! That would be interesting to see.

BTW...Racerx as in Racer X from Speed Racer?

If so, feel free to use the avatar if you want.