3 ways: VHS to DVD; or... the ineluctable modality of it all

[ahhaa]

There are 3 ways to move analog VHS to DVD:

a. computer capture card
b. analog to digital passthru features on DV camcorders
c. standalone DVD recorders

My theoretically simple project was to move some wedding videos from VHS to DVD before good VHS players become hard to find, which is happening already.

What I'm finding reminds me of the railroads before the Civil War, when the tracks were all at different widths on each route, and you had to change trains all the time to get anywhere.

I hope this thread will be used to compare reasons why you'd use one method over another, and the final quality on the DVD. Little info seems to be available about this...

THE COMPUTER CAPTURE CARD
As I'm using an ITX with only one PCI card (now filled with a dialup modem), this isn't a good option for me. My impression is that the capture cards make heavy demands on the memory, HD, and processor, so this option is best for those that frequently capture video. The software gets wildly varying reviews. Some functions not available otherwise.

ANALOG TO DIGITAL PASSTHRU
Many camcorders now have an obscure function which allows analog sources like VHS to be digitized, both onto the camcorder tape and/or passing through to a computer HD as a digital file. This method has a couple advantages- saving the capture card cost and allowing 'old-fashioned' video processor boxes to clean up the signal.

Unfortunately, the manufacturers do not detail this, probably due to the liability opened by video pirates. Simple facts like how well does it work on what models are very hard to find. This's like the flying elephant, I guess- not graceful, but impressive it works at all.

One reviewer mentioned in passing that A2DP works better than the capture cards... but no makes/models/output format were given.

In researching this, I thought, well... the cost of the card could go into a better camcorder! BUT then, another issue intruded. I was checking the JVC GRD-72 & 90 on Google, models which are cited as having the feature as well as impressive low-light, etc; there were a number of posts about very premature CCD failure in many models... & I was off on a paranoiac sidetrack.

To make a long story shorter, I could find no reviews of lower-end cameras with this feature that were also called reliable; tho the two issues aren't related. The problem here is that the models come out so fast there are no parts set aside for repair- it's worse than laptops!

STANDALONE DVD RECORDERS
These are suddenly all over Walmarts, etc. Personally, I don't need a permanent copy on relatively expensive DVD, I only timeshift programming, so reusable cheap VHS seems better to me.

But for transfers they might be the best option. They are designed to handle analog signals as well as digital. The cheapest ones ($140) do not have a HD inside, so you are risking a DVD failure that you won't know about until you get to playback. The more expensive models (to $400)have VHS & HDs inside, and a host of options are poorly explained in four languages.

What isn't covered is what the output is like, except for the +/- R and warnings in red that commercial DVDs can't be copied. One model had both VHS & DVD recorders, but no dubbing mode between the two.

The cheaper standalone boxes would allow audio mixing, video cleanup, etc 'on the lines' during transfer. The dual units offer ease of use, preview, and quasi-editing functions. This approach also would allow DVD to DVD dubbing- possibly. The lack of format/compatibility info and no computer monitor display connection are real drawbacks.

This is where a simple need to archive some old video has lead...

[Marvingj]

There is plenty of information on this site about different methods, there usage & etc. Would be a interesting sticky for Newbies!!!!

[thecoalman]

THE COMPUTER CAPTURE CARD
As I'm using an ITX with only one PCI card (now filled with a dialup modem), this isn't a good option for me. My impression is that the capture cards make heavy demands on the memory, HD, and processor, so this option is best for those that frequently capture video. The software gets wildly varying reviews. Some functions not available otherwise.

Not all are computer intensive, there's MPEG hardware encoder cards which take practically all of the demands off the system.

Hauppage 250 is a popular one.

ANALOG TO DIGITAL PASSTHRU
Many camcorders now have an obscure function which allows analog sources like VHS to be digitized, both onto the camcorder tape and/or passing through to a computer HD as a digital file..

This is an excellent way to capture and produces great results. I don't think that it's quite as obscure as you think, it gets mentioed here quite a bit. Also there are standalone devices that do exactly the same thing....

ADVC 100 is one, there's acouple of others.

The lack of format/compatibility info and no computer monitor display connection are real drawbacks.

The biggest disadvantage is they capture direct to mpeg, if your just trimming video cutting and splicing this is not an issue but adding anything such as filters etc forces a renecode which is not good. Same can be said for the hardware encoder cards.

See here for more info: https://www.videohelp.com/capturecards.php?&orderby=Comments That will really scramble your brain if you think it's scrambled now

It's good your doing reasearch... My suggestion, if your in the market for a digital cam by all means give it a try, if not try the ADVC 110, 100, 50 or 55. they are all the same essentially but in different configuarations and options. Thjey will all produce the same file.

[lordsmurf]

Personally, I don't need a permanent copy on relatively expensive DVD, I only timeshift programming, so reusable cheap VHS seems better to me.

I have no idea what you're talking about. VHS hovers at about $1.25 per tape on sale (if sales still happen), while a DVD runs about 25-50 cents each. There is almost always a sale where the best media is 33 cents each in store. If a 50-pack for $20 is "expensive" this is not the hobby for you. May seem harsh, but stinginess and video do not work together.

[p_l]

What I'm finding reminds me of the railroads before the Civil War

And I thought I was an old timer.


But for the three options you mention,

A. Don't know; never had a capture card.

B. Great if you already have/want a mini DV cam, and the file you transfer to your computer via firewire is DV-AVI, which is better for editing than MPEG. Just get a lot of NTFS hard drive space, though (see my system specs). If you don't have/want a DV camcorder, get a Canopus ADVC-100 or one of those.

C. Quickest and easiest, with good quality results, but MPEG format is not the best suited for editing, so this option is best for straight transfers. If you don't want to toss out DVDs after just one viewing, use DVD-RW's.


What's ineluctable is that VHS, which I agree is still often useful, seems to be going the way of the steam engine.

[ahhaa]

Personally, I don't need a permanent copy on relatively expensive DVD, I only timeshift programming, so reusable cheap VHS seems better to me.

I have no idea what you're talking about. VHS hovers at about $1.25 per tape on sale (if sales still happen), while a DVD runs about 25-50 cents each. There is almost always a sale where the best media is 33 cents each in store. If a 50-pack for $20 is "expensive" this is not the hobby for you. May seem harsh, but stinginess and video do not work together.

The VHS tape in my $100 machine right now has timeshifted programming mebbe 30 times so far and shows no signs of giving up. About every 3 months or so something comes along I want to keep & the tape gets changed. The tapes I'm using are those now replaced by my DVD movie collection, but were brand-name tapes at under a $1 each. So my cost is pretty much 'amortized'. Also, it's very convenient because I can use my computer for other things at the same time. (I sell on eBay.)

The money I'm saving will prob'ly go toward a 3-CCD camera. Apparently you don't have a SHE WHO MUST BE OBEYED in your house; stinginess is not exactly the issue!

[lordsmurf]

Re-using a tape TWICE is often enough to ruin the magnetic surface. I do not even want to know what a 30-used tape looks like.

You can get DVD-RW for about $2 each (or less on sale) and those do not degrade quality wise. Although the phase change may fail on cheap ones after so many uses.

Cheapness and video cannot exist together.
Not if you want quality results.

[ahhaa]

Hi Coalman! just worked on a book called 'Shot from the Mountain' by Claude Phillips; a period coal mine murder mystery. (Not a bestseller, but OK) ISBN 1-886167-22-2

I kinda miss the phillips audio cassette too... so easy, so durable!:]

[ahhaa]

Re-using a tape TWICE is often enough to ruin the magnetic surface. I do not even want to know what a 30-used tape looks like.

You can get DVD-RW for about $2 each (or less on sale) and those do not degrade quality wise. Although the phase change may fail on cheap ones after so many uses.

Cheapness and video cannot exist together.
Not if you want quality results.

Well... it's a theory. The video rental biz wouldn't have worked very well if true. (They expect a MTBF closer to a 100 than 2 on tapes, and I've been told they are having a terrible time with DVD failure.) Maybe my VHS has a better erase head than yours or something.

Do you say the same thing about digital camera tapes? You wouldn't re-use them? Have you had actual bad experiences?

[lordsmurf]

Rental = playing.

We're talking recording. More than ONCE is not suggested. Twice is getting pretty bad.

Re-use tapes? No way. Buy new ones.

No amount of "erase heads" can overcome this.

[RowMan]

Having been involved in the television industry since the early 90's, I can tell you that tapes are almost NEVER re-recorded on. Especially if used for broadcast. But for plain old timeshifting (just watching once and not keeping) I've run VHS tapes into the ground re-recording 50 times or more. For recording a program I wanted to keep, I have always used a brand new tape.

Getting back to the original topic... It sounds like a standalone DVD recorder would be the right choice for you in your situation for archiving VHS tapes. I have been using this method for a year with great results. I let the recorder do the work of capturing and encoding. Then I take the recorded DVD to my computer to add menus and chapters. Recording in the two hour mode via S-VHS has yielded results almost indistinguishable from the original tape.

[rkr1958]

As I read this I'm in the process of capturing my Son's (actually mine) Pinocchio Disney VHS tape to my computer for conversion to DVD. We own a number of unopened Disney tapes that I'm doing this on. This is probably tape 10 of 25. Anyway, this is the method I use (which uses the analog to digital passthrough):

I capture the tape by VCR ==> RCA-cable ==> Sony TRV-320 DV Camera ==> Firewire to my PC. I used Ulead 6 (which I got off of ebay for $20) to capture. I then extract the audio using Goldwave, convert it to 48-KHz, and use the timewarp function to strech it to the same lenght as the video. I've found that, in general, the audio runs about 0.5-seconds per hour faster the the video. Next I use CCE-Basic (previously TMPGEnc-Plus) to encode the video using 2-pass VBR (max 9000, ave 6000, min 2000 kpbs). I author w/motion menus using TMPGEnc DVDAuthor and use Nero 5 to burn.

I've personally found this method to be quite successful and produce very good results. By the way I have 750-GB of harddisk space spread among 5-harddrives (2-internal IDE, 2-internal SATA & 1-external firewire).

[ahhaa]

I have been using this method for a year with great results. I let the recorder do the work of capturing and encoding. Then I take the recorded DVD to my computer to add menus and chapters. Recording in the two hour mode via S-VHS has yielded results almost indistinguishable from the original tape.

Thanks Rowman! I expect this is all like explaining how to tie your shoes, easier to do than to put into words once you've got the hang of it.

couple Qs: your final output is a playback disk in the DVD player, right? what file format are you using for that? Did you get a DVD recorder with the internal HD? also, just out of curiosity, do you find, for your 'just organized' transfers, that you are transferring faster or slower than real time, all things considered?

[ahhaa]

I capture the tape by VCR ==> RCA-cable ==> Sony TRV-320 DV Camera ==> Firewire to my PC. I used Ulead 6 (which I got off of ebay for $20) to capture. I then extract the audio using Goldwave, convert it to 48-KHz, and use the timewarp function to strech it to the same lenght as the video. I've found that, in general, the audio runs about 0.5-seconds per hour faster the the video. Next I use CCE-Basic (previously TMPGEnc-Plus) to encode the video using 2-pass VBR (max 9000, ave 6000, min 2000 kpbs). I author w/motion menus using TMPGEnc DVDAuthor and use Nero 5 to burn.

I've personally found this method to be quite successful and produce very good results. By the way I have 750-GB of harddisk space spread among 5-harddrives (2-internal IDE, 2-internal SATA & 1-external firewire).

Thanks rkr! and I'm still trying to break the 240 Gig barrier!
Qs for you- are you recording on the DV320 tape as well? if so, does the audio slip show up there too? Are you generally happy with the 320 as a camcorder, or lookin' to move up?

[rkr1958]

Qs for you- are you recording on the DV320 tape as well? if so, does the audio slip show up there too?

No, not in general. The problem is that the Sony 320 refuses to record if it detects a Microvision signal. However, it will let me pass through the same signal to my computer. There have been some tapes that I could record, however, e.g. STAR WARS Episode I. The audio is in sync when recorded on the tape. The problem is with the capture. For example, Ulead 6 captures the audio at 32-KHz, or 32000 Hz. But due to capturing error the acutal rate is around 31995.56 Hz. But when played, the player plays the audio at 32000 Hz and thus get ahead by 4.44 Hz x 3600-seconds, or 15984 samples, which is roughly 0.5-seconds in an hour. The Goldwave timewrap function takes care of that. Also, I use Goldwave to convert the audio to 48-KHz for use with TMPGEnc DVDAuthor w/ac3 plugin which encodes the audio to ac3.

Are you generally happy with the 320 as a camcorder, or lookin' to move up?

Yes. I bought it 4-years ago when my son was born. Great camera. I've recorded 19 1-hour tapes (home movies). The DV analog to digital passthough capability was really an accident. I had no clue about that stuff, or any of this video hobby in general, four years ago.

[David K]

The audio is in sync when recorded on the tape. The problem is with the capture. For example, Ulead 6 captures the audio at 32-KHz, or 32000 Hz. But due to capturing error the acutal rate is around 31995.56 Hz

Rkr,

Have you got your DV Camcorder set to 12 bit or 16 bit audio. By default the Sony cameras are set to 12 bit and you'll get the 32 kh when you try to capture. If you set it to 16 bit you'll get your capture at 48 kh, and will not have to do all that converting with Goldwave.

I have a Sony TRV 340 and had the same problem. Check your manual and go to Record Mode, Audio Mode to change the setting.

[rkr1958]

Rkr,

Have you got your DV Camcorder set to 12 bit or 16 bit audio. By default the Sony cameras are set to 12 bit and you'll get the 32 kh when you try to capture. If you set it to 16 bit you'll get your capture at 48 kh, and will not have to do all that converting with Goldwave.

I have a Sony TRV 340 and had the same problem. Check your manual and go to Record Mode, Audio Mode to change the setting.

Didn't know that. Thanks for the tip.

[RowMan]

Thanks Rowman! I expect this is all like explaining how to tie your shoes, easier to do than to put into words once you've got the hang of it.

couple Qs: your final output is a playback disk in the DVD player, right? what file format are you using for that? Did you get a DVD recorder with the internal HD? also, just out of curiosity, do you find, for your 'just organized' transfers, that you are transferring faster or slower than real time, all things considered?

Yes. The final output is to DVD+ or -R in the standard DVD format. I start by recording to DVD+RW in my LiteOn LVW 5001 (no internal HD). I take that disc and import it into TMPGEnc DVDAuthor using the "Add DVD Video" mode. In the process, the program converts the video to MPEG2 for minor editing. After the menus are made it outputs everything back to a compliant DVD. All things considered, the entire process is slower than real time. If I take out the steps of adding custom menus and minor editing and just accept the generic menus of the DVD recorder, it's all real time.