VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4
FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 91 to 112 of 112
Thread
  1. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    gshelley I'm jealous.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    MV5S using FR 2h5m



    ES30VS using FR 2h5m



    ES30VS using FR 1h4m



    My big question is...
    If I compress the two 1h4m videos down to one single sided 4.7 gb disc using something like TmpGEnc, will it look better or worse than the two 2h5m videos already compressed by the recorders.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    I am so bad on these photo uploads.

    Quote Quote  
  4. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    I give up!
    Quote Quote  
  6. Slacker,

    ShowBiz and MyDVD came with the Adaptec. The Showbiz version could not capture but was used for editing. MyDVD could capture, create menus, and burn. This version of MyDVD could only capture audio as PCM.

    Movie Mill was a significant improvement. It could not only capture, it had color adjustments and could capture audio as mpeg1 layer 2. MyDVD did not seem to mind mpeg audio and would burn it to dvd.

    I upgraded to a new version of MyDVD when it began to support Dolby Digital. It would transcode mpeg1 layer 2 audio to Dolby ( AC3 ). This version of MyDVD had some editing features allowing trimming and removing sections of video but even a simple trim off beginning or end would cause a re-encode. This version also lost its capture ability so Movie Mill became essential.

    The next MyDVD upgrade allowed trimming off the beginning and end without re-encode. It regained its capture ability as well. It has very nice looking menus. Trimming out video inside a capture still causes a re-encode. Mostly it was used so that a re-encode would not take place making it was pretty quick and easy to use.

    I downloaded and tried Tmpgenc, DVD Author, and a bunch of trialware programs. What I found was that much of the software out there is not exactly bug free. That is one of the less desirable issues with capturing from cards; fighting all the software bugs or some quirk in a particular computer setup. Testing and bug fighting was putting a big crimp in the primary task at hand. Time also worked against approaches like tmpgenc which can have a pretty long encode time depending on settings if I am not mistaken.

    I pretty much stopped investing in software since the recorder arrived. No more sound sync issues, captures that suddenly stopped due to a tape drop out, dropped frames, Windows crashes. These events do happen with recorders since they are computers as well, but the frequency is much less. The other substantial change came when recorders dropped in price. The recorder cost about $10 more than the Adaptec.

    For me, the recorder is the best compromise for the quality vs time spent. I do have the advantage that my "audience" has already agreed that recorder quality is satisfactory for them. It might not be the right tool if you intend to spend a significant part of the time doing post capture processing.

    P.S. I suspect the Adaptec was made by Emuzed. I downloaded Movie Mill from Emuzed's web site as I recall and they had a product that looked virtually identical.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Originally Posted by slacker
    I give up!
    You have to remove the spaces in the file names...
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    mv5s (fr mode 2h5m)



    es30vs (fr mode 2h5m)



    es30vs (fr mode 1h4m)



    Hope these photos took.

    One thing that you cannot see in these photos (you need video clips) are the moderate-fast motions scenes which I ran some tests on last night. I was astonished at how BOTH of these dvd recorders choked during several moderate-fast motion scenes. There were macroblocks flying all over the place. Compared to my capture card these recorders are subpar. My capture card simply does NOT produce macroblocks, even with noisy VHS tapes. I need this quality in a dvd recorder.

    In conclusion, I would never use these recorders for precious video. I am going to run my tapes through an external svhs or vhs into my capture card to my PC external hard drive, like I have always done until something better comes along.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Is the Emuzed capturing in the same resolution and bitrate? If it is block free usually there is a compromise being made somewhere.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    trhouse,

    Yes, pretty much. I don't see where there is a compromise. With the Emuzed capture card I capture at...

    8.0 mb variable bitrate
    720 x 480 resolution

    The ES30VS is capturing at...
    9.5 mb variable bitrate
    704 x 480 resolution

    I am going to hook this ES30VS up to my capture card and see what happens. My capture card comparisons are taken from video using the older Panasonic vcr. Maybe I can load some 5 sec clips on the site as well for you to see.

    Two interesting side notes. MPEG Video Wizard and Arcsoft Showbiz "freak out" when I load these ES30VS vobs. I tried to capture some images from MPEG Video Wizard but for some reason they come out all distorted using Paint Shop Pro screen capture facility. Showbiz will only load two of the 5 vobs created by the ES30VS. An error message comes up saying that the clips are under 100 milliseconds long and therefore refuse to load. Strange.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Slacker,

    I meant from information theory, bandwidth and noise level fix the amount of data that can be transferred. Bitrate, resolution, and relative motion relate to this. Blocks are the encoder designers compromise to make it appear more info is transferred. It would surprise me if the Emuzed encoder could be that much better unless a compromise is being made to reduce the information transferred by some means. For example, most recorders use 10 bit input ADC's but with the Adaptec, I could never determine what that resolution is even though I had a 100 plus page datasheet for the capture chip.

    That is troubling and a surprise regarding the software. MyDVD never lets you deal with VOBs at all. It is pretty much an invisible process by which it creates the dvd.

    I do remember one problem remaining with MyDVD at least on this computer. I rarely capture beyond two hours but on one VHS tape that did go past three, the audio disappeared in MyDVD somewhere past three hours. The recorder had no problem.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    trhouse,

    Yes, I understand with regard to theory. But in the real world, material quality, manufacturing processes, software assurance, the ultimate production environment, etc. are always variable and dramatically AFFECT any outcome.

    The Emuzed literature can be found at www.lumanate.com/baliUSB.htm but I don't think it includes much electronic and electrical detail.

    Before I hook this thing up to my capture card, I am doing one last capture in XP mode (which I didn't try). I tried SP mode, as well as FR mode set at 1h4m because all of my tapes run about 2h4m. XP mode for me in a VHS tape production environment would be ridiculous, but I still want to see the results. I'll let you know.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Slacker,

    Thanks for the link. Which one do you have? Mine looks almost identical to the HP USB PVR or the Bali USB.

    I know what you mean about the manufacturing variation, but in the case of recorders and the Emuzed products, the encode is in hardware and determined by one or two chips. Variation in IC's is not much. I took mine apart and found it has a Conexant IC that does all the work. Everything else is just support chips for the various I/O's.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    trhouse,

    Mine came with my HP zd7000 MCE laptop. Nothing but praise for this one. The reason I like the PC/capture card method is...

    1 BIG 2 hour and 5 minute MPEG file to capture...
    Edit...
    Author...
    And it always works...

    As opposed to...

    Format a -rw disc...
    Dub for one hour...
    Finalize the disc...
    Take over to the PC...
    Rip to the PC...
    Go back over to the recorder...
    Format a -rw disc...
    Dub for a 2nd one hour...
    Finalize the disc...
    Take over to the PC...
    Rip to the PC...
    Import and join in Mpeg Video Wizard...
    Edit...
    Author...

    Whew!

    Pretty much the same quality both ways give or take...
    Plus my laptop has TIVO capabilities...
    Am I stupid to prefer the PC?
    Quote Quote  
  15. Slacker,

    No, not if that is what you need to do to get the same quality. I am not convinced you are getting that. Here is a part of a discussion about popular chips used in capture cards. These parts have 8 or 9 bit ADC's. This means at the same clock rate, these parts are generating 1/4 to 1/2 the data that the standard 10 bit ADC generates in a recorder.

    "However. There's a wider support of software for the BT878 (which has an 8bit ADC), and you can usually tweak the BT chip with additional 3rd party drivers. This level of functionality isn't all that strong with CX.

    Another issue is the Macrovision detection that's built into the CX2388x and the Philips SAA713x (which has a 2 x 9bit ADC's). "

    A comment about 10 bit ADC's,

    "Has a 10bit ADC (analog to Digital Converter) chip, which *should* yield a sharper image, with less dot crawl and cross-talk between chrominance and luminance."

    I suspect that because the screen size is less than 32", you may not see the loss of sharpness from these parts. The lack of blocks is due to the lower information rate. The only way to know for sure is to see what the chip is that the card uses or take your recordings to a store and ask them if you can play them on a big screen TV
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    trhouse,

    Thank you. I think I'm going to do that this week...
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    JUST AN UPDATE!

    I have converted about 15 or so tapes. I will say I am glad I purchased the Panasonic ES30VS over the JVC MV5. After running comparisons for several weeks, it is clear, FOR ME, that the JVC destroys too much detail which simply cannot be replaced by sharpness filters. Cartoons are one thing, recorded family history is another.

    Although the Panasonic filtering is not as aggressive as the JVC, even the Panasonic conversions will required slight sharpness adjustments due to the effects of its filters. But I love it! Nice unit!

    One man's noise is another man's detail.

    Happy converting!
    Quote Quote  
  18. I will say I am glad I purchased the Panasonic ES30VS over the JVC MV5. After running comparisons for several weeks, it is clear, FOR ME, that the JVC destroys too much detail which simply cannot be replaced by sharpness filters. Cartoons are one thing, recorded family history is another.
    As many members from our forum have experienced, you also have discovered first hand the PQ quality of the new Panasonic DVD recorders.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    If superiority includes making the image darker and red-shifted, I guess so.
    All I can say is "thank God I don't have to watch it!"
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  20. zorankarapancev wrote,

    "In theory, the correctly designed combo unit should perform better than two separate machines. The drawback of that design is the inability to connect another electronic enhancement unit between the player and the recorder, if you need one."

    The ES30 combo does allow the connection of an external enhancement unit as described in this thread,

    https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=274579

    The technique might work for other combos as well.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    SF, CA, USA
    Search Comp PM
    lordsmurf,

    The Panasonic may not be perfection, but it beats the hell out of the results I was getting from three DIFFERENT JVC units, FROM MY SEAT only, of course. Whatever you may want to call it, the Panasonic puts out a more realistic experience for me and my audience. The JVC is FLAT, the Panasonic has DEPTH. I can't quantify it. It's purely experiential. I realize that no pure engineer type would ever agree with me. But then... THEY are so FLAT!

    trhouse,

    I read your analysis. Well done! I will say that the ES30VS does such a good job in general that I will only need to sharpen slightly to complete my projects. My tapes are in phenomenal shape being stored for 20 years under the best possible conditions. I may have taken another route had my tapes been visually damaged in one way or another, i.e. correctors, enhancers, detailers.

    Again, thank you all for your help in sorting this all out! I'm sure if the price of oil keeps climbing, I'll be doing disc to flash memory conversions in MPEG4 or whatever. If you haven't noticed, screens for the masses are getting smaller, not larger.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Costa Rica
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by lordsmurf
    Originally Posted by gshelley61
    What if it is 16:9 DV source footage? Can 704x480 have the 16:9 flag?
    I think the answer to this one is "no".
    At least a MPG2 file encoded with TMPGEnc can have that flag. For some reoson I had to encode a DV file into a 704x480 MPEG2 with the 16:9 flag. I authored it with TMPGEnc DVD author and it is diplayed just fine in over 10 DVD playes from diferent brands that we have tested.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!