8 versus Hi8/Any difference?

[alegator]

I wonder if there's any noticeable difference in video queality between 8 and Hi8, or if it was more of a marketing name Sony imposed rather than reality. Someone knows the technical specs (resolution, etc) of both standards to make a comparison? It's just that I have old Hi8 footage, but some tapes I used at the time were not Hi8 but just standard 8.

[SingSing]

Hi-8 format has about double the quality and resolution of 8mm. See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8_mm_video_format#Hi8

[greymalkin]

totally off topic, but go to wikipedia and look up laserdiscs. It's pretty interesting.

[alegator]

Wow, that's a big difference, I thought the gap was much smaller.Thanks.

[zoobie]

I thought 8mm was around 300 lines, hi8 400 and dv 500 but now i see 8mm is even less than i thought
thx

[edDV]

8mm like VHS low pass filters luminance around 3MHz (~240 lines of horizontal resolution). Hi8 like S-VHS uses a comb or notch filter to separate chroma from luminace and record luminance out to near 5 MHz. So yes there is a big difference.

When you record to standard 8mm tape with a Hi8 camcorder, it reverts to 8mm low quality standards.

The bad wrap on Hi8 has always been susceptability to dropouts and Hi8 is noisy compared to today's DV format.

Everything you probably want to know is here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8_mm_video_format

This link is one of the best for technical description of the various analog tape formats.
http://catalogs.infocommiq.com/AVCAT/images/documents/pdfs/TT189%20-%204611.pdf

[zoobie]

nice link
noticed hi8 very noisy even with clean heads and pro tape
thx

[edDV]

See the second link that I added above (more tech).

[alegator]

Thanks for those links, I saved the PDF for reference. And yes, even Hi8 recorded in top grade Hi8 media is VERY noisy compared to DV.

[edDV]

Thanks for those links, I saved the PDF for reference. And yes, even Hi8 recorded in top grade Hi8 media is VERY noisy compared to DV.

But it was good in its day. Betacam SP camcorders were over $20,000 back then. Betacam SP is also noisy vs. DV.

[alegator]

What is/are the best filter/s to apply to improve the grainy look of old Hi8 video? Or is it better to keep it as it is?

[edDV]

I usually don't bother but then again my Hi8 camcorder has some built in noise reduction and TBC. My goal is preservation so I just want the good stuff transferred to DV format and after trimming I record back to MiniDV or Digital8 tapes. These will later be straight copied to a high capacity DVDR (HD/BD or other).

I suppose if I was to mix these Hi8 clips with DV, I'd maybe use software noise reduction and/or color correction then.

[zoobie]

I usually reduce the noise slightly and possibly sharpen once which seems to get me close to the look of DV

[SingSing]

Compare Hi-8 to miniDV. Hi-8 video is brighter than most miniDV, because Hi-8 use CCD with less but bigger pixels. Hi-8 has comparable spec to S-VHS, but never look as good. This is mostly due to the size of the tape.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Compare Hi-8 to miniDV. Hi-8 video is brighter than most miniDV, because Hi-8 use CCD with less but bigger pixels. Hi-8 has comparable spec to S-VHS, but never look as good. This is mostly due to the size of the tape.

Bollocks.

Hi-8 and S-VHS are electronically identical. They both record Y and C as separate components.
The CCD size has nothing to do with it - that's only relevant for cameras. Not all Hi-8 devices are cameras.

Hi-8 may appear "brighter" because the chroma signal isn't subsampled like it is for DV. Just like DVCPro50 looks better than DV (4:2:2 vs 4:2:0 or 4:1:1).

Or it may appear "brighter" because the equipment is set up wrong.

[SingSing]

Both of these have to do with dynamic range.

S-VHS and Hi-8 have a similar specifications, S-VHS VCR and tape can preproduce the signal better.

CCD pixel size vs contrast is a known selection parameter.

[edDV]

Both of these have to do with dynamic range.

S-VHS and Hi-8 have a similar specifications, S-VHS VCR and tape can preproduce the signal better.

CCD pixel size vs contrast is a known selection parameter.

SingSing,

You are playing fast and loose with genealizations there that have little to do with S-VHS vs. Hi8.

First lets separate irrelevant issues. The camera section of a camcorder can be high or low quality with either format.

Second preprocessing in a camcorder or VCR can be low or high quality (tuner quality, comb filter Y/C separation, noise reduction, etc.) with either format.

As for
"Both of these have to do with dynamic range. S-VHS and Hi-8 have a similar specifications, S-VHS VCR and tape can preproduce the signal better."

You need to back that up. "Dynamic Range" relates to signal to noise and if anything Hi8 has the edge with wider FM deviation and slightly wider chroma bandwidth. (see below).

Tape issues depend on actual tapes used. Hi8 tended to higher quality MP and ME tape formulations but in a smaller cassette (2hr per MP 120 tape). S-VHS used 1/2" lower quality tape in ~20min VHS-C cassettes.

Both formats had expensive "professional" tape formulations but let's set those aside. Few consumers were buying these $30-60 blank tapes.

In actual use, signal to noise tracked the cost of your camcorder and especially the cost of the tape you were using. Let's call that a wash Hi8 vs. S-VHS.

The major advantage of Hi8 was 2 hr. very good quality recording to a small cassette. The main disadvantage was even small tape defects manifested as large multi pixel dropouts on the playback screen. Sony battled that disadvantage with better tape formulations and digital dropout compensation in the more expensive models. When dropouts were detected, inforrmation from the pervious line was inserted to mask the dropout.

Digital dropout compensation and error correction were developed further for the Digital8 and MiniDV standards allowing even smaller camcorder cassettes.

Ref: http://catalogs.infocommiq.com/AVCAT/images/documents/pdfs/TT189%20-%204611.pdf

[SingSing]

S-VHS and Hi-8 have a similar specifications, S-VHS VCR and tape can reproduce the signal better.

The main disadvantage was even small tape defects manifested as large multi pixel dropouts on the playback screen.

The main disadvnatage of hi-8 format is indeed the small hi-8 tape. 0.5in SVHS tape records at 1.3125 ips. 0.31in(8mm) hi-8 tape records at 0.57 ips. The ratio of tape to hold one seconds of video between SVHS vs hi-8 is 3.7 to 1. Drop up on hi-8 causes much more noise, that's what I saw on my 200+ hi-8 tapes with my hi-8 VCR.

[edDV]

S-VHS and Hi-8 have a similar specifications, S-VHS VCR and tape can preproduce the signal better.

The main disadvantage was even small tape defects manifested as large multi pixel dropouts on the playback screen.

The main disadvnatage of hi-8 format is indeed the small hi-8 tape. 0.5in SVHS tape records at 1.3125 ips. 0.31in(8mm) hi-8 tape records at 0.57 ips. The ratio of tape to hold one seconds of video between SVHS vs hi-8 is 3.7 to 1. Drop up on hi-8 causes much more noise, that's what I saw on my 200+ hi-8 tapes with my hi-8 VCR.

Drop outs are not base noise but affect only one to many sequential pixels. It is a separate (but important) issue and needs a separate solution strategy.

True S-VHS records at higher playback effective head speed but Hi8 compensates with Metal Particle or Metal Evaporative tape that records at higher magnetic density. You can't assume head to tape speed makes S-VHS better. You need to do the tests.

Also, for camcorder application, the consumers have spoken that small 2hr tapes are superior or larger 20 minute tapes.

Both formats are now obsolete. Nobody should buy a new Hi8 or S-VHS camcoder.

The only interest is for capture and preservation of old tapes

[SingSing]

I have about 200+ Hi-8 recordings, and 30+ SVHS recordings. I see enough differences, during my tape to DVD conversion.

I am also old school, that use math and applied pyhsics.

[JohnnyMalaria]

I am also old school, that use math and applied pyhsics.

And your point is?

I have a PhD in physical chemistry, I've written and published scientific papers with some pretty scary mathematics, I've built machines that can measure objects smaller than the wavelength of light vibrating less than the diameter of an atom, I've written my own video codecs blah, blah, blah. I'm very familiar with electronics, photo detectors of many types and the fundamental limitations of consumer or prosumer implementations of cutting edge technology.

Unless your pile of Hi-8 and S-VHS recordings are of the same subject through the same lens with the same processing electronics, viewed on the same professional monitors that have been properly calibrated etc etc, your subjective impression of how one format is better than another is simply that - your subjective impression.

Your posts keep indicating your subjective opinion - where are your math(s) and physics? e.g., you say:

I see enough differences, during my tape to DVD conversion.

What does that mean? You see differences when watching the analog video on analog video equipment or that, for the same DVD encoder settings, one format has more artifacts than the other when viewing the MPEG? How many different Hi-8 players and S-VHS players are you using? If just one of each, you can't brand all Hi-8 as inferior to S-VHS. What models are they?

[SingSing]

I am not going to get stuck into arguments. I am going to say a last few things on this post.

I tapped DVD or cable shows on SVHS and Hi-8. So my comparsion of them is fair. Personally, I will be happy if Hi-8, is as good as SVHS, because I tapped most of my stuff on Hi-8. I had converted both of them to DVD. and moved on.

Note : There are a lot of people walking around with multiple REAL advanced degrees.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Note : There are a lot of people walking around with multiple REAL advanced degrees.

So mine isn't "real"?

You know nothing about it!

Your credibility just sunk a bit more...

[edDV]

Counting degrees isn't much help.

Committing to the scientific method of problem solving will get results and allow us to build on each other's work.

Consumer equipment usually lacks adequate documentation or independent performance analysis, but Hi8 vs S-VHS formats are well documented if you search the net.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Committing to the scientific method of problem solving will get results and allow us to build on each other's work.

Exactly!!!

[olyteddy]

So what happens to us poor suckers who used to punch an extra hole in 8 mm tape to record on it in Hi-8?

[alegator]

When you record to standard 8mm tape with a Hi8 camcorder, it reverts to 8mm low quality standards.

My collection of 1993/4 Hi8 tapes were recorded using a SONY Video Hi8 HandyCam CCD-TR101 (at the time it was the top of the line consumer Sony Hi8 camcorder). Most of the tapes I used were Hi8, but there are a couple of them who are just standard 8. When comparing both I really can't distinguish any quality difference whatsoever which surprises me given the info posted in this thread, basically saying that the quality of standard 8 is about half that of Hi8.

[edDV]

When you record to standard 8mm tape with a Hi8 camcorder, it reverts to 8mm low quality standards.

My collection of 1993/4 Hi8 tapes were recorded using a SONY Video Hi8 HandyCam CCD-TR101 (at the time it was the top of the line consumer Sony Hi8 camcorder). Most of the tapes I used were Hi8, but there are a couple of them who are just standard 8. When comparing both I really can't distinguish any quality difference whatsoever which surprises me given the info posted in this thread, basically saying that the quality of standard 8 is about half that of Hi8.

So what happens to us poor suckers who used to punch an extra hole in 8 mm tape to record on it in Hi-8?

Unless you did the olyteddy trick, it was supposed to use the 8mm format on 8mm tape. There would still be the advantage of the higher end camera section.

Most consumer Hi8 camcorders couldn't get near to 5MHz detail with their single CCD camera sections. That is probably why you saw little difference.

You could get close to full bandwidth from an external high quality source.

[alegator]

Most consumer Hi8 camcorders couldn't get near to 5MHz detail with their single CCD camera sections. That is probably why you saw little difference.

You could get close to full bandwidth from an external high quality source.

So that means that spending $ in Hi8 tapes was a waste, with standard 8 I was fine...?

[edDV]

Most consumer Hi8 camcorders couldn't get near to 5MHz detail with their single CCD camera sections. That is probably why you saw little difference.

You could get close to full bandwidth from an external high quality source.

So that means that spending $ in Hi8 tapes was a waste, with standard 8 I was fine...?

I wouldn't go that far. There should be a difference unless the camera was substandard.


I found this test report for resolution on Google. If this is true, you would have lost the part over 3MHz and had a bit more noise using 8mm tape.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ev.se/vkam9612/kambild/son_101e.jpg&...ial_s%26sa%3DG