Opinions on JVC SVHS active Video Calibration feature

[robjv1]

I was wondering what is everyone's take on this feature -- my understanding is that it's supposed to constantly keep the image in check, both as far as the tracking and overall image stability. Personally, I think the look of it is a bit too soft or too processed on any of the settings, so I turn it off and leave the picture control setting to NORM. I've rarely noticed that it has done anything to help a tape play better, outside covering up some grain or noise due to it's slightly softer image. I normally use manual tracking and monitor my transfers pretty closely, so perhaps it's a feature better suited for someone who doesn't want to worry about problems with tracking in between segments on a tape? Wouldn't the automatic tracking achieve the same purpose though?

Along with the Digital R3, it's one of the only settings on my JVC VCRs that I don't use.

Can anyone give an instance where it improved the quality of the image / capture in some way?

[lordsmurf]

Calibration does not affect image quality. AUTO and NORM are pretty much the same thing. This is a "mid-grade" setting, to remove noise, yet retain as much detail (not noise!) as possible. Most people who think it is "soft" are merely confusing noise with detail. Grain is not detail, it is noise.

It's something that works in conjunction with tracking. Personally, I don't think it works all that well when playing, so I've leave mine off most of the time too.

For recording, it pretty much makes the tapes unplayable in a deck other than the one it was recorded in -- and even that sometimes does not work.

[robjv1]

It does seem somewhat softer to me AUTO then it does NORM, but I would agree the difference is up for debate, but it does have a different look that I don't like as much as NORM. They both seem to pretty much be the baseline setting for the VCR though. I don't really ever use SHARP ever, but I do occasionally use SOFT with certain video that's very noisy.

I didn't know it had a function during recording -- that's good to know, in case I ever record something again.

[deuce8pro]

I think it also appears softer turning the "video stabilizer" on. Most if not all noise would be removed anyway with a JVC dvd recorder. No need to use either.

[robjv1]

I have had to use the video stabilizer (over the TBC) on occasion for certain tapes that seem to "bounce" and cannot be manually tracked, although at the sacrafice of some image quality as you've said. I don't know that I would call it softer, but it obviously doesn't do all the nice things that the TBC accomplishes.

[lordsmurf]

I rarely use the stabilizer either. I find the same tape may track better in another machine (Panasonic AG-1980P, for example).

[KeepItSimple]

Ok how does the EDIT setting fit into the mix? I don't know what circuits it turns on or off but I usually get a better result compared to NORM/AUTO or SHARP on the JVC SR-V10U.
Also what does that Digital R3 do?

[robjv1]

I could be totally off here, but it's my understanding that the EDIT setting disengages the NR filters that do most of the cleanup job.

I'm not sure that's right though, because it's been said that you can't really seperate the NR from the TBC and technically by engaging the TBC and going into edit mode, you'd be doing just that. I know it at least disables some of the filters, because on a lot of tapes I notice that I get some ugly chroma issues in edit mode, but on some tapes it yields the best results. In my own experience, I find it tends to work really nicely on really clean looking movies but looks bad on less then stellar tapes (especially tapes with cable interference patterns) or for sports in really brightly lit, detailed arenas.

I don't like the look of SHARP at all anymore -- I think it makes most footage look kinda plastic and second-generation dub-like , but having said that I used it pretty much exclusively before I got my Sign Video DR-1000 Sharpness/Detail enhancer. The R3 doesn't seem to have all that much of an impact in my experience. Personally I much prefer how the DR-1000 handles those things (plus having more control is nice too).

[lordsmurf]

The VCRs have multiple image filters in use. EDIT turns off one set of the filters, primarily the in-frame NR. Another one is tied to the TBC, primarily the temporal NR.

R3 is supposed to be edge correction, similar to what the DR-1000 would do, but to a lesser extend. SHARP increases grain in a bicubic-like method. This is terrible for an MPEG encoder to work with, at any quality mode or bitrate.

SOFT is great for noisy video, and you can restore much of the edge detail with R3, or better yet the DR-1000.

Chroma noise is mostly removed by the TBC/DNR, though the AUTO/NORM setting hides some with intra-frame NR filters. Not really "removed" as much as its being hidden.

I've been using these JVC VCRs for 10+ years now.

[highvolumeJP]

seems from one model of VCR to another they give different names to these features. I would recommend to leave video stabilizer OFF - IN most cases you would want to leave active video calibration off and picture control to auto - the active video calibration will work based on the condition of the tape you are playing - the picture control, when set to auto, will vary according to tracking & picture info - IN my experience I find that the picture control settings DO have a visible effect on the picture. Results will vary from one tape to another based on the image. In some cases, setting to EDIT will produce a noisier image (grains), because of the bypassing of the NR circuits while in other cases it provides less degradation (especially on higher quality sources that are lit well and noise free). The soft is useful for noisy video and for archiving your old VHS to DVD, where the source is noisy and would throw off the MPEG encoder - so in cases it would be a tradeoff, softness vs. macroblocking. SHARP makes your image sharper - I use this feature for good VHS recordings - it seems to increase detail without adding much noise, unlike traditional sharpness settings that raise the high frequency spectrum of the video - this seems to be some sort of dynamic contrast, I like this featurea nd find it gives the best result on stable and well lit recordings, for old, unstable VHS EP recordings you might want to use NORM. If you notice your picture getting softer, you might want to use EDIT then, depending on your source, you might get different results from those different settings. I have not used this on my higher-end S-VHS editing JVC VCRs only use it on my regular SQPB capable VCRs, I've done a lot of tests, and the SHARP does not increase noise, so it's using a different method perhaps.

The higher-end SVHS editing VCRs have a DIGITAL R3 setting - in my years when I would dump SVHS footage to my computer for editing, I would use DIGITAL R3 ON combined with the TBC/DNR function, I would get a clean, virtually noise-free stable image with enhanced detail ! However, when used on low-lit scenes which are usually noisier, it doesn't look good!

I've been using these JVC VCRs for 10+ years now.

So have I everything from the high-end to the consumer and was always extremely happy with the picture quality - however, I've came into a lot of problems in the past with VCRs going out of alignment very quick - even worse nowadays with the newer models it seems JVC has gone down a deep slope with quality control - I've had a Sanyo VHS VCR last me well over 15 years, it was used daily for 4 hours to record my shows, and kept working, while the JVCs would often go out of misalignment, guide problems, pinch roller going bad, tape path problems, etc. I've had one of those silver JVC editing VCRs way back, the pro series, with BNC and jog shuttle, the first 6 months it started having back tension problems and tracking misalignment.

[lordsmurf]

Some JVC models do suffer from alignment issues faster than others, but only under heavy use. I mean many hours a day, daily. Been there done that, many times.

[Vidd]

I was able to get a brand new lower end JVC SVHS (without a TBC) a while back. I'm now in the process of archiving 10-20 year old tapes to DVD.

Should I enable the Video Stablization? Any negatives I should look for if it is on? I read that people prefer to turn stablization off and was confused to as why.

I did test records with it both on and off. I did not notice any difference in softness like was described above.

With it off, I notice a garbage band on the bottom (about 16 pixels of 480). With Stablization enabled, the garbage band on the bottom is only 2 pixels.

[lordsmurf]

The stabilizer may cause more destabilization than fix.

It has nothing to do with the softness some people think they see, that's another filter entirely.

You can mask the entire overscan, assuming the "garbage band" is not seen on the television, only through a computer monitor.

[telefunken]

Question, when using the JVC DNR/TBC with a Canopus ADVC-300, capturing clean vhs or laserdisc would it be best to use Canopus DNR, JVC TBC/DNR or both?

[vhelp]

..just some pointers I noticed you could used.

Output and Input connections:

1. For VHS, you want to make sure you use the s-video connectors (s-video->OUT --//-- s-vide->IN)
2. And, for Laserdisc, definately make sure you use the Compsite connectors (RCA->OUT --//-- RCA->IN)

I would suggest a upgrade in capture card if your projects include laserdisc. I've use my advc-100 and IMHO, I did not like the quality of Laserdisc [rca]-> [rca] ADVC-100 -> [dv] HDD. It doesn't capture the full grain-ness of this medium.

Speaking of capture cards, I've personally tested the Winfast TV2000 XP Expert card on my laserdisc. Fastastic card for this medium. If you can find one available on ebay or other source, get it. For laserdisc transfers, you won't regret it.

* RCA / Composite, same thing.

-vhelp 5072

[lordsmurf]

Canopus DNR is all smeary from what I've heard, not very good. I'm not pissing away $$$$ to get a Canopus ADVC-300 box and see for myself. The information I've gotten second-hand is from reliable sources.