I'm transferring about 100 VHS tapes - pixellation problems

[lordsmurf]

Hi I don't know which VCR the tapes were recorded on as I didn't record them. The tapes are from the 70's and 80's. But certainly, different tapes play better on certain machines. The current video tape I've been using as a test funnily enough looks best on the Sony and not the Panny 1000. I had not considered Phillips are they good? I think my next plan is getting a Canopus and converting to H264. Trying that. I can also get hold of a JVC DR-MH30 DVD recorder if that is any good?
I will upload a capture clip for you all to judge within the next few days also.

JVC will filter the VHS more, others will not.

H.264 is complicated. Without writing up a big diatribe, I don't think that's a route you want to mess with.

[2Bdecided]

We never had any of these problems with analogue video! I'm also wondering if even recording to DV - AVI would turn out pixellated. At times like this I hate digital video.

It would have to be a spectacularly noisy source to give visible pixellation with DV. Even then, it should go slightly soft, rather than pixellated.

Remember DV encodes each image separately, a bit like a series of 125kB 720x576 JPEGs. Even a screen-full of random noise can be encoded OK at that data rate.

The "problem" with MPEG-2 is that it looks for similarities between frames, and only codes the differences. Random noise is completely different on each frame, so with lots of noise MPEG-2 can be less efficient than DV! (Unless you force MPEG-2 to use all I-frames, which makes it similar to DV and M-JPEG).

The real problem of course is that you probably want this to end up on DVD, and you'll have to do some filtering to make it easier to encode.

Cheers,
David.

[Blackout]

Yeap, true that!

The build in TBC (line TBC) of my current VCR, create problems on old noise and specific tapes, I once recorded with a specific VCR some 20 years ago.
Also SECAM tapes are Hell with this TBC feature on.

The only cure: The PC root. And forget mpeg 2. It is H264 time.

I have 100% success only the hard way: I use a frame TBC unit (ACE, not on sale any more) and I capture to DV using canopus AVC100. Then, I encode to H264 using x264 at a "Crazy" bitrate like 2000kb/s
Overkill but the only way to preserve the VHS tape "as is".

For DVD, I have to filter: Neatvideo is the only thing I use anymore, with some MSU filters.

I wonder: Will I ever finish with my tapes? Probably not...

man this is my exact work flow as well. i use a Panasonic HS-950. Then into an ACE tbc (awsome) then into a Canopus ADVC100. Then i use Vegas to run the Neatvideo plugin (incredible ) then i convert to H264 (i use the mainconcept standalone convertor prog as its the only H264 that i have properly tested with interlaced video that actually makes interlaced H264 files). Be careful most H264 convertors (Handbrake etc) will break the interlacing and drop half of your frames. ie your video will look jerky.

my transfers are generally better than the original. So good i throw away the VHS tape. which believe me, i would not generally do if there was any doubt in my mind that it wasnt perfect!

i think this workflow is very similar to many others...its a tried and tested method that just works!

re: mpeg2 (DVD) vs H264 from my extensive testing, H264 kicks mpg2's ass. Run H264 with a high bitrate of say 3500 and use the "High" profile and it creams any mpeg2 encode of the same VHS tape on 8000 bittrate. For a still picture, you wont see a difference. For a lot of good quality digital capture sources, you wont see a difference in quality, other than a smaller file size for H264. But add some VHS noise and some long swaying grass that is being panned across with the camera and watch mpeg2 just fall apart at the seams, even at 8000 bitrate. a H264 encode just looks "effortless" and the mpg2 encode just looks like its struggling, no matter how you tweak it. Just an older, less optimized algorithm vs a far more efficient and superior one. if mpg2 could go up to , say 16,000 bitrate then it would probably approach H264 on 3500. but the mpg2 file would be probably 20 gig size and the H264 would probably be 1 gig. hehe

noise in a picture (dirty VHS tape noise) and how well it is encoded is what really separates the men from the boys of encoding software.


Cheers,
Blackout